Saturday, July 08, 2006
The Hyper-Calvinist Gadfly Is At Again
Alan states:
“A couple of preliminary notes before Boston’s article. When I read about the Puritans and other Reformed thinkers and pastors of the past, I am utterly embarrased by what I see in evangelicalism today and the pragmatic preaching (and non-existent teaching) that must make God gag. Many pastors—and there are those that give Reformed lip service—are governed by the fear of the sheep than the fear of the Shepherd.
Thomas Boston is a model of pastoral Biblical integrity for today’s pastor.”
Alan should be embarrassed for promoting an infant baptizer. Alan seems to always put his view of soteriology above all other doctrines. He has failed to give warning to Thomas Boston’s false teachings concerning baptism. Boston was a Scottish Presbyterian minister who held to the error filled Westminster Confession of Faith. Here is what the WCF says about baptism:
III. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.
IV. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ,[11] but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.
VI. The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongs unto, according to the counsel of God's own will, in His appointed time.
VII. The sacrament of Baptism is but once to be administered unto any person.
The readers will notice the numerous errors concerning baptism. First, immersion is necessary according to the practice found in the New Testament and dipping is manmade device designed to alter the true teachings of the Bible. Second, infants are not to be baptized. This practice is not found in the scriptures. Third, baptism does not confer grace upon the recipient. Fourth, baptism is to be administered a “second” time if that believing individual was baptized as an infant. This second baptism or rebaptism was the main reason thousands of Baptistic believers were persecuted throughout history by both Roman Catholics and Protestants.
Thomas Boston: ‘The sacraments are not converting, but confirming, ordinances; they are appointed for the use and benefit of God’s children, not of others; they are given to believers as believers, so that none others are capable of the same before the Lord’ (page 282 cited by Henry G. Weston). Weston “How the positions thus avowed can be reconciled with the practice of infant baptism is not for me to say.” (Henry G. Weston’s “Regenerate Church Membership”). Weston was right in recognizing the inconsistency of Boston’s view concerning baptism. Mr. Kurschner, on the other hand, has failed to point out any errors concerning Boston. Alan has no problem promoting padobaptists as long as they share the same view of soteriology. This is irresponsible and an embarrassment to those who call ourselves Baptists.
Alan states:
“A couple of preliminary notes before Boston’s article. When I read about the Puritans and other Reformed thinkers and pastors of the past, I am utterly embarrased by what I see in evangelicalism today and the pragmatic preaching (and non-existent teaching) that must make God gag. Many pastors—and there are those that give Reformed lip service—are governed by the fear of the sheep than the fear of the Shepherd.
Thomas Boston is a model of pastoral Biblical integrity for today’s pastor.”
Alan should be embarrassed for promoting an infant baptizer. Alan seems to always put his view of soteriology above all other doctrines. He has failed to give warning to Thomas Boston’s false teachings concerning baptism. Boston was a Scottish Presbyterian minister who held to the error filled Westminster Confession of Faith. Here is what the WCF says about baptism:
III. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.
IV. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ,[11] but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.
VI. The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongs unto, according to the counsel of God's own will, in His appointed time.
VII. The sacrament of Baptism is but once to be administered unto any person.
The readers will notice the numerous errors concerning baptism. First, immersion is necessary according to the practice found in the New Testament and dipping is manmade device designed to alter the true teachings of the Bible. Second, infants are not to be baptized. This practice is not found in the scriptures. Third, baptism does not confer grace upon the recipient. Fourth, baptism is to be administered a “second” time if that believing individual was baptized as an infant. This second baptism or rebaptism was the main reason thousands of Baptistic believers were persecuted throughout history by both Roman Catholics and Protestants.
Thomas Boston: ‘The sacraments are not converting, but confirming, ordinances; they are appointed for the use and benefit of God’s children, not of others; they are given to believers as believers, so that none others are capable of the same before the Lord’ (page 282 cited by Henry G. Weston). Weston “How the positions thus avowed can be reconciled with the practice of infant baptism is not for me to say.” (Henry G. Weston’s “Regenerate Church Membership”). Weston was right in recognizing the inconsistency of Boston’s view concerning baptism. Mr. Kurschner, on the other hand, has failed to point out any errors concerning Boston. Alan has no problem promoting padobaptists as long as they share the same view of soteriology. This is irresponsible and an embarrassment to those who call ourselves Baptists.
