tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post8806246987074834182..comments2023-07-06T15:14:57.204+01:00Comments on JOHN'S BLOG: Ryle on BaptismJohnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-37487909334070661542008-12-19T17:14:00.000+00:002008-12-19T17:14:00.000+00:00Christian faith is trusting Christ. But my 3-month...Christian faith is trusting Christ. But my 3-month-old baby doesn't trust Christ. He doesn't know who Christ is. I don't think he even trusts <B>us</B>, as I don't think he has a concept of trust or of us, but even if he did that wouldn't mean that he trusted Christ. (Compare: I trust you, but that doesn't mean that my baby trusts you even if he trusts me.) <BR/><BR/>Of course, there are degreesDaniel Hillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07823511443088751096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-34822559330480696052008-12-19T15:39:00.000+00:002008-12-19T15:39:00.000+00:00I think we have to ask the question of what faith ...I think we have to ask the question of what faith appropriate to a child looks like.<BR/><BR/>Your mind is substantially different from your son's. Love looks different if it is you loving or your son loving. So what does faith look like for a baby?<BR/><BR/>I think that faith for a baby with Christian parents may well consist simply in wanting to be with those parents and in trusting them.<BR/><Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-5806279515533584622008-01-15T16:29:00.000+00:002008-01-15T16:29:00.000+00:00And after the Waco-like polygamistic apocalyptic c...<I>And after the Waco-like polygamistic apocalyptic cult scenario at Munster in 1533, people weren't going to take chances with the Anabaptists.</I><BR/><BR/>True - although guilt by association for any theological movement is dangerous ground, because the logical conclusion is blaming people like you and me with our fundamentalist(!) beliefs for something like the prosperity gospel...<BR/><BR/><Blue, with a hint of amberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17689914726284208496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-52436841700361252822008-01-15T16:14:00.000+00:002008-01-15T16:14:00.000+00:00We could get into a long discussion at this point ...We could get into a long discussion at this point about the reasons for the persecution of the Anabaptists... As I recall, it was largely because they were rejecting the history of the Church and the authority of the state in a way that even the magisterial Reformers weren't. And after the Waco-like polygamistic apocalyptic cult scenario at Munster in 1533, people weren't going to take chances Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-37563451043458140372008-01-15T15:47:00.000+00:002008-01-15T15:47:00.000+00:00Like I wrote earlier, you're trying to argue with ...<I>Like I wrote earlier, you're trying to argue with a dead guy...</I><BR/><BR/>I assumed we were discussing said person. Is his current health a major issue for this blog?!!<BR/><BR/><I>"Church" is a translation of the Greek ekklesia, which is also used of the gathered nation of Israel in the Greek translation of the OT . So the NT uses the already existing OT word - seems fine therefore to Blue, with a hint of amberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17689914726284208496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-88812531487551058752008-01-15T11:58:00.000+00:002008-01-15T11:58:00.000+00:00Like I wrote earlier, you're trying to argue with ...Like I wrote earlier, you're trying to argue with a dead guy...<BR/><BR/><I>Old Testament Church? It is interesting which bits of the covenants we embrace and which bits we don't.</I><BR/><BR/>"Church" is a translation of the Greek <I>ekklesia</I>, which is also used of the gathered nation of Israel in the Greek translation of the OT (done before the NT was written). So the NT uses the already Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-17801102723361623042008-01-15T09:51:00.000+00:002008-01-15T09:51:00.000+00:00an interesting discussion, but to take some points...an interesting discussion, but to take some points made and continue the discussion.<BR/><BR/> * Children were admitted into the Old Testament Church by a formal ordinance.<BR/><BR/>Old Testament Church? It is interesting which bits of the covenants we embrace and which bits we don't.<BR/><BR/> * The baptism of children is nowhere forbidden in the New Testament.<BR/><BR/>A total non entityBlue, with a hint of amberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17689914726284208496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-24760311165828721922008-01-14T17:55:00.000+00:002008-01-14T17:55:00.000+00:00We're mostly in agreement. I, too, would prefer ba...We're mostly in agreement. I, too, would prefer baptism by immersion, (because the death and rising symbolism is more explicit). But not with babies.<BR/><BR/>My church normally baptises infants by sprinkling and adults by immersion. That seems sensible to me...<BR/><BR/>You're right about the Quakers shifting. There are still some strongly evangelical strands in the Salvation Army though (who Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-28634539805122396662008-01-14T13:18:00.000+00:002008-01-14T13:18:00.000+00:00Hmm...Well, about the Greek word, I would say that...Hmm...<BR/><BR/>Well, about the Greek word, I would say that the English word "bat" can mean a flying mammal or a thick stick used in baseball, but it is generally clear from context. However, "dip" and "immerse" are close enough that the context wouldn't be clear. I guess I would immerse (because it covers both meanings of "baptizos") unless there were some sort of REALLY bad drought.<BR/><BR/>Speaker for the Deadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10032990561585099482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-40134505100913390742008-01-08T14:09:00.000+00:002008-01-08T14:09:00.000+00:00'If it isn't possible for infants to believe, then...'If it isn't possible for infants to believe, then the logical conclusion is that they go to hell if they die, unless you try some form of special pleading'<BR/><BR/>I think that the argument in fact works the other way around.<BR/><BR/>(1) God could justly have sent to Hell all those that die in infancy.<BR/>(2) God in fact seems not to have done this (as suggested (but not proved) by 2 Samuel Daniel Hillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07823511443088751096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-16173747250515692712008-01-08T13:40:00.000+00:002008-01-08T13:40:00.000+00:00The evidence is that one cannot go to Heaven unles...<I>The evidence is that one cannot go to Heaven unless one is regenerate:</I><BR/><BR/>Which I accept. The special pleading I was referring to might be clearer from this:<BR/><BR/>* Either it is possible for infants to believe in a saving fashion or it is not.<BR/><BR/>* If it is possible for infants to believe in a saving fashion, we should baptise the ones who do so believe; it is more Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-76189016796654827532008-01-08T13:04:00.000+00:002008-01-08T13:04:00.000+00:00'I think his point is rather that credobaptists ca...'I think his point is rather that credobaptists cannot claim with certainty that they are right.'<BR/><BR/>I thought Ryle was arguing that credobaptism was certainly wrong. I certainly agree that it's not certain on either side. Indeed, that's precisely why I approached you for help thinking this through.<BR/><BR/>'<I>Those infants dying in infancy that go to Heaven are regenerated at the point Daniel Hillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07823511443088751096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-24353380397641120352008-01-08T11:35:00.000+00:002008-01-08T11:35:00.000+00:00speaker for the dead - good name. I'm a bit of an ...speaker for the dead - good name. I'm a bit of an OSC fan, and Speaker for the Dead is one of the all-time great sci-fi novels.<BR/><BR/><I>Doesn't the Greek word βαπτίζω (not sure that's the right one) mean "immersion"? (From what I've read, it can also be used to mean "dipping.") Obviously, droughts are one thing, but I'm not sure that's a theological argument.</I><BR/><BR/>It's often reported Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-38674943061099232012008-01-08T11:28:00.000+00:002008-01-08T11:28:00.000+00:00To one extent, you're trying to argue with a dead ...To one extent, you're trying to argue with a dead guy. I just reported and summarised what he said. But what he said does answer some of your questions...<BR/><BR/><I>Well, of course, but I'm sure Ryle is happy with an argument from silence to the effect that adults should only be baptized if they profess repentance and belief, so he cannot complain that credobaptists rely on an argument from Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-26319207277980689682008-01-07T21:13:00.000+00:002008-01-07T21:13:00.000+00:00This is very interesting. I was just wondering a f...This is very interesting. I was just wondering a few things...<BR/><BR/>Doesn't the Greek word βαπτίζω (not sure that's the right one) mean "immersion"? (From what I've read, it can also be used to mean "dipping.") Obviously, droughts are one thing, but I'm not sure that's a theological argument.<BR/><BR/>Is Ryle speaking about actual infants or children? I think there is a big difference, Speaker for the Deadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10032990561585099482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-39830835325532665222008-01-07T10:49:00.000+00:002008-01-07T10:49:00.000+00:00Thanks for posting Ryle's comments, Custard: very ...Thanks for posting Ryle's comments, Custard: very interesting! Some brief replies:<BR/><BR/>'I never saw an argument against infant baptism that might not have been equally directed against infant circumcision.'<BR/><BR/>How about Piper's argument that there has been a change between the old covenant and the new, such that under the old covenant physical birth was the entry into God's people, andDaniel Hillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07823511443088751096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-30147890093347112202008-01-06T22:44:00.000+00:002008-01-06T22:44:00.000+00:00Just to say once again, lest there by any doubt, t...Just to say once again, lest there by any doubt, that it is more important to love and accept people who disagree with you over baptism than it is to be right.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.com