The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Question for the board

How would you handle being on a fellow Paedo-Baptist board with people you normally agree with.
However, someone starts talking about Reformed Baptists in way that you know are not true and you could prove it?

As most are aware, I hold to the 1689 LBCF; but have a lot of respect for many Paedo-Baptists, such as this site.
I was recently on a site with others who hold to the 1689 LBCF.
You guessed it; they started saying things about Paedo-Baptists that are not true.
I thought I could provide some clarity to the situation so I put my 2 cents into the matter.
Unfortunately, it was like I was secretly a Paedo-Baptist myself.
I even gave proof of what I said by quoting RC Sproul.
That was not received well and the person started saying that although he respected RC Sproul, I should not be defending them after all they killed our Baptists brothers and sisters way back.
A fellow Reformed Baptist brother said I should just forget about the matter, because it is not worth the hassle.
I did just that; but I thought I would pose that question here.
Thanks in advance

Tom

Sure looks like you have a "woke" Reformed Baptist in your midst promoting religious CRT and Paedo-Baptist Supremecy, I have to wonder if he will be demanding reparation's for past "crimes against his Baptist brothers, etc."?? The divide between some Baptists and non-CredoBaptists is deep and ugly and I doubt it will ever cease any more than the similar hatred between Muslims and Jews. When God pours out his Spirit upon the elect does this person believe that this is actually immersion and not pouring?

IGNORE such bitter, misinformed and contentious individuals. Time is too short to contend with such and no church should allow such in individual in their midst and neither should that site, IMO.

Actually the issue has nothing to do with Woke.
The guy usually sound doctrinally; if not a bit combative, when he does
not need to be.
He believes that when I see error anywhere, it is our responsibility to correct it.
In this case, it is Paedo-Baptism.
Yet he does not even understand the position and is not willing to consider that he is wrong.

Pilgrim
Although I am a Credo-Baptist, I want to thank you and the Highway, for making me feel comfortable enough to feel like our differences are no big deal.
????
Tom

I didn't mean "woke" in the political contemporary sense. But 'woke' in the sense that 'if you don't agree with me, you are wrong and should be exposed and cancelled". As I have stated too many times here, having publicly debated well known Baptists on this subject and spoken with countless individuals and groups on the subject of baptism, when I explained that some of us paedo-baptists do NOT adhere to any form of 'presumptive regeneration' nor believe that elect infants, even in the womb are born with the "seed of faith" of any kind (ala: Berkhof), nor that they are inherently privileged above others so that they are to be looked upon as worthy of special privileges, etc. etc., BUT in fact they are to be presumed dead in trespasses and sins and under the just judgment of God even as others (ala: the Apostle Paul in Eph. 2) and thus must be given the gospel and they must repent, according to the sovereign work of the Spirit having experienced genuine guilt and believe upon Christ, then most all antagonism and arguments fall to the ground. Baptism does NOT save anyone yet should be administered as per Christ's command. It is Sola Fide and not Sola Fide/Baptism nor any other faith+work combination that justifies. There is likewise not one single hint, never mind command to immerse only, nor pour, nor sprinkle ONLY in Scripture... only that baptism is be done with water. Pharisaism has no place in the Church. But man has always wanted to add to or ignore the simple law of God which ALWAYS causes problems and in many cases puts a yoke upon the shoulders of Christ's sheep which the "holy" are not even able to bear. (Acts 15:10)

Thanks, I had never thought of Woke in that particular sence before, but it makes sense.
By the way, you mentioning “Presumptive Regeneration” was part of our conversation.
In fact, because RC Sproul is like you on that issue. That was the issue that I quoted RC Sproul on.

Unfortunately, that seemed rile him even more.
As you probably know, the owner of ‘A Puritan Mind” (I think that is the site) holds to Presumptive Regeneration.
Often Reformed Baptists get kicked off that board for opposing Presumptive Regeneration.
He seems to take that board as representing all Paedo-Baptists and regardless of being proven otherwise
He labels all Paedo-Baptists the same way.

The fact, that I would try to correct him, makes him think I am secretly a Paedo-Baptist.
Tom

Just a question. Who did they kill? LBCF professing Baptists or Anabaptists. I would think the LBCF folks would not want anything to do with the Anabapists and now they are calling them like-minded friends.

John
Exactly, the Anabaptists were not LBCF Baptists.
I did not say that to him, because it would be a waste of time.
I already carried on the conversation longer than I should have.
The interesting thing I found, is both him and I hold to the same confession and say we like the same pastors and theologians.

Still scratching my head.

Tom