I am truly sorry i come across as a brash bigot . That honestly is not the intention . I implore baptists to baptise their children as I believe it to be True. Is that uncharitable ?<br><br>howard
In reply to:[color:"blue"]I am truly sorry i come across as a brash bigot . That honestly is not the intention . I implore baptists to baptise their children as I believe it to be True. Is that uncharitable ?
Howard, no it is not charitable.
Just because someone baptizes children or has baptized children does not make that one better than anyone else. Though I do believe it is biblical to baptize children, God alone knows who His elect are and has everything under His control--even unbaptized children! It makes NO difference to Baptists if YOU think baptizing children is true! It is what THEY believe that makes it a step of faith. This issue is between them and God. Our witness is not to condemn or beat them into subjection with our knowledge of what Scripture states, but love them to the truth of what Scripture states--a hard lesson for each to learn and live--especially myself.
Thus, the Word of God implores you to baptize your posts with the seasoned salt of grace, love, and humility, and help others see the truth of God's Holy Word with this type of the washing of water.
As far as your comments above concerning Pilgrim they are uncalled for. Pilgrim has admitted his errors in the past when he believes he needs to. He is ONE of the most biblical individuals I know and I personally, with a host of others here, respect him highly.
Apologies to all offended by my manner.<br><br>I have a great deal of respect for Pilgrim and The Highway as a whole.<br><br>I regard Pilgrim and other male moderators as my Elders and I recieve their admonishments just as I would recieve a punch on the nose . It hurts but it works. I thank you for them. I only hope I can learn from them this side of eternity.<br><br>Humbled but happy<br><br>howard
Pilgrim,<br>I think you misunderstood bro howard here.I dont believe that howard thinks a baptis brother is any less saved than a presby brother.Its all by grace,understandably so your theological biblical growth is a journey and is fufilled in Christ so if you understand howard better its his(not secluding him) view that baptists should not be pastors per se as they dont fufill the sacrements according scripture hence by denying children baptism.<br><br>my 2 pennies,<br>Blade
Bladestunner316<br>Well then, if that is the case that Baptists should not be pastors, I would have to conclude that CH Spurgeon should not have been a pastor. <br>Think about that for a minute and see how the Church would have missed out on the marvelous blessing that God did through such a humble servant in Spurgeon.<br>
Even if that were true, which I would strongly argue it is not, that Baptists should not be pastors, just think what the history of the Christian Church would look like if there were not any Calvinistic Baptist pastors.
Secondly, I have not been able to find anything in Scripture, particularly in the Pastoral Epistles, e.g., 1 and 2 Timothy or Titus, where the qualifications for pastor/teacher demand that a man be a paedobaptist. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/wink.gif" alt="wink" title="wink[/img] Could it be that those who hold so stringently to the doctrine of baptism, on BOTH sides, are putting far too much emphasis and importance on baptism than is Scripturally warranted? In my own mind, the differences between the positions of credo-baptists and paedo-baptists are worthy of notice. However, I do not believe that they are of such importance that they warrant the gulf that has emerged over the years and separated the two camps which presently exist. As Tom pointed out and which I too have also said previously, regardless of one's position on the doctrine of baptism, one would be hard-pressed to find many men, especially pastors, who could stand with a man such as Charles Haddon Spurgeon.
As a conservative, Bible-believing Southern Baptist, I have more in common with a PCA member than I do with a member of the liberal, unbiblical Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.
True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
Pilgrim,<br>1. First I have not yet made a choice on whether I agree with howrds position but I at least understand where he is coming from.<br><br>2. Now speaking hypothetically if paedo is what Christ wants us to do and then pastors who dont then would this not create a problem?<br><br>3. I too glean much from baptist preachers and theeologians I love reading AW Pink and look forward to reading the works of Gill.<br><br>4. Im sure spurgeon was a great preacher but lets not place all are epmphasis on the man instead of God.<br><br>blade
Many think rod parsly is a great preacher does that mena he should be one?<br><br>All though he is not docttrinally close to spurgeon.I just dont understand why u seem to place alot of emphasis on him as though he saved the church or something.Im gratefull for how the Lord used him,but he didnt save me Christ did.<br><br>blade
blade,<br><br>I'm surely not placing all my emphasis upon Spurgeon or any other man. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/tongue.gif" alt="tongue" title="tongue[/img] What I am contending for is "charity" where a doctrine is much disputed and not a matter of salvation. If one is to espouse perfect doctrine as a qualification for one being duly ordained an Elder, then WHO would qualify? Should a man who espouses Pre-millennialism be denied office? or how about Amillennialism or Postmillennialism? How about a man who holds to exclusive psalmody or non-instrumentation or vice versa? Should men be denied a pastorate in either case? <br><br>In His Grace,
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Im gratefull for how the Lord used him,but he didnt save me Christ did.</font><hr></blockquote><p>So, are you saying that unless a specific man was instrumental in YOUR salvation, he is to be possibly exempted from being a pastor? [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/drop.gif" alt="drop" title="drop[/img]<br><br>Let's remember that God works through men to bring the gospel to other men unto salvation. It was God's perfect will that He raise up a man such as Spurgeon and countless other Baptist preachers who sounded forth the doctrines of grace and called sinners to repentance and Christ Jesus. Personally, knowing that the conversions that took place under their ministry were for the most part valid, and their preaching sound, I'm not going to question God's prerogative in ordaining them to be His spokesmen. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/wink.gif" alt="wink" title="wink[/img]<br><br>Just one final thought..... if Spurgeon, et al, who were Baptists are not qualified to be pastors, then just how many Presbyterian pastors who are preaching error today do you think should be removed from that office? [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/evilgrin.gif" alt="evilgrin" title="evilgrin[/img]<br><br>In His Grace,
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
