Here’s one of those gems that is so good I had to post it. You may find the original here on Iron Ink.

“While the Anabaptists argued against infant baptism, that children could not experience faith and repentance, the Reformed replied that although children did not possess the acts of faith, they still could possess the disposition (habitus) of faith. Since absolute certainty about the internal state of the recipient is never certain in the case of either adults or children, the question is whether we have the same certainty in either case…. Just as with adults, the hearts of infants should be judged with charity….

Since as a poorer dispensation of grace circumcision was administered to children, it follows that as a richer dispensation of grace baptism ought to be administered to children as well. Also, the entire idea of the covenant as the historical and organic realization of election points toward the inclusion of infants through their connection with their parents in grace and blessing.”

Herman Bavinck
Reformed Dogmatics Vol. IV – pg. 498

1.) Those who hold to anabaptist ecclesiology while trying to embrace Reformed soteriology at the same time are seriously confused. Anabaptist ecclesiology suggests that membership of the church is characterized by those who themselves choose to be part of the church. The emphasis falls on the individual. This is advocated in keeping with anabaptist “pure church” theology. (A “pure church” is one that has no tares. Classical Baptist theology holds that all that are members of the Church are saved.) This emphasis on the individuals choosing has an Arminian flavor.

2.) As faith is received passively and is a consequence of regeneration before it becomes active in conversion it was fitting for the Reformed to speak of infants having the habitus of faith. The idea is that in having this disposition of faith infants will display that faith actively as they age to the point of being able to display that faith.

3.) The judgment of charity should be extended to infants of believers in Christ since as being the child of at least one believer infants are already members of the covenant. Throughout scripture God promises to be God to His people and their children. God reckons and counts His people covenantally. This differs from Baptists who reckon God’s people individually and who count them one by one in conversion. The difference here is the difference between God counting His people as one with individuals seen as extensions of that one community. On the other hand Baptists count God’s people as individuals who when totaled together count as the whole.

4.) In the old covenant the children were clearly part of the covenant. Baptists would have us believe that in the new and better covenant the children are only part of the covenant upon their “asking Jesus into their hearts.” The new and better covenant leaves children out of the covenant.

5.) In the end Baptist theological notions of covenant should be seen as a ongoing social compact that each generation has to ratify for themselves with their vote for Jesus in order to be part of the compact. On the other hand Reformed notions of the covenant should be seen as a social compact decreed, organized, and populated by God.

Source

As I wait on pins and needles for the baby to arrive (due date day is almost over and still no sign of labor) I thought I would share this article. It is after all, that time of year again when the air can be filled with a lot of “BAH humbug.”

Should Christians celebrate Christmas?

I sympathize with those who want to be rigorously and distinctly Christian, who want to be disentangled from the world and any pagan roots that might lie beneath our celebration of Christmas, but I don’t go that route on this matter because I think there comes a point where the roots are so far gone that the present meaning doesn’t carry the pagan connotation anymore. I’m more concerned about a new paganism that gets layered on top of Christian holidays.

Here’s the example I use: All language has roots somewhere. Most of our days of the week—if not all—grew out of pagan names too. So should we stop using the word “Sunday” because it may have related to the worship of the sun once upon a time? In modern English “Sunday” doesn’t carry that connotation, and that’s the very nature of language. In a sense, holidays are like chronological language.

Christmas now means that we mark, in Christian ways, the birth of Jesus Christ. I think the birth, death and resurrection of Christ are the most important events in human history. Not to mark them in some way, by way of special celebration, would be folly it seems to me.

I remember I lived next door to somebody back in seminary who didn’t celebrate birthdays for their kid. The idea was, partly, that all days were special for their kid. But if all days are special then it probably means that there are no special days. Yet some things are so good and precious—like anniversaries, birthdays, and even deaths—that they are worthy of being marked. How much more the birth and death of Jesus Christ!

It’s really worth the risk, even if the date of December 25 was chosen because of its proximity to some kind of pagan festival. Let’s just take it, sanctify it, and make the most of it, because Christ is worthy of being celebrated in his birth.

There is no point in choosing any other date. It won’t work.

By John Piper. © Desiring God. Website: desiringGod.org

So, I ran across this article in my Google Reader Shared items. It’s just way too good not to post here as well. I don’t know a lot about the blog it comes from since I’m not a regular reader… but this is a great post none the less.

Source

I read a great quote from Pastor McAtee on how the Credo-Baptist position essentially views children as salvifically-unviable-fetuses:

Credo-baptists believe that soteric worth is tied up with moral agency. Such moral agency is dependent upon consciousness. For Credo-baptists, soteric rights presuppose interests, and creatures without a fairly advanced state of consciousness do not and can not have soteric interests. Hence, until such a time that a child is considered salvifically “viable” as witnessed by a advanced state of consciousness, the child is, salvifically speaking, not a person, but rather is a soteric fetus awaiting enough consciousness to be considered a candidate for soteriological personhood.

And ironically, the first commenter on Pastor McAtee’s post takes most Paedo-baptists to task with the same logic:

Insert Paedo into this article where it reads Credo and some would think that you had certainly made a mistake and truly meant Credo. However, many who would think you made that mistake apply this very reasoning to God’s Covenant children by rejecting them from Christ’s table “until such a time that a child is considered salvifically “viable” as witnessed by a advanced state of consciousness”.

And if you’d like to be entertained by hearing some Lutherans (Missouri Synod) discuss it, check this thread out. Pastor Weedon brings out a quote from Luther on 1 Corinthians which explains that the “examine himself” command doesn’t apply to children at all. Its quite telling that Pastor McCain jumps in immediately and begins repeating slogans and ad-hominems as if his life depended upon it. He knows exactly the threat that the quote presents to the anti-paedocommunion establishment, even if others don’t yet see it.

I found another good read today via a good friend of mine. It was such a good read that I have to post it here:

Why You Shouldn’t Allow Your Children To Eat Thanksgiving Dinner

(Man I’m really on a roll with this theme aren’t I?)

Marion Lovett, Elder at Heritage posted two very good articles recently on how Christians view their children. Check them out!

    • It’s Really About How We View Our Children

    • The Context for Discerning the Body

So I’ve been reading some articles and blog posts in regard to the celebration of Christmas, as I am sometimes wont to do this time of year.

Many of you reading this may know that my immediate family has condemned Christmas as pagan and therefore does not celebrate. No festivities, no decorations, no christmas trees, nothing. In many ways I am glad for this as it gave me the opportunity to examine why we did not. I thoroughly evaluated the celebration of Church holidays, in particular Christmas. I came at it from many angles such as, should the Church be celebrating holidays other than the Lord’s Day, should we celebrate Christmas or is it a pagan holiday? I came to the conclusion that Christmas indeed should be celebrated. We should be joyful! If on no other grounds than this… we, God’s chosen people, of all people have cause to celebrate. We are the elect of God, we are his people, why should we do nothing while the pagans celebrate? The pagans bring out their “seasons greetings” and happy holidays” but we should celebrate CHRISTMAS! We celebrate the coming of our Saviour to the world, we celebrate his life and death for us. We should celebrate because the victory belongs to Christ, this world belongs to our Lord and we should celebrate that victory, not with silly tales of Santa Clause and reindeer, which is a diversion from the truth of the victory of Christ our Lord! It doesn’t matter what the roots of the day are, we can find something pagan that happened on every day of the year, so instead of letting the pagans have the day, we claim it in the name of the Lord as we do every day.

But there is something more thought provoking here that I came across and it made me think. I’ve been in a few different circles of thought in my lifetime. But at this point in my life I am proud to be a part of the reformed worldview. Now, everything has advantages and disadvantages. Everyone has weaknesses and strongpoints. And I think weaknesses and strongpoints come pre-wrapped in schools of thought as well, and the reformed school of thought is no exception.

And I believe in the reformed world that we sometimes have this little problem of wanting to be radical and different for the sake of being radical and different. And I can’t say that I have always escaped this tendency either. We absolutely revel in our radicalness. And, there is a place to be radical and different, we do after all desire reform, and that means being different sometimes. But our differentness should have a purpose and reason behind it, and not just any old reason either. When we as Christians are different or radical, it should be because we have the word of God behind us.

We are called to be a Holy (set apart) people, and this is why we are often seen as radical. And I applaud and endorse many of the “radical” notions within the reformed community such as Covenant Renewal Worship, Patriarchal Leadership of the home, Family Worship etc. All of these things are often seen as radical and often we are accused of being in a cult. No problem.

But, there is a tendency to be different for the sake of being different, and then we try to throw biblical justification in as an afterthought, and it just ruins the whole show! I believe holidays fall in this category for many reformed folk. But wait, the Bible actually does talk about Holidays doesn’t it? And it didn’t tell us to

Make certain though celebratest no holiday not defined in the New Testament. Make sure thou feastest not, except to partake of the Lord’s Supper. Be certain that ye celebrate nothing for I the Lord thy God am a Grinch, desiring that my people be dour and sour and that above all they celebrate not the victory of Christ in the world where he rules and reigns with a rod of iron.

No no no, we are commanded to REJOICE! (Psalm 32:11, Psalm 33:1 Psalm 35:9 Philippians 4:4… and the list could go on forever).

And then also we are told not to condemn either way the celebrating of some days above others, or not celebrating. (Romans 14:5-6)

And throwing all other arguments aside, why should we not have special focus this time of year on the coming of our Lord to this world? Why should we not celebrate that which is right and good! And isn’t it interesting that all the non-Christians are worried about this holiday? This is one of the main holidays that are attacked.

So to that I say to all you Christians, go forth and have a MERRY CHRISTMAS!

---------------------------

Here are a couple of articles I was reading:

http://jeffreyjmeyers.blogspot.com/2007/11/christmas-time-is-here-again.html

http://jeffreyjmeyers.blogspot.com/2007/11/is-christmas-christian-part-ii.html

http://www.hornes.org/theologia/mark-horne/celebrating-a-calvinist-christmas-with-a-clear-conscience