Neither I nor anyone else involved in the BI discussions, that I am aware of, are saying that either “believers baptism” or “the eternal security of the believer” are not important. I think they are vitally important, and I strongly embrace both in my personal beliefs and practice. And I agree many of the original Anabaptists were martyred for their defense of believers baptism.

But to leave it there, in my opinion, totally misses the point. No one is arguing that we should allow missionaries who don’t believe in believers baptism or eternal security, or we should make room for such people as denominational employees. What I (and others) are arguing for is an admission that the Body of Christ also includes people who are wrong about these important doctrines. And, even though they are wrong on these important doctrines, they are still our brothers and sisters in Christ, and we should treat them as such. That includes recognizing the legitimacy of their churches and their baptisms, whenever their baptisms are done according to biblical standards (e.g. for adult believers who are truly repentant, and by immersion).

That I am aware, none of the early Anabaptists was martyred for claiming we should invalidate the baptism (immersion) of authentic adult believers as practiced by other groups of Christians.

Thank you. I acccept your apology.

Les

Let us love chicken together, my brother. If you will baptize them in the grease I will imbibe them at the table.

Please don’t miss this statement in comment 36–

“Before I offer these three instances, I will offer a word of clarification. I AM NOT SAYING that the three examples are equal to or on par with the homosexual acceptance of the Episcopals or the PCUSA.”

In regards to my comment 61, continuing this dialogue seems almost fruitless, but I would like to offer one point of clarification. I never said that we should not read nor benefit from Presbyterians. Neither did I say that I held them in disdain. I simply said we should not have one as president of the SBC. Praise the Lord we have never had one nominated.

ABClay, David, et al,

As to Baptist forefathers, whether you follow an Anabaptist origin or an English Separatist origin, you must agree that those who practiced believer’s baptism sacrificed greatly as they were held in ill-repute by the Magisterial Reformers, Anglicans, and Catholics alike.

All that aside, the question that still remains to be answered is with the Biblical teaching of baptism. Wanting to relegate that to the status of ‘unimportant’ is irressponsible, especially as it relates to the security of the believer. A view of the security of the believer in acceptable doctrine goes to the very core of who we are because it relates to the nature of the Cross. Either the Cross was sufficient for salvation and the Spirit is sufficient for security, or they are not. This is not just some ’system of doctrine’ but is a confession of the adquacy of a Triune God to accomplish what we could not. In other words, believer’s baptism is essential because it tells us not only what we believe about the church, but it also demonstrates what we believe about the work of Christ. It pictures that we have either died to our sin that we might have eternal life. A view lacking in eternal security at best says we have died to ourself and been put on life-support, wherewith the plug could be pulled at any moment. That’s a view of an abundant/eternal life that I want to avoid. If baptism is a sign of salvation, let us struggle to make sure it is a sign of a proper understanding of salvation. I cannot help but think it is important.

You’re still the Mann!

With that, I am….

Your Chicken-loving Brother,

David

I apologize for my statement of you being a hair’s breadth away from a Presbyterian. My reasoning behind that statement was your investigation of Presbyterianism that Robin and Tim referenced earlier. However, I should have traversed a different path and sought your own conclusions before I openly stated what I did.

I also apologize for calling Dwight a charismatic. Though I still am strongly opposed to the practice of a private prayer language, believe it is anti-biblical and is a result of ecumenism, it was improper of me to attribute the term ‘charismatic’ to a person based on that practice alone.

Finally, I apologize to Robin for derailing what was otherwise a substantive post. It has been my practice to avoid personalities and focus on the topics while I have ventured into this arena. Unfortunately, I followed bad judgment in this particular comment.

I appreciate your assessment.

When one speaks (Post #36) in one paragraph about the PCUSA’s acceptance of flagrant, unrepentant sinners in the ministry and then claims that a brother was “a hair’s breadth away from being a Presbyterian” a few short paragraphs later in the same post, I can only assume that the descriptor “Presbyterian” is used in the pejorative.

Maybe I am should refrain from connecting the dots. Heck, I don’t even disagree with the thrust of Brother Mann’s point as wanting an clear identity. I just wish he would have clarified that Brother Les is a long way from being in line with the PCUSA.

People keep wanting Brother John to provide proof of his claim in post #36, item number 1. The only way that I can understand his claim is if he believes that we as Baptists claim as our “Fathers in the Faith” the Anabaptists. If he holds this heritage, then I would submit that the Anabaptists were called heretics and murdered for much more serious “offenses” than merely practicing believers baptism.

Sorry for the length of this one.

Grace and Peace…

ABClay

John will respond tomorrow with an apology concerning his statement on Dwight and Les.

In my mind I thought that if Les wanted his position defended, he would do it. I was wrong not to correctly clarify Les’ position also. As Les repeated to me tonight he is a Southern Baptist and will remain a Southern Baptist. He did some time ago explore some of the teachings of Presbyterianism, but came to the conclusion they were wrong. As Les told me over the phone, he is unashamedly a Southern Baptist. Again, I aplogize to Les for not making this more clear.