1994 issue 7 - theonomy and baptism: reflections of a new paedobaptist - counsel of chalcedon

8/12/2019 1994 Issue 7 - Theonomy and Baptism: Reflections of a New Paedobaptist - Counsel of Chalcedon

1/4

heOIOgiCal inertia pushes both

ways: there is the tendency to

remain in a static position -

unmoved and unchanging, but once

motion hasbegun, there is the tendency

to continue moving in a straight line

until

we reach the end -- like falling

down

the stairs. Tumbling down the

theonomic.stairs has produced more

than a few bumps and bruises. I was

warned some years ago, as I came near

the upper landing of heonomy, that I

was

in

danger of falling.

As

a Baptist

pastor I

was

especially

cautionedaboutthe logical

(theological) implications

of

theonomy

and the

inevitable conclusions of

covenant theology

-

especially paedobaptism.

They

were right.

Thankfully, there were

a

few

b ptists

in

my life

that failed to perceive of

this alleged

danger

and

encouragedme to take my

first few theonomic steps.

This new appreciation for

the

Old

Testament was

exciting. New Testament Christianity

had

been

replaced by

whole Bible

Christianity. A few more steps seemed

safe enough. I was encouraged to read

Calvin, Hodge, Warfield, Machen,Van

Til, Murray, Bahnsen, Rushdoony,

North, et. al. -- but always with this

one caveat: "These guys are off

concerning their views of baptism."

The warning was heeded for a while,

but not without some arousal of

curiosity.

Many more theonomic steps were

taken over the years -- baby steps and

giant steps. More alarms were sounded

-- some quite hysterical. Why have

these theolOgians bumbled so whenit

comes

to

the question o f baptism? I

asked. I was confidently assured that

these men had failed to be completely

Reformed in this area and were

following Rome. "After all," I was told,

"these men are fallible. This was a

fantastic claim -- cenainly one that

demanded careful examination. While

all men are fallible, the question

concerning these great Reformed

paedobaptist scholars still begged an

answer: "Given their uncompromising

commitment to

the

principle of

'Scripture alone,' their rigorous level

of scholarship and careful attention to

details, the fact that theyhadproved to

be such able men of God to whomwe

turned with so many other imponant

questions, specifically, where do they

err from their otherwise reliable

principles of biblical interpretation to

consistently produce this alleged

false

understanding of the doctrine of

baptism? These men do not have the

authOrity that would preserve them

from all error. They do, however, have

sufficient authoritytomake me hesitant

in

patronizing them.

I began

to

read -- one of the more

dangerous activities of Christianity.

As I went to the Scriptures to study this

issue out I was struck harder than ever

before concerning the imponance of

one's interpretive prindples. I was told

by some that all I needed to do was get

my concordance and look

up

every

.Robert Randy) Booth pa


2/4

the covenant sign (baptism) and be

counted

as part

of

the covenant

community of God's people.

writings [Old Testament] which are

able

to

give you the wisdom that

leads

to

salvation through

faith

which is in Christ

Jesus. All

SCripture

[Old

Testament]

is

inspiredofGodand profitablefor

teaching,

for reproof,for correction,for

training in

righteousness; that

the

man of God may

be

adequate,

equipped for eVelY good

work. Besides these passages, Christ

and the writers of the New Testament,

over and over again quote from and

God alone

may

exercise the

prerogative to alter His Word. In other

words, ChHstians may not

arbitrarily

declare any portion ofGod's

Word

void,

including any portion of the Old

Testament. Any claim for change

between the Old Covenant

and

the

New Covenant must be validated by

fmther revelation of God

as

found in

the SCriptures themselves.

Both

the

Old and New Testaments are to direct the

belief and

practice

of he

New

Covenant

believer.

Ironically, the New Testament

settled this issue for me -- it explicitly

admonishes

New

Testament believers

to rely on the authOlity of the Old

Testament. When Jesus said, Man

shall

not live by

bread

alone,

but

on every

word that proceeds

out

of the mouth of

God (Matt. 4:4),

He

was quoting from

and referring to the Old

Testament.

Jesus was

unequivocal about the

fact

The New Testament

does

not

set

aside the Old Tes-

tament t relies on and

emphasizes

the

continued

validity of the Old Testa-

ment for God's people in

the New Covenant.

that His ministry in no way

invalidated the Old

Testament, asserting:

Do not

think

that

came to abolish

the

Law or the Prophets; did not

come

to

abolish,

but

t

fulfill.

For truly say

to

you, until

heaven and

earth pass away,

not the smallest letter or stroke

shall pass away from

the

Law,

until all

is

accomplished.

Whosoever

then annuls

one

of

Dividing the Bible and

the covenants of God is

unwarranted. We might

as

well sever a tree from its

roots

and

expect

it

to

survive. The Old and New

Testaments are

tied

together and are mutually

dependent on one another.

The Old Testament needs

the NewTestamentand the

New Testament needs the

Old

Testament

to be

properly interpreted

and

he least of these

commandments,

and so teaches others,

shall be called least in

the

kingdom

of

heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches

them,

he

shall be

called

great

in

the

kingdom

of

heaven

(Matt.

5: 17-19).

TheBereans examined

the

Scriptures

[Old Testament] daily, to see whether

these things were so (Acts 17: 11).

Even

the apostle's teaching had to stand the

scrutiny of the Old Testament. Paul

refers to the Old Testament when he

says

in

Romans 15:4, For whatever

was wHtten in earlier times [Old

Testament] was written for our

instruction

...

In 1 Corinthians 10: 11

we

are

told, Now these things

happened to them

as

an example, and

they were written [Old Testament}

for

our instruction, upon whom the ends

of the ages have come. And again

we

read approvingly of the New Covenant

use ofthe Old Testament 5Cliptures in

2 Timothy 3:15 17

:

That from

childhood you

have known the

sacred

apply the Old Testament SCriptures to

New Testament believers.' The New

Testament does not set aside the Old

Testament. It relies on and emphasizes

the continued validity of the Old

Testament

for

God's people in the New

Covenant.

Both the Old and

New

Testaments

interpret one another. The RefOlmed

principle known as the analogy ofaith,

(Le., SClipture interprets SClipture) is

our guiding interpretive principle. It

places an emphasis on the unity of

SClipture, while allowing

for

some

change where new biblical revelation

calls

for

such change.

t is

flurefore

presumed, by

the

covenantal

method

of

interpretation,

that

the teachings and

practices of the

Old

Testament are

still

valid

and

reqUired for

believers in

the

New

Covenant

era unless God has

revealed

in SCripture some change in the

use, f01m,

or

application

of

His

former

revelation.

understood. No matter where we start

our study of a doctrine we are forced to

consider it in light of the entire Bible.

The demand that we begin our

study of any doctrine with the New

Testament

alone

must be immediately

frustrated. This is true for

two

important reasons. First, the New

Testament can only be interpreted

properly in the context of the Old

Testament. Both the Old Testament

text itself, and the culture it produced,

provide the foundation

for

understanding how those who first

received the New Testament would

have understood its teaching. God

preserved an inspired written record

of both the history of redemption and

the historical experiences ofHis people.

These are not minor points that may

be overlooked or brushed aside i we

are to come to a right understanding of

any doctrine.

No

fact (or verse) of

Scripture is isolated from any other

September 994

TH

COUNSEL

of

Chalcedon

7


3/4

fact -- they are all related and have

impact on one another. We may not,

tI;lerefore,

rush

toche New Testamem,

concordance in hahd,

and

presume

that we have all the

tools

and

information necesSary to reach

an

accunite

conclusion about any

doctrine.

A

e ~ b n d

reason that starting with

theI:' ew Testament is immediately

frustrated is because there are no

doctrines

in

the New Testamem that

not have their roots

in

the Old

Testament. When we read .

in Galatians 3:29 that weare

"Abraham's offspring" .and

lieirs

ac,ording to promise,

we are i i n t h ~ ~ t e l y driven

to

.

Genesis

to

gain

understan,ding. When we

rea,d

in

Philippians 3:3, we

re

the

drcumcfsion,"

we must

totl;le

Old

"Testament to

djscqver

~

circumcision

was and

what

function it

performed.

When

we read in Romans

1 5 : a C h r l s t c a m e t o c o n f t r m t h e p r o m l s e s

l'iade to the fathers: or in Ephesians

i:12

that the Gentiles were exdw led

from he commonwealth of Israel,

and

strangers

to the

covenants

of

promise,

it

is only i i i the

Old

Testament that we

diScover

the

' foundation for these

teachings.

'How

did

the Jews understand the

baptiSrrt.

ofJohn

in John

3:251 What

were the various baptisms of Hebrews

6:2?Why

was circumcision of the

heart

in Colossians 2:11-12

represented by baptism? What

represented cirCumcision of the heart

in the

Old

'Testament? To seek the

answers for thek basic questions

without turningto the Old TeStament

would

be

vain. Other examples of

how stait lng with the New Testament

drives us iinmediately to

the Old

Testament are seen

in

the dOCtrines of

creation, sin, redemption, the sacrifice

Of

Christ the

atonement

the

priesthood

the

eldership,

church

discipline, the Lord's Supper, malriage,

divorce, households covenants,

judgmem, heaven,

and

much more.

In a

letteno

his son in 1850, we see

an

example of

how

Rev.

C. C. Jones

applied this principle of biblical

interpretationto the question ofcapital

punishment. This same principle of

continuity must be brought

to

bear on

allother doctrinal. questions, including

baptism. Rev . Jones adVised his son:

The

fallacy

ofyour young friend on

the capital punishment question, so

far as the Scripturesare concerned,lies

insetting the New Testament over and

above the Old, whereasboth are equally

the Word of God, equallyauthoritative,

and

form

one

perfect revelation, one

perfectruleoffaithandpractice. They

are not

in

any respect antagonistic,

but

consonant,

and

mutually support the

one and the other. Nothingissetaside

in the Old Testament in and by the

New save the types and shadows and

ceremonial. laws, all which find their

fulfillment in

our

Lord and savi01lX,

Jesus Christ

and

expire, as the lawyers

would say, by the statute of their own

limitation. But all the laws ofGod that

embody our duties to God and men,

whethersoctallyorcivilly, remain ever

in

force. These laws are recognized In

the New Testamem, but not repeated

in

extenso, there being no necessity for

it .. The New Testament is built up out

ofandupon the Old,andisnotcontrary

to

it in any thing whatever. t ever

recognizes

and

then supports the Old.

18 l

THE COUNSEL of Chalcedon l Septelllber, 1994

Anotherfal.lacy ofyour young friend

is that weare not bound to do anything

butwhat weare distinctlycommanded

in

so

many words by the New

Testamenttodo.

You

perceive at once

that this principle cannot be admitted

without involving

us

in

many

difficulties.

This

fallacy grows

out

of

the first and

falls

with it. All that is

necessary is for the New Testament

to

acknowledge the Old, and the two be

united

in

one

perfect

revelation.

Neitheris complete without the other

..

I

need

not

proceed any

umher.

You

can manage the

controversy now, I think,

with this little help. 2

the dlspensatiOilal

notion

oftsolating the New Testament

from

the Old Testament, as

though

we

may determine any

doctrine in .t.\ proper relation

t redenipltve history with the

New Testdment

alone, is

a

dangerous

and misguided

method of determining truth. The

problem with

this

dispensational

method is not so much the starting

with the

New

Testament, since the

New Testamentimmediately pointSus

to the OldTestament. The real.problem

posed by this method is that

it

not only

wantS to startwith the New Testament,

it also wants

to

stop with the New

Testamentand

settle

the issue with the

New Testament

alone.

We must

not

forget that all Scripture c including

the Old Testament --

is

profitable for

doctrineC2 Tim. 3: 10). Starting

and

ending with

the whole

Bible

Is the only

sure

way t amve at sound doctrinal

positions.

The dispensational system

does not adequately account for the

necessary unity of the Bible.

Given the unchangeable character

of God there can

be no

question about

the principle of continuity

in

His

revelation (the Bible).

Continuity

and

unity should

be

presumed over

discontinuliy . Who, but God alone,


4/4

may presume to change what God has

said? When

it

comes to Scripture, only

God is permitted to say what is in fact

new

about the New Covenant. Dr.

Greg Bahnsen has written, "everything

God has said

should

be that by which

man lives (Matt. 4:4), notsimply those

things which God has spoken

twice

(and

in

the right places). We must live

by

every

Scripture unless God explains

otherwise .. " 3

Having fallen down the theonomic

stairs and having landed safely on the

paedobaptist step, let me comfort

others who fear such a

fall.

like

aU

truth, even when we avoid it and fight

against

it

at first,

in

the end

it sets us

free.

Thatwhich,atfirst,

we

cannotsee

at aU, we come to embrace and love.

Suddenly, thebeauty of ts instruction

is seen on every page of Scripture so

that we wonder how we ever missed

seeing it in the first place. Rather than

being the monster I imagined, the

doctrine of believers' infant baptism is

now a comfon and a friend. The

knowledge that God has set apart my

family, inc udingmy beloved children,

for special covenant blessings and

promises is reassuring to me as a

believer who labors to train them in

the fear of the Lord. It is a comfort to

know and serve a covenant-keeping

God. I once hated the Doctrines of

Grace because I did not understand

them and thought them

to be

the

MERIC

he First 35 Years

opponents of evangelism

and the

Kingdom of God. Now I love the

Doctlines ofGrace and know them to

be the very gospel which advances

God's kingdom. Believers' infant

baptism is a blessing

to

God's people-

not an enemy. n

'e .g., 2 Cor. 6, Rom. 8:36; 9:25-26;

10:6-8, 11,

13, 15;

Gal. 4:27; Heb.

8:8-12; 10:30; 13:5; 1 Peter 2:10; etc.

'Robert Manson Myers,AGeorgian

atPlinceton

(New

York:

HarcourtBrace

JovanOvich, 197

6),89

-90.

3Greg L. Bahnsen, T11eonomy in

Christian

Ethics

(se

cond edition,

Phillipsburg, NJ; Presbyterian

and

Refonned Publishing Co., 1984), 184.

For over100years Americans havebeen subjected to historical misin

formation. We have been given lies for built and myths for facts.

Modern, unbelieving historians have hidden

the buth

ofour nation's

historyfromus.

America:TheFirst35

Years notonly corrects the lies,

but

also points

out

things "overlooked" by modem historians.

t

interprets American history from a Ouistian perspective so that you

hearnotonlywhat happened, bywhyithappened-andwhatit means

to us today.

32

lectures on 16-90 minute cassettes,

200

page note

book, 16 page study guide, lecture outlines, index bibliography.

special rate

for

Counsel of Chalcedon readers--

MERICA: The First 350 Years- 64.95x

=

Louisiana residents add

7

sales

tax

J2J:J)

=

SHIPPING

AND

HANDLING: Add 10%

(15

UPS)

=

(Check or Money Order) Total Enclosed

(name)

(Street Address or P.O. Box)

(City) (State) (Zip)

PLEASE ALLOW 4-6 WEEKS FOR DEliVERY

Send self-addressed

stamped

envelope to receive more information

September, 1994

t

TIlE COUNSEL of Chalcedon 1 19

1994 issue 7 - theonomy and baptism: reflections of a new paedobaptist - counsel of chalcedon

Documents