Replies

Took a new (slightly better-paying) job, buying a house...

...So I've had little time for FReeping of late.

But, yes -- this is one of 2 or 3 threads I would like to return to at a later date.

Thanks for the kind words. I enjoyed the debate very much, and look forward to its good natured (probably on-again off-again) continuation.

That said, I must state again for the record: it is my belief that you have behaved acrimoniously towards certain anaBaptist Elders of the Church of Jesus Christ, in the past. As a communicant member of the Presbyterian Church ("the Church of the Elders"), it is impossible for me to simply "let sleeping dogs lie" on such a matter. I believe that as a Christian Layperson, you have a duty to seek reconciliation with any of your Brethren; how much the more, then, with any Elders (even though they be not your Elders in terms of Local Administration).

I am not stating this with any attached assignation of "blame" for the events in question. Rather, I am simply stating that you do have a Duty to seek reconciliation prior to each participation in the Lord's Supper. This may stick in your craw; this may stick in their craw. But it is a Christian Duty nonetheless, and may not be summarily forgotten. As always, IMHO.

Best,
(the-quite-busy) Uriel

Uriel, none of us are anabaptists.

I don't recognize the authority of "elders" who preach the gospel of Christ by calling those who profess Christ "lying whores" using nasty FRmail tricks. Among many other novel evangelization techniques.

I think you should reconsider your association with them but you're a man of sober judgment. I'm confident that you'll recognize your duty sooner or later.

Even within your own denomination, Uriel, you would be mistaken to kowtow to those in obvious error. And we Baptists are far far more independent. I can't quite understand how you fail to grasp this. It makes the offenses committed by the "elders" you mention all the more inexcusable. They would laugh at the notion that any such rule should apply to them. Actually, by your suggested standard, I should respectfully kowtow to Jimmy Carter when he advocates sodomy and abortion as a Baptist. Sorry, it don't wash.

Maybe you've never quite grasped exactly how independent Baptist churches really are. It makes us fractious. But we can never be hijacked by a liberal clergy or committee. A timely observation, I think.

Besides we're all tired of talking about Hebrews 10 anyway. It ultimately became merely a pretext.

I would say that you are not truly fundamentalist in your outlook. That's not necessarily a criticism, merely an observation. There was something underlying, Uriel, that you never did quite grasp, largely because, I suspect, of your own denominational background.

I would enjoy returning to the paedobaptism discussion. It was actually just starting to get interestng when people starting posting about what baptism meant to them and the devotional implications. That was the part I liked best since neither you or I were arguing paedobaptism as free agents.