Who was George Blaurock?

George Blaurock’s name marks Truett-McConnell College’s proposed student recreation center (SRC) – a facility not yet built, but already called the Rock.

Like a rock, Blaurock stood stone stiff in his faith and practice, and that example provides the impetus for his name donning the SRC.

Swiss-born, Blaurock’s early years are a mystery. Even his birth is cited by some historians as ca. 1492. But of the evangelical aspects marking his adult life until his death in 1529, much more is known.

Educated at the University of Leipzig, Blaurock was a Roman Catholic priest until his conversion to Christ and evangelical Anabaptism. Before arriving in Zurich with his wife around 1524, however, the seeds of radical transformation apparently had taken root in Blaurock’s heart and life because he evidently had abandoned the priesthood.

Perhaps attracted by the significant changes and the Reformation already begun in Zurich by Zwingli and others, Blaurock’s search for truth led him in 1525 to Zwingli. Blaurock wanted to consult with him concerning the gospel, but being disappointed turned to Conrad Grebel and Felix Manz for the truth.

These and other men, known as the Radical Reformers, believed the so-called Reformation did not go far enough, as Zwingli was defending, among other things, the baptism of babies, or, paedobaptism.   Continue at Norm Miller

Spontaneous Baptisms

Over the last week, there’s been a lot of discussion about the practice of spontaneous baptism, spurred on by controversy surrounding Elevation Church’s how-to guide for “doing your part in God’s miracle.” Russell Moore’s weighed in, The Gospel Coalition released a roundtable discussion between Matt Chandler, Mark Dever and Darrin Patrick about 18 months ago, and undoubtedly many more voices are bound to say something.

None of us, of course, should be surprised that Furtick and Elevation would meticulously plan out such things—after all, anyone who has read Furtick’s books or heard him speak anywhere would be painfully aware of his Revivalist, um, “exuberance.” The first time I heard him speak was at the Willow Creek Leadership Summit a few years back where he demoed the power of Spirit Keys to set the mood during a worship gathering (and I hated Spirit Keys ever since).   Continue at Aaron Armstrong

Why I Changed My Mind About Baptism

Editors' Note: What doctrine or issue have you changed your mind about? The Gospel Coalition posed that question to several pastors, theologians, and other thinkers in order to gain a better understanding of what leads to shifts along the theological spectrum [see Sam Storms's "Why I Changed My Mind About the Millennium"]. Gavin Ortlund continues this new series with an explanation of how he changed his view on baptism.

I was baptized as an infant in the Church of Scotland. After my family moved back to the United States, I was raised in various Presbyterian churches, eventually working at two Presbyterian churches during college and then attending a Presbyterian seminary. As I look back, I have nothing but gratitude for my time among Presbyterians; in fact, I often miss that world!

The issue that propelled me out of Presbyterianism was the doctrine of paedobaptism (infant baptism). Once I sensed God's call to ministry, I conducted an intensive study of this issue since I knew it would affect where I could be ordained. During my final semester of college, I read everything I could get my hands on that addressed the question. Throughout my first year of seminary, I continued reading and also dialoguing with my paedobaptist friends. I remember conversations that lasted well into the night. I remember long office hours with professors and a few spirited discussions in class. I remember entire afternoons struggling with books like Pierre-Charles Marcel's The Biblical Doctrine of Infant Baptism, Paul Jewett's Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace, and countless others on both sides of the issue. By April of that year, my convictions had solidified against paedobaptism, and I (somewhat reluctantly) changed my church affiliation and was baptized (dunked in a river, to be precise).

It was helpful to formulate my convictions about baptism in a setting where almost everyone saw it differently than I did. In seminary I heard countless defenses of the Reformed paedobaptist argument from godly people whom I trusted and respected. I think I was able to see the paedobaptist view sympathetically, as an insider sees it. Though the issue is complex and many factors were involved, in the end it was a relatively simple insight that proved decisive for me. In conversations with friends, I learned to state my primary dissatisfaction with the Reformed (sometimes called "covenantal") argument for paedobaptism in the form of a question.   Continue at Gavin Ortlund

You Asked: Should I Get 'Re-Baptized'? (Paedobaptist Answer)

Editors' Note: Send your theological, biblical, and practical ministry questions to ask@thegospelcoalition.org along with your full name, city, and state. We'll pass them along to The Gospel Coalition's Council members and other friends for an answer we can share.

Lynda M. from Northern Ireland asks,

I was baptized at the age of 13 before I was really walking with the Lord. It came as a result of covering the topic in a youth Bible class after which we were asked if we would like to be baptized, and considering the majority of the class were doing it, I decided to as well. I recall at the time being too embarrassed to even tell my school friends about it, never mind ask them to come.

The Lord really worked in my life at the age of 20, and that's when I would say he really opened my eyes to what following Jesus was all about. Ideally that's when I would have been baptized, but obviously I already had been. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on getting baptized for a second time, and if you feel that would be necessary.

We posed the question to Jared Oliphint, regional coordinator and a ThM student at Westminster Theological Seminary. He studied philosophy at Gordon College and earned his MAR at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia in 2005. You can follow him on Twitter. And you can also read the credobaptist answer from Bobby Jamieson.    Continue at Jared Oliphint

The Importance of Jesus' Fulfilling All Righeousness For Us

Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, "I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?" But Jesus answered him, "Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." - Matthew 3:13-15

What an odd passage. Jesus comes to John to be baptized. John, knowing Jesus' identity, tries to stop Him and tells him it should be the other way around. Jesus tells him to do it anyway in order to' fulfill all righteousness'. Huh? What righteousness? Isn't Jesus already righteous, we ask? What actual need would there be to fulfill any more righteousness? While we all acknowledge that Jesus is indeed righteous in His essence, but I propose to demonstrate from the text of Scripture that, in order to become a perfect substitute for us, Jesus also needed to fulfill all righteousness as a man from our side, a man who is 'born under the law' who needed to perfectly keep it in order to be able to impute righteousness to us. Yes we must be quick to acknowledge that our Lord’s atoning death removes sin. Clearly, the curse of the law is removed because Jesus endured the penalty for us. “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (2 Cor. 5:21). “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree” (Gal. 3:13). Indeed, as the text of Scripture declares, in order for human beings, who are sinners, to have eternal life the guilt and penalty of sin must be removed. But Jesus does this not only by dying the death we justly deserve but by living the life we should have lived. This means, along with punishment for sins, that we must also have a perfect record of obedience to God’s law. When these two conditions are fulfilled people can be justified or declared righteous, before God. Therefore, justification contains one negative and one positive element.

The fact is, if Jesus simply needed to impute the righteousness of God from His essence, there would have been no need for him to live for 33 years. Instead when Herod went to go massacre the infants in Bethlehem, Jesus death as an infant would have sufficed for our justification. But this was not the plan of God because to become a perfect high priest and lamb without blemish, Jesus not only had to die for us but he had to live for us. It is clear then that the Scriptures speak of God's people not only being justified by His death (Rom. 3:25; 5:9) but also as being saved by His life or obedience (Rom. 5:10, 19). Aside from the above obvious passages, where else do the Scriptures teach this? Well if you turn with me to Hebrews chapters 4 and 5 we will find a very precise passage on this very topic:   Continue at Reformation Theology

When Should My Children Be Baptized?

Every Christian parent longs for his children to trust in Christ and to make this profession public. In Baptist churches such a profession is made public through baptism. One of the ongoing discussions among Baptists relates to the age at which children can or should be baptized. Many children raised in a Christian home—perhaps even most of them—profess faith at a young age. Many parents then ask, Should my child be immediately baptized? Here is my attempt to answer this question.

Defining Baptism

 

Baptism is an ordinance of God given to the New Testament church. It symbolizes that the recipient has been buried and resurrected with Christ and serves as public profession of faith and admission into the local church community. It precedes both membership and partaking of the Lord’s Supper, and as such, is the gateway to full participation in the life of the church.

Three Premises

 

Here are three premises related to the age of baptism.

Premise #1 - Those who make a credible profession of faith are to be baptized. 

Without exception, the New Testament pattern for baptism is that it follows a credible profession of faith (see Acts 8:12, Acts 9:36, Acts 16:29-34). What makes a profession of faith credible? I look for credibility to be displayed in knowledge and maturity.

Knowledge. For a person’s profession of faith to be credible, he must display at least a basic knowledge of the gospel and of the meaning of baptism. Baptism is not a rite performed upon a person, but an ordinance in which he is a full participant. Therefore the one who is baptized must have knowledge of what is being done and why.   Continue at Tim Challies

IMAGE

Numbers, Faithfulness, or People?

Perhaps one of the most important things to settle in ministry and as a church is how to define “success.”  Without question, we all have some notion of what constitutes “success.”  And whether it’s explicit or implicit, whether it’s written down or unspoken, our notion of success drives our behavior and our self evaluation.

Very often churches and church leaders define their “success” in terms of numbers.  Some defend measurement as an acceptable approach to gauging progress and effectiveness.  They speak of the number of baptisms or converts, church attendance and budgets, and other numerical assessments as shorthand for “success.”  Others reduce “success” to one factor: faithfulness.  ”Whether the numbers change or not,” this group tells us, “is not the issue.  The issue is whether a leader and church have been true to God’s design and intent.” Keep Reading...

Revisiting Baptism and Young Children

I’ve considered this question before. As Baptists, when should we baptize our children? A few blog posts recently give reasons why we should or should not delay baptism until our children are more mature (apx. ages 10-12).

First, Trevin Wax gave 4 points on his position relating to this question (which is that we should delay baptizing children until they are around 10 years old or so).

John Starke at The Gospel Coalition Blog then gave 4 reasons why we should baptize small children.

On the heels of these posts, Mike Gilbart-Smith at 9 Marks Blog posted his own “9 reasons why we should not baptize young children“. Keep Reading>>>

What is the Importance of the Parting of the Red Sea?

Question: What is the importance of the parting of the Red Sea?

Answer: The importance of the parting of the Red Sea is that this one event is the final act in God delivering his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus from Egypt is the single greatest act of salvation in the OT, and is continually recalled to represent God’s saving power. The events of the exodus, including crossing of the Red Sea, are immortalized in the Psalms as Israel brings to remembrance God’s saving works in their worship (e.g., Psalm 66:6; 78:13; 106:9; 136:13). Keep Reading>>>

9 Reasons Why Baptizing Children is a Bad Idea

The folks over at IX Marks have raised some very good points on why the church should not be so eager to baptize children:

1. Undermining the family: Church membership of children confuses the responsibilities of discipleship between the family and the church. The instruction is given to fathers to bring up their children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord, not to the church. This confusion can go two ways. Either baptism becomes a ‘family ordinance’ when it is up to parents to discern when a child is ready for baptism, effectively removing the ordinances from the pastoral oversight of the church. Or, the church ends up toaking over the role of the family, where the Sunday School teacher becomes the primary discipler of a child rather than the parents. Keep Reading>>>

Should We Baptize Small Children? Yes

The question among Baptists over whether to baptize small children is sensitive, and I’ve gone back and forth on it. There are several pastoral difficulties, and parents face many questions that they don’t often feel equipped to answer. Local churches who take conversion and church membership seriously have often taken a more conservative stance by implementing a certain age (say, 10, 15, or 18) before baptizing a child in order to guard against giving a young child false assurance or baptizing someone who isn’t truly converted.

Trevin Wax recently brought up the question and makes the case that “there is wisdom in delaying baptism for young children” (emphasis mine). He follows the lead of W.A. Criswell, who “encouraged and affirmed childhood decisions for Christ, but postponed baptism until a child was around 10 years of age.” So if your child professes faith at 6, the encouragement would be to wait until 10 to finally baptize him. Some churches wait longer, even until the child is out from under the direct influence and authority of parents. Keep Reading>>>

Baptism in History, Part 2

The writings of the third and fourth centuries reveal varying teachings on baptism. These include baptismal regeneration, baptism as a replacement for circumcision, and baptism as a step of faith. The church accepts some of these arguments today. Others have been rejected. Conclusions some claim are apostolic but which are based on rejected propositions should be viewed with skepticism.
Tertullian, in On Baptism (early 3rd century), argues against infant baptism: “[T]he delay of baptism is preferable; principally, however, in the case of little children.”¹ He gives several reasons. One is that the infant is “innocent.” The church under the more theologically precise Augustine soon rejected the “innocence” of infants. But if we read Tertullian generously, as not necessarily commenting on original sin, but as asserting that the status of an infant is “safe,” then the church agrees (see the Westminster Confession of Faith, Calvin, Hodge, Shedd, and Warfield [all referenced by Boettner²] and Spurgeon³). Although Augustine later rightly contradicted Tertullian’s words, Tertullian may have stood on a relatively orthodox basis when he argued for credo-baptism. Read the rest HERE

Baptism in History, Part 1

 What did those with close exposure to the Apostles teach? In The History of the Church, written in the 4th century, Eusebius relates this story:

When the tyrant was dead [Diocletian, A.D 96], and John [the Apostle]…used to go when asked…sometimes to appoint bishops, sometimes to organize whole churches, sometimes to ordain one person of those pointed out by the Spirit…. [He] finally looked at the bishop and indicating a youngster he had noticed, of excellent physique, attractive appearance, and ardent spirit, he said, ‘I leave this young man in your keeping’…. [T]he bishop accepted him and promised everything…the cleric took home the youngster entrusted to his care, brought him up…and finally gave him the grace of baptism.²

If the implications of the details of the story are correct, this boy was selected by John from those in the church. He was in this church, noticed (presumably pointed out by the Holy Spirit) by the Apostle John and raised by a bishop who had some relationship with the Apostle. Even though he was present in the church and raised on John’s order, he received baptism only after he was “brought up.” Read the rest HERE