I accept that, Tyrese; but some of the comments seem to miss the point as to the nature of the communion.
Baptism trend in the SBC
- Thread starter Bill The Baptist
- Start date
- Status
I accept that, Tyrese; but some of the comments seem to miss the point as to the nature of the communion.
alexandermsmith
Puritan Board Junior
I would disagree on the issue of video games. They are an utter waste of time. A puzzle game on one's phone to pass the time when travelling is perhaps one thing; but actually going to the bother and expense of purchasing a games console, and games, and spending the time necessary to play them- and immersing oneself in the world of those games- is quite another.
The reason I mention video games is because the conversation has been focusing on our young people. This is a more pertinent example of what one should be looking at in judging a young person's claim to being converted. Video games may not be "as bad" as fornication- though sin is sin- but if we're talking about a 12 or 13 year old, then the fact they're not fornicators probably- hopefully- won't mean much.
Tyrese,
No-one is arguing that one must be perfect in order to receive the sacrament (although the Christian should be striving to obey Christ's commands and not to be content with the sinful state he still finds himself in). But I'm afraid your comments come across as special pleading.
You're also confusing being converted with being admitted to the Lord's Table: these are not the same thing and don't tend to happen at the same time. In Scottish Presbyterian churches the old practice was that there would be some time between a person's conversion and their going before the Session to be admitted to the sacrament. This would allow the change in the person to be observed by the church at large (and for the person himself to see the change in his own life); for the fruits of conversion to begin to appear. Rather than the invitation approach where one goes forward at the first notion one might be converted. It's not that the Session is waiting for the person to become sinless- that won't happen in this life- but rather it's taking account of the danger of false conversion, or self-delusion. We've all read of those who felt they were converted during some great revival and then a few months later they are back to their old ways.
A person may well be converted when they are quite young, and sanctification certainly is a lifelong process. So why rush the person into membership and partaking of the sacrament? The Session should use wisdom. Perhaps they might think it better for the teenager to come back at a later time. That doesn't mean they're saying the child isn't converted, but that prudence dictates in this case they wait. It is far, far worse for the unconverted to be admitted to the sacrament than for the converted to be kept back from it.
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
Exactly. There is nothing inherently wrong with video games any more than there is with board games, though both may be abused for sinful purposes. I gave up playing video games when I was 19. I now see that that was a mistake, and that a moderate usuage of them would have seriously reduced my stress levels. Moreover, when people are using such adiaphora in moderation, that means that they are not spending their time watching or listening to filth. People cannot read theology 24/7; they need time to relax. Having a healthy view of both the Sabbath day and the primacy of other spiritual duties will permit them to enjoy such wholesome recreations in moderation. If they do not do so, then it is likely that they will replace such things with material that is inherently bad.
alexandermsmith
Puritan Board Junior
Well at the risk of taking the discussion off topic, again I disagree. It's a false choice to say that it's either video games or something even worse. What about something better? One can't read theology 24/7- read a Christian biography. There are other forms of Christian literature than theology. Video games are also different from board games. Video games immerse the player in a virtual world, whereas board games don't; video games are often inherently anti-social and whilst being on one's own can be a very beneficial thing, video games cultivate an individualistic, narcissistic mentality. And whilst there are multi-player games which one might argue cultivate sociability, they do so in the way facebook and twitter cultivate social activity: in a fake, empty way.
You were right to give up video games at 19, I would argue earlier is better. They are for children. Christians were able to de-stress before video games came along. It's another example of our inability to be alone with our own thoughts, in the quiet, in a way which is productive: reading, meditating upon the Word; or with a friend, in quiet conversation. The "alone time" of video games is not healthy, and I don't even think they reduce stress. I played video games as a teenage: they were not relaxing.
"When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things."
alexandermsmith
Puritan Board Junior
There's a context in which partying is acceptable?
I'm sure Earl means lawful celebrating rather than excessive partying (which sounds redundant). Let's get the thread back to topic if it still has life. Start a new one for discussing lawful and unlawful pastimes.
Parakaleo
Puritan Board Sophomore
A thousand times no, that's why I would not admit a child who does not:
The analogy about growth may have been a poor one, but it was intended to address what I called general "misgivings", not an absence of requirements. If the child meets the basic responsibilities the same as a recently converted adult, in both cases judgments of charity should be made and additional maturity should be looked for as the individual avails themselves of God's means.
Parakaleo
Puritan Board Sophomore
In other words, if I wouldn't make a recently converted 40-year-old go through a five year probation period before coming to the Table, why would I make a seven-year-old with the same, exact profession and even understanding of the 40-year-old do it? The seven-year-old covenant child even has several years of church experience, catechesis, and daily discipleship that the 40-year-old does not.
Things become "jarring" when you violate the 9th Commandment and don't treat my words in the context they were presented but create an example that doesn't fit the context of my remarks. I have no clue how you can equate what I stated to what you gave as an example in response. Can you enlighten me about my specific words in context and how they relate, in substance, to the example you offered?
A "waste of time" would be one of those "other factors" I mentioned; so basically you are making the same point.
To apply this to the present discussion, this is not something which would debar from the Lord's supper unless it created a scandal. Fornication, on the other hand, is scandalous in and of itself, and immediately debars from the Lord's supper.
We must be careful to distinguish things that differ.
There are numerous reasons. Foremost among them is the fact that every society recognises a time in a person's life when he "comes of age" and is regarded as capable of speaking for himself. The Bible itself recognises this as a natural principle of life and development. In one's minority a person is under the government of others since he is not fitted to enter into political, commercial, or social arrangements for himself.
Tyrese
Puritan Board Sophomore
Rev Winzer,
What you just said here is exacltly what I've been trying to say. There's a difference between hobbies that are a 'waste of time', and those that bring scandal.
Btw, I just saw your Church denominations new web page. Very nice! A friend recently told me about the spiritual challenges you brothers are facing in Austrailia. If you ever get a chance do share about your Church and how we can pray for your ministry.
Tyrese
Thankyou, Tyrese. Please pray that we remain steadfast, unmovable, and always abound in the work of the Lord; and that the Lord might be pleased to glorify His name and bless the preaching of the truth for the conversion and confirming of souls. Blessings to you, brother.
Parakaleo
Puritan Board Sophomore
The specific words are "not really". The context is you asking out loud if sinless perfectionism is to be looked for in a young applicant seeking admission to the Lord's Table. Perhaps your use of the words "sinless perfectionism" was hyperbolic? I assumed not, because the answer you gave was "not really", as opposed to "not at all" or "of course not". The more mild negative was unexpected after such a bold statement. "A bit jarring" is the phrase I used.
I further used an example to try and illustrate the sound and force of those words, "not really", upon someone in a very comparable situation (seeking permission from an authority with very high standards). You had no clue that's what I was getting at?
The above is my honest take of your words in their context and my thoughts behind what I wrote as one who differs with you and would love for you to consider whether your approach is not over scrupulous. Just as I examine my own positions in light of everything that is said. If I have misread you, or rushed to judgment, please forgive me, but do not accuse me of violating the Ninth Commandment because I made an attempt to express my mild surprise over your words as I honestly read them in context.
I would invite anyone else reading to please let me know if it is thought I have sinned. Thank you.
Tyrese
Puritan Board Sophomore
I think a few of my comments were misunderstood not becuase of what I said but because of what I didn't say. What happenes is another brother reads your post and assumes you MUST be saying the exact opposite of what they're saying, or, you've taken your position to the extreme. I think this is why brothers bring up the worst case scenario and then write a lengthy response based on that assumption. For example, in one post you said we need to be charitable. Soon after someone else took that same idea to mean we baptise and admit to the Lords table those who are living in open sin.
Being that you both share the same views concerning paedobaptism I'm confident your comments are being misunderstood, or there's an effort on the part of others to be argumentative. Since we're all brothers in Christ I'm going to go with the idea that you're being misunderstood.I think Rev Winzer summed it up best. We have to be able to see the difference between those who 'waste time', and those committing scandalous sins. That's all I was trying to say this whole time. And if we go back to the original topic concerning Baptism in the SBC, I stand by my comments that young children are treated unfairly in Baptist Churches. I've been in Baptist Churches all my life and I've seen young children who are far more mature (when it comes to spiritual matters) than adults, and yet, they were not able to get baptised because they were children. In my opinion, something is wrong with that.
Last edited:
Well, no, you could invite me and ask: "Did I construe your words correctly?"
How do you know how scrupulous I am with my children? Apparently, you believe you can speak so uncharitably about it as to present an analogy about whom I would permit to date my daughter (since I am a father who would need to make that decision).
I began this conversation in this thread by noting that certain things are guided by the "light of nature". There is no absolute yardstick one can hold up to a child and say: "If he says X and prays Y times a week and pays attention for Z minutes throughout a sermon and is praying and repenting on his own then he is ready for the Lord's Table."
Wisdom doesn't work that way.
I don't know what words you would like me to state but you have accused me in your latest reply of being "over scrupulous". I inferred as much in my first reply when I said (speaking of what I'm looking for):
"Am I looking for sinless perfection or some sort of really high standard?"
Notice that I did not merely ask whether I'm looking for sinless perfection. The conjuction OR implies that I'm not really or, if you prefer, I'm really not looking for either sinless perfection or a really high standard.
READ: I am not over-scrupulous in this matter (not a really high standard).
I've been an elder for several years and have admitted many communicants to the Table. I can't tell you in scientific terms what I'm looking for but I am neither looking for sinless perfection NOR am I looking at some sort of really high standard that is unreasonable for a person to acheive. I am, however, looking for some level of maturity that I do not yet see in my children that I believe is necessary for them to approach the Table.
Why, you, a complete stranger to me and my family would feel like you have the right to infer from that that I do not have the requisite maturity or wisdom to be able to determine whether my own children are mature enough is beyond me but it is, at best, extremely rude.
For you to then create an analogy in which you construe, with the worst possible construction possible, and compare it to a scenario in which a father (presumably ME since I'm that shockingly unsure about what's good for my kids), can't describe to my own daugther what is good for her is beyond the pale.
I really don't have time for this Blake. You either modify your tone or drop the issue because you have given needless offense where my own point in interaction was to discuss the issue. I didn't attack your position or call into question your wisdom but merely interacted theologically with the idea of using the Table as a means for achieving maturity necessary. If you want to keep accusing me of such things then I'll remove you from the conversation.
As a divorced father who raised three boys (without their mother in the picture at all) who were raised in a Baptist Church during their early years, seen their professions of faith and baptisms at early ages (7-12... they were all baptized by their Papaw the same day), watched them grow through their teen years and into their mid 20's, and see where they are today, I can say something is being left out. The Lord tests the faith of those who confess him. That testing is hard and very real even when they have been given and know the correct answers to the right questions.
Just like God tested Israel he tests us.
We should look at the wisdom of our heritage, even Israel. They were given wisdom as pertains to the Covenant and their Children. The promise is for us and our children. Even for those who will come into the faith and their children also (Acts 2:39). But there is a distinction between being children and those who are not. I agree with Chris Coldwell that we should look into these things from a historical perspective. It has been written about. Can anyone give us those references?
Just like God tested Israel he tests us.
We should look at the wisdom of our heritage, even Israel. They were given wisdom as pertains to the Covenant and their Children. The promise is for us and our children. Even for those who will come into the faith and their children also (Acts 2:39). But there is a distinction between being children and those who are not. I agree with Chris Coldwell that we should look into these things from a historical perspective. It has been written about. Can anyone give us those references?
Last edited:
Parakaleo
Puritan Board Sophomore
Would you believe that this question was at the base of everything I said regarding your comments? Please accept my apologies and forgive me for doing a terrible job of this and speaking instead in a way that made it sound like I thought you were irresponsible or lacked maturity.
Thank you. I forgive you. I understand that this medium does not always lend itself to clarity.
- Status