Monday, July 02, 2007

Centuri0n Grabs Some Low-Hanging Fruit

In a post earlier today, Centuri0n responds to an argument that believers-only baptism is reflective of an anti-sovereigntist mindset (Source).

Yeah, Centuri0n, we all know that there are Reformed baptists, and that Reformed baptists don't baptize believers-only for that reason. On the other hand, the "your mama" part of the critique is dead wrong. You wrote: "So while LongShot here wants to pin some kind of crypto-pelagianism on baptists, he's a crypto-pelagian as well because of the value he hangs on bad works." You should know better, Centuri0n: bad works do have actual demerit, for which men receive all the blame. Works are not symmetrical.

Perhaps, next you'll go after other low-hanging fruit in the covenantal tree, like Doug Wilson's reason inane statement that: "Although Christians have their differences over infant baptism, we need to remember that in a certain sense all baptisms are infant baptisms" (Source).

No, Doug, they are not all infant baptisms unless one just equivocates over the meaning of infant. Equivocation, however, is not "a certain sense," but two conflated senses. Furthermore, it is precisely such equivocation over the term "infant" that leads to the undermining of the doctrine of justification by faith and provides fodder for Reformed Baptist critiques.

Fortunately, for Presbyterians and Congregationalists (and Reformed Anglicans, if there are any left), there are far more able advocates on this particular subject. I would exhort Centuri0n to respond to them instead.



Anonymous said...

There are much more important things to do than read Doug Wilson's (as you say) inane, Blah, Blah, Blog.

Turretinfan said...

Dear Godith,

Unfortunately, Doug Wilson has become a much listened-to speaker in the modern Reformed scene.

Thus, even when his comments are clearly wrong, his blog is still worth reading, for the same reason that its worth reading Peter Leithart's blog.

And not everything that Doug Wilson has to say is wrong or tainted by the FV controversy. In some (perhaps many) cases he colors within the lines. He even makes some poignant points from time to time.


GeneMBridges said...

In some (perhaps many) cases he colors within the lines.


There's got to be joke in that somewhere given the whole "all baptisms are infant baptisms" remark... ;)