Baptist Why and Why Not (1900) Chapter 8: Why Baptism Of Believers and Not Infants By R. P. Johnston, D. D. Pastor Third Baptist Church St. Louis, Missouri And as they went on their way they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be [...]
Archive for March, 2009
Why Baptism of Believers and Not Infants
Posted in Baptism, Baptist Distinctives, Baptist Why and Why Not, church history, ecclesiology, infant baptism, SBC, tagged R.P. Johnston on March 30, 2009 | 1 Comment »
Why Baptist and Not Campbellite
Posted in Baptism, Baptist Distinctives, Baptist Why and Why Not, Calvinism, Campbellite, ecclesiology, faith, perseverance, regeneration, repentance, SBC, soteriology, tagged Edgar E. Folk on March 27, 2009 | Leave a Comment »
Baptist Why and Why Not (1900) Chapter 7: Why Baptist and Not Campbellite By Edgar E. Folk, D. D. Editor, Baptist and Reflector Nashville, Tennessee For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. – John 3:16. Knowing that [...]
Are We Dangerously Dependent on Wikipedia?
Posted in Uncategorized, tagged wikipedia on March 25, 2009 | Leave a Comment »
No, says Andrew Lih, the author of a new book about Wikipedia. I use the site often and think it can be helpful provided that one understands the nature and limitations of it. Some articles obviously are much more useful than others, and it’s not the last word on any subject.
Why Baptist and Not Presbyterian
Posted in Baptism, Baptist Distinctives, Baptist Why and Why Not, Calvinism, ecclesiology, infant baptism, Presbyterianism, SBC, Uncategorized on March 25, 2009 | Leave a Comment »
Baptist Why and Why Not (1900) Chapter 6: Why Baptist and Not Presbyterian By T. S. Dunaway, D. D. Fredericksburg, Virginia Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God [...]
Why Baptist and Not Methodist
Posted in Arminianism, Baptism, Baptist Distinctives, Baptist Why and Why Not, Calvinism, infant baptism, Methodism, SBC, tagged R.A. Venable on March 24, 2009 | Leave a Comment »
Baptist Why and Why Not (1900) Chapter 5: Why Baptist and Not Methodist By R. A. Venable, D. D. Pastor First Baptist Church Meridian, Mississippi For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren. Moreover whom he [...]
More from Phil Johnson on “The Pornification of the Pulpit”
Posted in Mark Driscoll, Phil Johnson on March 23, 2009 | Leave a Comment »
The controversy (generally speaking, one could hardly call it a conversation) continues. For the latest update on the reaction to Phil Johnson’s Shepherd’s Conference message, see here. He notes that by profane he doesn’t necessarily mean “cussing” and he provides a clear answer to those critics who charged him with hypocrisy given some of his [...]
Black Pro-life pastor sent to jail
Posted in abortion, Political on March 23, 2009 | Leave a Comment »
Story here. HT: Puritan Fellowship
Further Thoughts on the Reactions to Mark Dever Calling Infant Baptism Sin
Posted in Baptism, Baptist Distinctives, infant baptism, Mark Dever on March 20, 2009 | 18 Comments »
Dr. R. Scott Clark, Professor of Church History and Historical Theology at Westminster Seminary California, has been invited to respond to the controversy at the 9 Marks blog. Dr. Clark posts a lightly revised version of what he had previously posted on his own blog. Dr. Clark is not offended by Dr. Dever’s calling infant [...]
Mark Dever on the Sin of Infant Baptism
Posted in Baptism, Baptist Distinctives, infant baptism, Mark Dever on March 19, 2009 | 2 Comments »
Mark Dever graciously responds to those who have expressed concern over this statement from this month’s 9Marks ejournal: “I have many dear paedo-baptists friends from whom I have learned much. Yet I see their practice as a sinful (though sincere) error from which God protects them by allowing for inconsistency in their doctrinal system, just [...]
