How, when and why I turned from Evangelicalism to a full-orbed Reformed Faith
____________________________________________
To turn one’s back on something, as I did with evangelicalism quite a few years ago now, implies a turning to something else or a complete abandonment of the Christian faith altogether. Certainly, I shall not be returning to the modern evangelical fold which left me disappointed and bewildered. My conclusion was that did many of these Churches truly believe what they profess to believe, then not only their Churches but also their own individual lives would take off in a very different direction, unrecognisable from what they are currently. The Reformed faith is not evangelical nor is it Baptist. Luther, Calvin, and Augustine for that matter, were not evangelicals by any definition.
A BROADER UNDERSTANDING OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
Most seriously-minded Christian believers will at some point wrestle with the issue of paedobaptism as against the baptism of those who profess to believe and follow Christ. In the process Scripture passages fly back and forth and no real conclusion is reached. Looking with an unprejudiced eye both appear to have a strong biblical case for their position. I reached this point after a long period of hesitation whilst studying in Constance, Germany. At the university, in the extensive library to which I had access there were many hard-to-find books in any number of languages, besides German and English, French, Dutch. I made time between my studies to read widely. Yet assistance came at the time from an unusual and unexpected quarter. A good friend whom we got to know in Austria sent me a copy of Kindertaufe und Bekehrung (Infant Baptism and Conversion) by Dr Jochem Douma, professor of ethics at Theological High School in Kampen in the Netherlands, a German translation of the English version. In this pamphlet, the author sets out to answer David Kingdon’s Children of Abraham. I found the arguments of Dr Douma helpful and convincing, despite the fact that Kingdon’s book was the best defence of the Baptist position I had read at the time. Nevertheless, it began to occur to me that the question was much wider than as to whether to baptise professing believers or to include the infants of believers. Involved are two very different positions on what is the Christian faith. I could move from one position on baptism to another easily enough, but still miss the wider significance.
WHERE DID BAPTISTS COME FROM?
For many years I fought shy of identifying myself as ‘reformed Baptist’. I even avoided aligning myself too closely with groups that were exclusively Baptist. On two occasions I turned down pastorates in a Baptist Church. The word ‘reformed’ did not sit comfortably for me with ‘Baptist’; they seemed to be something of a contradiction to each other. ‘Sovereign grace Baptists’ is a fairer and more accurate description of these good folk. Strictly speaking, Baptists do not profess the reformed faith. Even the great Victorian Baptist preacher, C. H. Spurgeon, asserted that Baptists did not come out of the Reformation, in fact, had nothing to do with it.
"We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at the Reformation, we were reformers before Luther or Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves.” (The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol.VII, Page 225).
Spurgeon’s assertion is not strictly accurate as many did emerge from the Roman Church. If they step outside the mainstream of the Christian Church for their origins, for me at least, this places them among the many sects which claim to have a bloodline going back to the New Testament. Historically, it cannot be shown, though many have tried it, that such a ‘trail of blood’ flowed from the early Church apart from the Roman Church without at the same time including many heretical sectarian groups in that line. More likely is that the Baptist/Anabaptist movement of the 16th century did find its origins in the Roman Church, possibly from the asceticism of the Franciscans or other monastics (see K. R. Davis Anabaptism and Asceticism).
PAEDOBAPTISM IS AT THE HEART OF THE REFORMED FAITH
Today, my conviction is that paedobaptism within the context of the Reformed faith is a thoroughly biblical position. This has come not from trading different Bible passages on baptism with Baptists. Involved is a move to a very different, wider and I believe more biblical understanding of the Christian faith. I would now go so far as to assert that to deny infant baptism is to deny the implication of God’s Covenant, but it also puts many other doctrines in danger. To deny infant baptism is to sin against God and our own family. It breaks the Covenant with God and implies a surrender of creation over to Satan.
As I continued to read and to study the Word of God and read the works particularly of Dutch Reformed theologians, it soon became clear to me that the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s supper were not as I had previously thought, a response to God acting in renewing grace, not a confession from us, but they are themselves God’s gracious call, physical signs of God’s holy word. They are both a claim and a promise to which we must respond in obedience and faith. Faith is not the end, but the beginning; it is presuppositional. Baptism is not something we come to after making a decision, but is the presupposition of faith and subsequent growth in grace. For this reason, we must teach our children to believe right from the beginning. Otherwise, shall we simply let them believe what is untrue, a lie? Baptism is not a sign of individual profession of faith in Christ, rather it is the sign of the coming in history of the New Covenant order. Those who persevere in faith, according to the Westminster Confession, ‘improve’ their baptism and are saved, whereas those who apostatise and repudiate their baptism are damned. Thus, paedobaptism lies at the heart of Reformed theology so that we cannot really speak of Reformed or even Calvinistic Baptists.
BAPTIST INDIVIDUALISM
The need to baptise the infants of believers was reinforced by my growing conviction of the need to turn from the narrow baptistic individualism in which I had grown up to a wider full-orbed biblical and Reformed faith. I had moved in a world where subsequent to an individual conversion and profession of faith the feeling emerged that one ought then to be baptised by immersion.
There are two extremes: excessive individualism on the one hand, a rigid corporatism on the other. Modern individualism in today’s world has all but destroyed the family unit. Baptist individualism breaks down the family. The Bible teaching shows a balance between these two extremes. The family although comprising individuals is also a corporation. There is but one who is God. God is one being in three persons and in a similar way the family is one entity comprising several individuals. The entire family comes within the sphere of God’s Covenant life and so the whole family, wives and children are to be baptised.
“We observe that in history the covenant is never concluded with one discrete individual, but always with a man and his family of generation, with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Israel and with the church and its seed. The promise never concerns a single believer alone, but him, his house and family also. God does not actualize His covenant of grace by picking a few people out of humanity at random, and by gathering these together in some sort of assemblage alongside the world. …The covenant of grace does not ramble about at random, but perpetuates itself, historically and organically, in families, generations, nations” Herman Bavinck Our Reasonable Faith
Nevertheless, each member of the family stands before God as an individual in this life and on the day of judgement. Consequently, rebellious wives and husbands in extreme cases can be divorced and rebellious children disinherited.
Although Baptists claim to only baptise believers, we all know of many who later have shown themselves to be anything but believers. In this the outcome is little different from those who walk away from their baptism as infants. At best the baptism of believers can ever only be a professor’s baptism. No one can be invested with the responsibility of making a subjective evaluation of another man’s heart. Only God can do this.
“We have to keep to the rule that we cannot judge of the heart, but only of the external conduct, and even that defectively. Those who, as the human eye sees them, are walking in the way of the covenant must according to the judgement of love be regarded and treated as our fellows in grace. But in the final analysis is not our judgement, but God’s, that determines. He is the Knower of hearts the Trier of the reins. With Him there is no respecting of persons. Man looks on the outward appearance by God looks on the heart (1 Samuel 16:7).” Herman Bavinck Our Reasonable Faith
My misunderstanding concerning the preaching of the Gospel for a long time was that I thought it largely about seeing as many individuals as possible come to Christ then grow in their Christian experience. To take one element of Christian preaching and make it the whole is bound to make it unbalanced. Reading through the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation, which I constantly do, it began to occur to me that the message of the Gospel was very much broader than this. It was then in the writings of the Reformers and reformed theologians that I found much help in consolidating and developing the thoughts that had arisen from my Scripture reading.
In corporately organised Churches everything is directed from the top and outside the local congregation. The local Church only exists because it belongs to the larger corporate body as in the Church of England or the Church of Rome. At the other end we find Baptists, where each local Church is separate and independent. No real connection exists between them and this can have unfortunate circumstances. I witnessed on one occasion the complete collapse of an established congregation when it could have been rescued by others around them. The reason given to me by one of their pastors in the same denomination was adherence to the principle of the independence of the local Church. In the Reformed tradition, each local Church is a real entity, but so is its connection to the Church at large. Problems within individual Churches become issues for the wider Church. Individual Churches are not left to sink or swim on their own.
INDIVIDUALISM AND THE HOLY SCRIPTURES
The individualism of the Baptist tradition in which I grew up sees salvation in terms of individual believers and their journey to heaven. Some evangelical Baptists have gone so far as to teach that the Bible is only inerrant when it deals with matters of eternal salvation. Cultural concerns, science and history all lie outside their very narrow definition of salvation and therefore will not be dealt with in Scripture in an inerrant fashion. Errors are only to be expected as the writers all those years ago did not have the same understanding that we have today.
The Holy Scriptures are absolutely inerrant, Old and New Testaments on all matters of which they speak and they speak of all things directly or indirectly. They contain all that is necessary for faith and life for all mankind in every sphere of our individual and social lives. All men are held accountable by God against the Scriptures. Scriptural and Reformed salvation sees the restoration of the whole of creation (see Romans 8:18-22), the regeneration of all things. This being so, seeing creation is also related to salvation, the Bible will of necessity speak inerrantly in every detail of science and history and in all things of which it speaks.
CHRIST DIED TO SAVE THE WHOLE WORLD
According to Genesis 1, God created two realms: heaven and earth. The goal is not for earth to be swallowed up by heaven, but for heaven to impress itself on earth. This is why we pray, “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10). Earth will become like heaven so as to be one community. In Revelation 21 & 22, the New Jerusalem comes down from heaven to earth.
“The perfect sacrifice which Christ accomplished on the cross is of infinite power and worth, abundantly adequate for the reconciliation of the sins of the whole world. Holy Scripture always relates that whole world to the redemption and re-creation. The world was the object of God’s love (John 3:16). Christ came into the world not to condemn the world but to save it. In Him God reconciled the world, all things in heaven and on earth, to Himself. Christ, accordingly, was a propitiation not only for the sins of those who at a given time believe in Him, but also for the whole world (1 John 2:2). Just as the world was created by the Son, so also it is destined to belong to Him as Son and heir (John 1:29; 2 Corinthians 5:9; and Colossians 1:20). It is the Father’s good pleasure in the fulness of times again to gather all together in one with Christ as head, all, that is, in heaven and on earth (Ephesians 1:10). There are times coming of the restitution of all things; according to the promise of God, we look for a new heaven and a new earth in which righteousness dwells (Acts 3:21 and Revelation 21:1).” Herman Bavinck Our Reasonable Faith
The abundant adequacy of the sacrifice of Christ for the whole world means that this Gospel is to be preached to all creatures without distinction, to wherever God sends the Gospel. The promise is that whosoever repents and believes will not perish but have eternal life. Those who receive not the Gospel are damned.
Man’s rebellion in Eden disrupted the whole fabric of human life on earth. God’s salvation in Christ will ultimately see the restoration of the whole of earthly life as God intended it (Matthew 17:11; Acts 3:21; Romans 8:19-23). To this end the Lord Jesus has been enthroned by the Father as Lord of heaven and of earth (John 17:5; Acts 2:33-36; Philippians 2:9-11). Before the coming of Christ, God chose to accomplish His mission of redemption through a Covenant of grace. Through this Covenant all nations were blessed or cursed. Israel was intended to be a light to the Nations (Exodus 19:5; Psalm 67; Isaiah 49:6). Israel failed in the performance of her mission (Matthew 8:10-12; Romans 11:5-10). Upon the resurrection and enthronement of the Lord Jesus, the Holy Spirit was poured out to bring the Kingdom of God to all nations and ultimately to restore not simply what was lost in Eden, but to fulfil God’s purpose for mankind and his creation in the New Jerusalem.
THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH
It is given to the Church of Christ to call all men back to fellowship with God, proclaiming His Word; to call on all those presently outside the Kingdom to repentance and faith in Christ. Those who are Christ’s are to be exhorted to obedience and growth in grace in every sphere of life. It is the mission of Christ’s Church also to organise the communal worship and praise of the saints. In the Kingdom of Christ is promised a glorious future when all nations will flow into the house of the Lord (Isaiah 2:2-4).
Baptist theology individualises the Covenant and the Church. Baptists see no claim of God upon the child outside the child’s own ‘decision’. The Covenant itself is defined in terms of the individual. This is reflected throughout Baptist structure. There is always one man at the top presiding over a diaconate and the congregation of a local Church. Historically, plurality has been expressed only in the Calvinistic-Reformed view of leadership. The Reformers taught that Christ was the Head of the Church. Elders are to rule in plurality according to God’s objective standard.
The sign of baptism signifies the Covenant promise, the reality of that promise is made operative only through faith. The ground of the sacrament lies not in its perceived power, but in God who commands it to be administered to children in that adults and children are sealed into the Covenant of grace. Membership in the Covenant is unconditional, the elements of baptism not being dependent on faith for their efficacy. Baptism is a solemn oath of deep significance and eternal power. Objectively, baptism has a meaning and significance apart from the response and heart condition of the recipient. However, it is efficacious for personal salvation only through faith in the promises proclaimed in baptism.
In Covenant theology the basic unit of society is the family, whereas Baptist theology sees the individual as the foundation of all things. As a result, the status of children has suffered greatly at the hands of Baptist teaching. The complete exclusion of the children of believers from the Covenant changes the way they are to be approached. They are outside the Church and should not be prayed with. The must be approached as lost sinners and pressed to have a conversion experience. The biblical Covenantal view creates a positive atmosphere for any child. They are to be raise in the faith, not outside it. To raise a child outside the faith encourages unbelief as many have discovered to their own dismay.
To the unrepentant, reprobate child given the sign and seal of the Covenant or an adult who has later apostatised, baptism is powerful and significant. Baptism testifies again all such. They are sealed into Christ’s death in a negative sense, not in saving significance, but they stand utterly condemned with divine vengeance heaped upon them for having profaned the death of Christ before God the Father. They have mocked and treated it with derision by continuing to live in sin and unbelief (Hebrews 6:4ff; 10:26-31; 12:18ff). Baptism is powerful and efficacious even without the faith of the recipient, but it is significant to salvation only to those who believe. It seals a child either for blessing or a curse.
IN SUMMARY
I very much regret that I saw these truths so late in life and that it has taken such a long time to find the courage to confess my convictions. Truly, “The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the Lord shall be safe” (Proverbs 29:25). Had I not been so misguided early on in my Christian experience, following paths that led nowhere, I would have escaped much of the heartache that has been my lot and now weighs so heavily upon me at times. I thank God for those who helped me towards a more biblical understanding of the Christian faith and plead His forgiveness for my reticence and blindness.
David W. Norris