Steadfast Media Pick of the Week — Youth Ministry

 

 

Youth Ministry

The White Horse Inn has been doing a series on youth ministry and while it has been good in general, the most recent episode had one of the most jarring moments in a podcast I have experienced and not in a good way.

T. David Gordon was talking about having a discussion with your children about the serious nature of the demands Christ makes and whether they are willing to make this decision or not. Then Mike Horton tells a story about a similar discussion with his sons when they were considering making their “profession of faith”. He told them to consider that while they would become Christ’s own and that meant redemption it also meant carrying a cross. Mr. Horton concludes by telling how they were ready a year later. All I could think was, “What comfort could this system give if either of these boys had died in that interim year?” I had never heard redemption that explicitly tied to the “profession of faith” by a serious teacher and I did not enjoy it.


relevant discussion begins about 28:30


Comments

Steadfast Media Pick of the Week — Youth Ministry — 6 Comments

  1. Dear Mr. Yamabe,

    Thanks for this podcast and your comments. It got me to thinking . . .

    The reason that the Evangelicals, Baptists, Methodists, etc. put off the baptism of infants and children is because, fair enough, they want to warn those persons about the requirements of the “Christian life,” i.e., sanctification. So baptism in their system is really the beginning of sanctification. Sanctification is thus logically the focus of their religious system.

    And this is so clear, when you listen to Dr. Horton in this podcast, who is a “die hard” Calvinist . . .

    The reason that the Lutherans baptize infants and children, besides the fact that Jesus told the church to baptize all people and their children (Matthew 28:19; Acts 2:39; etc.), is because we want to bring infants and children into the status of being righteous before God. So baptism in our system is really the beginning of justification. Justification is thus logically the focus of our religious system.

    Thanks for all of your excellent “Steadfast Media Pick of the Week” posts!

    Yours in Christ, Martin R. Noland

  2. Dear Pastor Noland,

    I like your reasoning concerning why some protestant denominations ‘put off the baptism of infants and children’ and I really like how you expressed the Biblical/Lutheran understanding of Holy Baptism from Matthew 28:19, Acts 2:39; etc. Just a small disagreement. I believe some Methodist churches do baptize infants. ‘Churches in America’, published by CPH,1994, pg.46 says, ‘Some Methodists, like Wesley himself, do recognize baptismal regeneration of infants’.

    Thank you for your historical and theological perspectives here on BJS. They are always expressed in such a kind and pastoral manner.

    In Christ,
    Diane

  3. @Diane #2
    They used to. John Wesley himself used to do this, being a former Anglican.

    Also interesting to note that, like Luther, Wesley and Calvin both had no problem with absolution, yet it’s nearly impossible to find anything akin to corporate confession and absolution in Methodist or even in many Reformed churches.

  4. @J. Dean #3
    Also interesting to note that, like Luther, Wesley and Calvin both had no problem with absolution, yet it’s nearly impossible to find anything akin to corporate confession and absolution in Methodist or even in many Reformed churches.

    And Luther practiced individual confession and absolution, “yet it’s [very difficult] to find anything akin to [individual] confession and absolution in Lutheran churches.

  5. Dear Diane,

    Thanks for the correction on that point re. Wesley.

    You are correct that John and Charles Wesley believed in the double practice of infant and adult baptism, and believed that infants were regenerate. Charles became so alarmed by the number of Methodist societies that were becoming Baptist over this issue, that he asked his brother to write a tract on the issue titled “A Treatise on Baptism–a Preservative against Unsettled Notions in Religion.” So it seems like the Methodists and Evangelicals were wavering on this point even during the Wesley’s lifetime.

    “Wesleyan” Methodists rejected the Wesley’s belief in the regeneration of infants at their baptism. Today it is said “Every Methodist minister has his own view of what baptism means.” (see Donald Bridge & David Phypers, The Water that Divides: The Baptism Debate [Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1977], 142).

    Thanks for your comment!

    Yours in Christ, Martin R. Noland

  6. @Martin R. Noland #5
    Thanks, Pastor. Wow! ‘Every Methodist minister has his own view of what baptism means.’ How confusing for the laity and pastors alike. One of the reasons I love Biblical/ Lutheran theology is that it is so consistent and our pastors are really the best educated in the world.

    In Christ,
    Diane

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.