I have been trying to think of how far presuppostitional argumentation
can be applied and I have come to a conclusion: The further a theology
is from true Reformed Christianity the more the presuppositional
method can be applied. Thus presuppositionalism in its fullest can be
applied to anti-theism, but perhaps only certain aspects of it can be
applied to Romanism (but not as much as to anti-theism), and even
some aspects of it can be applied to the Baptist's doctrine of the
sacrament of baptism (not as much as Romanism for baptists are not
suppressing the truth in unrighteousness as found in Romans 1).
However, because WE ALL have presuppositions we start our argument
with the Baptist (or Lutheran etc.) by first dealing with the
presuppositions of the baptist (i.e. the requirement for an explicit
command in the N.T.). Secondly, while the baptist is not necessarily
suppressing the truth in unrighteousness as an unregenerate he may be
suppressing the Biblical doctrine of baptism for other hidden
motives; if he becomes convinced he'll lose his posh position in the
Baptist Church, all his friends are Baptists, he has published books
on the subject which he would then have to retract etc.
So the procedure is as follows:
(1) Acknowledge and address the presuppositions: (A) a false view of
the regulative principle, (B) Discontinuity over continuity (cf. Matt.
5:17; 2 Tim. 3:15-16) (C) If they are a dispensationalist their entire
hermeneutic must be addressed.
(2) Presume their world view, do an internal critique demonstrating
the arbitrariness of their assertion of their misconception of the
regulative principle (why do they worship on Sunday?) Show how their
doctrine does not fit the facts of Scripture.
(3) Correct misconceptions of the Reformed doctrine (this is half the
battle!). Just as most J.W.s don't know or understand the doctrine of
the Trinity and thus set up straw man arguments so too most baptists
don't understand and thus set up straw man arguments. However, I
think a lot of the misconceptions have been our fault when we use
such terms as "Infant baptism" (as if we don't baptize adults or
baptize babies just because they are babies). I think we can correct
the false notions by using a term such as "Covenant household
baptism."
Grace and Peace in the Lord,
jr
Presuppostitionalism and Baptism
by clash_city_rockers 3 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
clash_city_rockers
-
funkyderek
By definition, presuppositionalism can be applied equally to any belief system and is therefore utterly pointless.
-
JT
true Reformed Christianity
being that most of us come out of the jw where the phrase THE TRUTH was used day and night, could you define what "True Reformed Christianity"
the reason i ask is because there are others who will not agree with you who consider themselves christians- why would christianity need to be reformed, what is it being reformed into?
-
clash_city_rockers
JT,
I would respectfully submit to you the doctrinal standards of the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF)
click here http://www.reformed.org/
and go to historic church documents. and you will see the WCF it is a outline of doctrine of what the bible teaches.
cheers,
jr