The Invasion Of Prostestant Theology by William L. Brown
The Invasion Of Prostestant Theology
William L. Brown
Pastor, Carmichael Baptist Church
Text: I Timothy 3:15
There is an invasion of Protestant theology into the ranks of Baptists. It is often subtle and slight at first. The invasion is slow but persistent. It actually had its beginning long before the reformation but it’s systematic conquering of Baptists theology was met with some indifference during the six4een hundreds. One such invasion came in the form of a much-publicized confession of faith known as the „Westminster Confession” around 1645. Some Baptists rewrote parts of it to reflect their differences but enough it slipped into the theology of Baptists that little difference is seen between many Presbyterians and many Baptists today. They are so nearly aligned that some see themselves as co-workers with the same faith and doctrine with a few minor peculiarities. First we need to understand where Protestant theology had its beginning. Where did the reformers get their doctrine? Whose disciples were they before they began a reformation? They were part and parcel with the whore of Babylon. Their doctrine was Roman Catholic. This system of doctrine is what they sought to reform. They never went far enough. They would have been better of casting off the old garments entirely but instead sought to sow new threads into a garment that was already stained with the blood of God’s true people.
THE INVASION INTO THE DOCTRINE OF BAPTISM:
The wrong mode:
1. Dipping or immersing is the admitted mode of the ancient churches. Every Protestant historian and theologian who is honest notes this.
2. Luther, Calvin, and Wesley all admitted immersion was the Biblical method of Baptism. (Read them explain Romans 6 and other passages)
3. The Greek word for baptism, baptize, etc. is baptiso – meaning to dip or to immerse. It means to plunge in and take out.
4. There are specific Greek words used for pouring, sprinkling, and washing and never are any of them used in connection with baptism.
5. Great pains are taken by many to explain why they practice something other than what the early churches practiced.
B. The wrong design:
1. Why be baptized? To enjoy a covenant relationship? To ensure the blessings of God upon our children? This is not all that far removed from the heresy taught by Roman Catholicism which teaches salvation through the church and through the administrations of her ordinances.
2. They teach they grace of God is conveyed through these ordinances. They give the emblem the substance of truth conveyed to someone whether they are a believer or not.
C. The wrong subject:
1. While some will baptize adults, they are taught to baptize their infants. Unknowing, unwilling, faithless participants.
2. The Bible is clear that those who express faith in a risen Savior, in Jesus Christ who died for them, who was buried for them, and who was raised up for them, If thou believest thou mayest be baptized.
a) ACT 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
b) MAR 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
D. The wrong administrator:
1. Where did they receive their baptism? How is it they can simply remove themselves from the great harlot and presume to baptize. (Graves – Trilemma)
2. Let me ask you a question. What would you do if I sprinkled an infant in this very church, yet continued on to also immerse adults who professed faith in Christ?
3. 1 would hope you would exclude me for heresy. We have Baptist preachers today who would accept the immersion of a Pedobaptist preacher simply because he immersed a believer.