Comments on: Within The Bounds of Orthodoxy? http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/08/within-the-bounds-of-orthodoxy/ Theology you can eat and drink Fri, 10 Aug 2018 15:01:57 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.41 By: Mike Bull http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/08/within-the-bounds-of-orthodoxy/comment-page-1/#comment-2694 Wed, 17 Feb 2010 00:12:49 +0000 http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/?p=330#comment-2694 A bit more info. I’m a baptist. I believe that the FV says a lot of good things about baptism, but the reason they don’t make sense to those within more “traditional” Reformed thinking is because they are applied to infants. So I believe you are both right, but both wrong. Baptism confers a Covenantal union with the body of Christ, the church, but only for believers. Salvation is a submission to the authority of the Head, baptism to the delegated authority of the Body. The only reason their ultra-baptism becomes “mystical” is because they baptize infants. So instead of their beefier approach to the efficacy of baptism improving things, it actually makes things worse.

That’s my 2c, anyhow.

]]> By: Mike Bull http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/08/within-the-bounds-of-orthodoxy/comment-page-1/#comment-2693 Tue, 16 Feb 2010 23:55:55 +0000 http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/?p=330#comment-2693 Hi Wes

His article stated that it was neither a defense nor a critique, but I’ll check it out.
I don’t agree with everything under the FV banner. I guess the issue is whether or not it should be attacked vehemently as it has been.

Thanks for your comment,
Mike

]]> By: Wes White http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/08/within-the-bounds-of-orthodoxy/comment-page-1/#comment-2691 Tue, 16 Feb 2010 23:27:35 +0000 http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/?p=330#comment-2691 Did you know that Joseph Minich retracted his defense of FV?

http://johannesweslianus.blogspot.com/2009/07/fv-defender-retracts.html

]]>