Monday, May 19, 2008

Ascol gets assist from Pedos


I noticed the following announcement on Tom Ascol's Flounders blog for May 19, 2008:

Interview on the resolution --
Paul Dean and Kevin Boling, hosts of the daily talk radio show, Calling for Truth, have asked me to join them Monday, May 19, 2008 1 PM Eastern time for their program. We are scheduled to talk about the
resolution on integrity in church membership that I have submitted to the Resolutions Committee of Southern Baptist Convention.

This appears to be a Pedo-Friendly program -- which means we probably would not hear any "resolutions" about "regenerate membership" in the Pedobaptist church. While Paul Dean is identified as a Baptist pastor, Kevin Boling is with Mountain Bridge Bible Fellowship and evidently that is a Pedobaptist entity. On their website, it says:

"The specific Fundamental Biblical Doctrines and how we perceive them are formulated, in detail form, with Scripture proofs, in our sub-standards; The Westminster Confession of Faith and Larger and Shorter Catechisms."

Those "sub-standards" affirm the usual Pedobaptist practices of Infant Baptism and Infant Church membership. Boling also works with another entity, Pastors Fellowship, which has a connection to Pedobaptist Ligonier Ministries (Pedo R. C. Sproul's work).

To work so closely with Pedo Boling, I suppose Baptist Dean stiffles what I would assume to be Baptist convictions. I would therefore indentify him as a "Pedo-Friendly." The Pedo practice of baptizing babies on the presumption that they get "regenerated" in infancy does not hinder him from "evangelical" fellowhip with the Pedos.

What is amusing about Ascol's appearance on the show, however, has to do with his own Resolution, not with the Pedo-Friendly relationship of Baptist Dean to Pedo Boling. Ascol's twice-failed Resolution is focused on "cleaning up" the Southern Baptist church rolls so that the SBC does not claim more members than Ascol believes that they should claim. He says its design is to uphold integrity on "regenerate church membership."

Funny thing, however, while Ascol and his interviewers denigrate the SBC for its statistics, you could probably "bet the farm" that neither Ascol nor either one of the other two will say one word about the Pedo practice of receiving unregenerate infants into church membership. Pedo church rolls are loaded with the names of baptized babies, and no Baptist worth his salt believes those babies are "regenerated."

But do you think Ascol, Dean, or Boling will say, "I wish the Pedobaptists would bring this Resolution before Pedobaptist church bodies, too?"

This is just another instance of how Ascol "plays footsies" with the Pedos and Pedo-Friendlies. He gives the Pedos a "pass," and has no resolve to call them to "repentance" for their deliberately adding the unregenerate to the church roll. Mutual love for Hybrid Calvinism apparently covers a multitude of Pedo unbaptistic practices.

When an "unregenerate" happens to be baptized by a Southern Baptist, at least the SBC church requires a profession of faith in Christ. All the Pedos require is that the infant be the child of a Pedo parent who makes some promises about raising the infant in accordance with the Pedo catechism.


At Monday, May 19, 2008 5:37:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Ironically, the motion by Drs. Yarnell and Barber, who are often accused of being "Baptist Identity" by some blog authors and commenters for their firm advocacy of Baptist distinctives (of which "regenerate church membership" is a hallmark) is rejected because it does not include a call to repentance and it is alleged that they lack credibility in the issue of integrity in membership. Dr. Welty's refutation was both cogent and articulate.


At Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:58:00 AM, Blogger Bob L. Ross said...


Anonymous said...

Ironically, the motion by Drs. Yarnell and Barber . . . is rejected because it does not include a call to repentance . . .

Actually, it is rejected by Tim & Tom primarily because it is a leadpipe cinch to be preferred over Ascol's twice-failed resolution.

As for "repentance," it is implied in the resolution itself, otherwise why have a resolution at all?


Post a Comment

<< Home