Joshua Charles thinks that disagreements over baptism, the Lord’s supper, and church government are a problem for Protestants.
Also, everyone cannot be a scholar. That is true, but that seems to be a smoke-screen for “just trust us” (the Roman Catholic Church, himself as a scholar of the early church fathers, and the Popes through the centuries.) Joshua Charles is a former Protestant and White House speech writer (for Vice President Mike Pence during the Trump administration), but he had the time and spent a lot of time in reading and studying the early church fathers. Unfortunately, he came to the wrong conclusions about them, and like so many, has bought into the John Henry Newman development of doctrine argument, similar to my friend Rod Bennett.
I love all conservative Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Anglicans, conservative Weslyans also, as my brothers and sisters in Christ, even though we disagree about baptism. I am a Reformed Baptist, with the conviction that baptism is only for those that make a credible profession of faith in Christ first. The Scriptural order is “repent and believe”, then be baptised. Baptism is like a seal on faith, as Tertullian wrote in “On Repentance”, 6.
All Protestants agree that baptism is a part of the command of the Lord Jesus Christ to make disciples, and part of the great commission. (Matthew 28:19) The disagreements are over when a person can be baptized (believer’s baptism vs. infant baptism – believer’s baptism or disciple’s baptism – after repentance and faith – which the Scriptures clearly teach (there is no infant baptism in the Scriptures), and which Justin Martyr clearly affirms in his First Apology 61 – there is no infant baptism there. (in 150 AD) Justin clearly says the person must first be taught and learn and accept and believe and repent and fast before being baptized. “they are illumined in their understandings” – they have to be taught doctrine and come to understand sin and who Christ is, etc. Infant baptism was clearly a development in the late second century and early third century. This is demonstrated in the book, “Baptism in the early church” by Stander and Louw (2 paedobaptists) (see my other articles in the side bar categories of Baptism and baptismal regeneration.)
The first clear reference is in Hippolytus (215 AD) and implied by Tertullian’s exhortation to wait for baptism until the person is old enough to understand. (On Baptism, 18) There are other disagreements such as the mode – immersion vs. pouring vs. sprinkling -that is less important, since the Didache lays out the exceptions when there is not enough water for immersion. The Eastern Orthodox -the Greeks agree with the Baptists that baptizo means “immersion” – getting dunked all the way and surrounded and immersed.
Joshua Charles makes the comment about the “one dude” (The Pope). That because everyone cannot be a scholar, they need to trust the “one dude” (Peter, and they claim, the Popes through history as successors of the office of the Papacy, beginning with Peter) and the 11 other dudes (the other apostles and their succession of bishops throughout history.) The “one dude” you have now is a heretic and does not know how to interpret Scripture at all. (Pope Francis) Peter and the other apostles would condemn him. (changing the long tradition that the death penalty is valid for some extreme cases; his statements on homosexuality, his synod on synodality where they are in process of seeking to change the rules of election of the Pope and to affirm LGBTQ relationships, already blessing same-sex couples, etc. ) Why would any thinking person who loves Jesus and Bible want to submit to him? Many of the past Popes were heretics also. Robert Sungenis admitted this in his debate with James White on the infallibility of the Pope – Honorius – anathematized as a heretic at the 6th Ecumenical Council – 680-681 AD; and pronounced a heretic for 300+ years afterward by every Pope who succeeded him. This alone defeats the 1870 infallibility dogma. Unam Sanctum of 1302 by Pope Boniface VIII is a massive contradiction to the Scriptures (Salvation by grace through faith alone (Scripture) vs. salvation by submission to the Pope – Boniface VIII) – why would anyone want to follow and submit to such heretics? Also Leo X and his massive wicked campaign of indulgences to raise money to build St. Peter’s Basilica. You Roman Catholics have many disagreements among yourselves about interpretations on many issues; so your argument is moot and carried no weight. (Trads. Rad-Trads, the New Mass vs. Latin Mass, Sedevacantists, the Old Catholic Church (Ignaz Von Dollinger), Catholics for LGBTQ, catholics for women priests, pro-choice Catholics (Nancy Pelosi, Biden, the Kennedys, etc.) scholars such as the late Raymon Brown who taught that the gospel birth narratives are not historical, etc.) Gavin Ortlund has rightly demonstrated that Nicea 2, 787 AD on the veneration of icons, contradicts previous earlier church history tradition and practice. Also, your church contradicts itself by the recent ruling on “blessing same sex couples” and the reverse on the death penalty; and Vatican 2 and post-Vatican theology (CCC # 841, & # 847 contradicts earlier history on “no salvation outside the Church”. Gavin Ortlund has also demonstrated in his many videos that you guys are wrong on the Papacy, the Bodily Assumption of Mary, Purgatory, Indulgences, icons, relics, etc. It is this modern movement of former Protestants who are demanding that people be scholars (experts in the early church fathers, which not many people have the time to read and study and grasp) – informed mostly by arguments by Cardinal John Henry Newman (who was a scholar and had time to think and write these things out over several decades – he even admitted his conversion was a slow process. A person does not have time to be a scholar (which is true, in principle) – but it is you guys who demand “just submit to the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church” – without thinking. My friend Rod Bennett said this by using (abusing) Proverbs 3:5 on me – “do not lean on your own understanding” Boniface VIII said, “just submit”. Unam Sanctum 1302. Sorry, a thinking Protestant who loves Jesus and knows the Scriptures is more equipped to handle your arguments. Also, those Protestants that do have time to read and study the early church fathers and church history are not fooled by your tactics of “just trust the chief dude” or “trust us who have had time and claim to be experts in the early church fathers”.
Joshua Charles blocked me on Twitter when I was able to quote Irenaeus in context and demonstrate that he did not teach a nascent Roman Catholicism, which Joshua and others like him claim. My friend Rod Bennett also claimed the same thing, in his book, “Four Witnesses”. If Protestants have the time, you can equip yourself to go toe to toe with these former Protestants who are now Roman Catholic. Don’t trust them! and don’t trust “the one chief dude” (The Pope). Trust in Christ alone and keep studying the Scriptures and grow in a Biblical, conservative, healthy, balanced Protestant Church.
For more on baptismal regeneration and Baptism, click on the side bar categories.
Apologetics and Agape 