I often ask myself why I bother to debate with evangelicals, especially after I have done it yet again, and against my better judgement. It seems to me that they are irredeemably stupid, deaf, and ignorant, despite their post-graduate degrees.
My motivation for engaging these types is to show them a better way, and to show them from their own Confessions and the Bible where their view of justification and the sacraments needs modifying, for the gospel’s sake. I usually succeed in not saying things that I will regret through anger and frustration, and I strive to be patient and courteous. But one of my failings has been to not know when to stop trying.
Why is it that people who are supposed to be highly intelligent are blind to this article of faith in the Nicene Creed?
I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins.
I am fully aware of the political implications of actually agreeing with it, having paid the price myself, but how is it that people who do not believe it allow themselves to be ordained without declaring this exception, and, when they are made aware of its meaning when in the ministry, refuse to acknowledge it?
If anyone is an evangelical it is certain before God that he does NOT acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. Believing it will inevitably result in immediate loss of fellowship within one’s evangelical group, and ostracism by other evangelical ministers.
Off to the sacerdotalist outer darkness with you!
I devoutly wish that these men and denominations would have the honestly and integrity to modify their Confessions and Standards to reflect the truth about their belief on this article.