Abraham Piper has an excellent review at the DesiringGOD blog of a recent Touchstone magazine article on the dearth of quality literature from evangelical writers.

What ought to be the response of the church of Jesus Christ to the social troubles that plague our world? What ought to be the response of the church of Jesus Christ to the AIDs crisis in Africa that takes the lives of 6,300 Africans every day and infects 9,500 more every day and has left 11 million children as orphans? What ought to be our response to unfair governmental trade policies that have as their result the oppression of the poor in countries throughout Africa? What ought to be our response to the overwhelming debt owed by countries in Africa to the World Bank and to the International Monetary Fund, so overwhelming it could never possibly be repaid?

Many evangelicals cringe at the notion that social issues like these ought to be of any concern to us at all. These issues are for us a distraction from our primary focus: preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ.

But you should know that God made a priority out of these issues in the Old Testament, particularly in the book of Amos. Amos was a shepherd whose travels frequently took him from the southern part of Israel to the north where he witnessed the abuse of the poor and displaced. He made it a priority to cry out against the religious and political leaders of his day who ignored, and even took advantage of, the poor and oppressed. And even before Amos’ time, God had written into the Law a Year of Jubilee, where every 50th year all debts owed would be forgiven and slaves would be set free. In the New Testament Jesus went through the cities and villages healing the sick and ministering to the poor. The Apostle Paul took up at least two offerings for the relief of the poor who lived in the region of Macedonia. The Bible makes a priority out of relieving social evil, and so should we.

Concern for the poor and oppressed, and for those suffering from AIDS, specifically throughout Africa, is the driving passion of Bono’s life; and he has spent the last ten years using his popularity to gain access to the political power brokers in an attempt to create a solution to the problem of debt owed by poor countries in Africa to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the rapidly spreading AIDS crisis in Africa, and the imbalance of trade between these same poor countries and their wealthy counterparts in the West. The specifics of Bono’s activism on these issues can be found at www.data.org.

Bono, whose given name is Paul Hewson, is the lead singer of the Irish Rock group U2. U2, at the moment, is the most popular rock group in the world. They have recently concluded the third leg of a four leg international tour, performing in sold out venues around the world throughout 2005.

Bono, along with computer whiz Bill Gates and his wife Melinda, were named Time’s Persons of the Year for 2005. Why?

“For being shrewd about doing good, for rewiring politics and re-engineering justice, for making mercy smarter and hope strategic and then daring the rest of us to follow, Bill and Melinda Gates and Bono are Time’s Persons of the Year.” [Time Magazine, 12/26/2005, p. 44]

Time has co-opted the language of the Bible to describe the philanthropy of these three billionaires. “…doing good…justice…mercy…hope…daring the rest of us to follow…” Those are Bible words. Those are words that have their source in the life-changing gospel of Jesus Christ. And yet when you examine the work that Bono and Bill & Melinda Gates are doing, it is void of the power of the gospel.

There is no question that what Bono and the Gates’ are doing are good and important works. And you should know that Bono doesn’t trust the good works he performs to earn him a mansion in heaven. Over a period of several months in 2001, Bono was interviewed by music journalist Michka Assayas. One of those conversations turned to the subject of grace and Bono said,

“I’d be in big trouble if Karma was going to finally be by judge…It doesn’t excuse my mistakes, but I’m holding out for Grace. I’m holding out that Jesus took my sins onto the Cross, because I know who I am, and I hope I don’t have to depend on my own religiosity…I love the idea of the Sacrificial Lamb…The point of the death of Christ is that Christ took on the sins of the world, so that what we put out did not come back to us [Karma], and that our sinful nature does not reap the obvious death. That’s the point. It should keep us humbled…It’s not our own good works that get us through the gates of Heaven.”  [Bono in Conversation, Riverhead Books, 2005, p. 204]

But, nonetheless, the good works of Bill & Melinda Gates and Bono don’t go far enough. Their version of doing good, and justice, and mercy, and hope relieves the physical suffering of humanity without consideration for the eternal soul of humanity. After all, Scripture reminds us, “For what shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?” [Mark 8:36] What is an AIDS victim in Africa profited if we relieve his AIDS, but never offer him the gospel of Jesus Christ to secure his SOUL for eternity? This is not to suggest we should do nothing to alleviate the AIDS crisis. Rather, while working to relieve suffering we must also be acutely aware of the eternal destiny of those inflicted with AIDS. It is this eternal perspective that is wholly lacking in Bono’s activism.

A TALE OF TWO TABLES

Bono is an evangelist for the social gospel and his songs are his sermons. In one particular sermon/song, titled Crumbs from Your Table, Bono indicts America generally and the evangelical churches specifically for not doing enough to relieve the suffering of humanity around the world, especially in places like Africa.

From the brightest star
Comes the blackest hole
You had so much to offer
Why did you offer your soul?
I was there for you baby
When you needed my help
Would you deny for others
What you demand for yourself?

You speak of signs and wonders
I need something other
I would believe if I was able
But I’m waiting on the crumbs from your table

Bono based these lyrics on the story of the Canaanite Woman in Matthew 15. The table in Bono’s imagery is a place of wealth and abundance. The table is the resources of the nations of the industrialized West, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. Bono is preaching that America and the evangelical church in the West have not only ignored the plight of the poor and oppressed, but have not even offered the smallest percentage of their resources in an effort to relieve their suffering. And there is a sense in which it IS true that we evangelical Christians are NOT doing enough.

Ronald Sider in his recent book, The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience, makes the following observation based on statistical analysis of the giving patterns of American Christians by a couple named John and Sylvia Ronsvalle:

American Christians live in the richest nation on earth and enjoy an average household income of $42,409. The World Bank reports that 1.2 billion of the world’s poorest people try to survive on just one dollar a day. At least one billion people have never heard the gospel. The Ronsvalles point out that if American Christians just tithed, they would have another $143 billion available to empower the poor and spread the gospel. Studies by the United Nations suggest that just an additional $70 - $80 billion a year would be enough to provide access to essential services like basic health care and education for all the poor of the earth. If they did no more than tithe, American Christians would have the private dollars to foot this entire bill and still have $60 - $70 billion more to do evangelism around the world.

But the reality is that American Christians do not even tithe their income to their local church. According to recent surveys by George Barna, the average evangelical Christian in America gives less than 3% of their income on an annual basis to their church. And less than 9% of all evangelical Christians actually give 10% or more on an annual basis to their church. With statistics like that it is obvious why the average church in America cannot meet the basic needs of its own operating budget, let alone the needs of missions causes outside the local church.

THE OTHER TABLE

But while I agree with Bono that Christians, for the most part, have been indifferent to the issues he is passionate about, I want to argue that Bono is looking to the wrong table for help. Bono is looking to the table on which sits the wealth of nations. But there is another Table – the only Table – that can truly meet the needs of lost and suffering humanity.

The Table in New Testament imagery, as Jesus left it to us, is a place of spiritual life, and nourishment for that spiritual life. Not only ought the church to be offering the crumbs from this Table, but the full abundance of this Table.

The Table is the Lord’s Table. And it represents for us an abundance of God’s grace, provided in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ calls us to eat at this Table, to feast on Him, and to find in Him the satisfaction of our deepest longings. And it is the resources of this Table that the church is obligated to offer to a lost humanity as the only hope for their eternal souls.

The source of man’s trouble is his sin. And the remedy for sin is found at this Table. If you truly want to relieve the suffering of humanity, the root of the problem must be cut out. God cut out the root when he put His son to shame on the cross, when he laid on Him the iniquity of us all, when Jesus bore our sins in His own body on the tree, when He who knew no sin was made to be sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.

The Bible makes a clear connection between sin and the human condition. In John 9 Jesus and the disciples pass a blind beggar on the road and the disciples ask Jesus, “Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” In Matthew 9 some people brought a paralytic man to Jesus and he healed him by saying, “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven.” Jesus equates physical healing with the forgiveness of sins.

The plight of the human condition cannot be remedied outside of God’s grace in the forgiveness of sins. And it is precisely this grace that is missing from the works of mercy being honored by Time magazine in their Persons of the Year.

WORKS OF MERCY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE GOSPEL

There is no question that the church of Jesus Christ has in many ways abdicated its responsibility for the blind, the halt and the lame (and AIDS victims and the poor) to social service organizations whose primary mission is devoid of the gospel. And while the primary mission of the church is the proclamation of the gospel, a suffering world needs more from us than a pious, “God bless you.” The church alone is in the unique position of being called and equipped by God to both relieve the immediate and present suffering of humanity while at the same time offering lost humanity eternal life through the grace of God in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The Church of Jesus Christ is called to do works of mercy in the context of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. How do works of mercy done in the context of the gospel differ from those being done by Bono and Bill & Melinda Gates?

The primary difference is one of focus: Bono has a short-term focus on the present by relieving the suffering of humanity in this life only. The focus of the gospel of Jesus Christ is on enduring suffering in this life [2 Corinthians 4:16 – 18] in view of the pleasures received in the future, and for eternity, at God’s right hand [2 Corinthians 5:1 / Psalm 16:11].

But there are at least two other differences that flow from this eternal perspective, seen in the story of the Canaanite woman and her appeal to Jesus on behalf of her demon possessed daughter in Matthew 15:21 – 28:

Works of mercy that have an eternal impact have their root in God and His grace, not in man and his resources. This woman understood that there was only one source of hope for her and her daughter: Jesus. There was no one else to whom she could go. No political connections. No financial connections. It was her FAITH alone in Jesus Christ ALONE that was her only hope. She knew she was undeserving, and so she depended on the grace of Jesus to meet her need. It was what Jesus could do, and not what she could do, on which she depended. And by FAITH she believed that His grace would move Him to respond to her need. She came to Jesus with nothing but faith; and it was her faith that Jesus rewarded.

Works of mercy done in the name of love are impotent without the name of Jesus. The Gospel of Mark’s account of this story says that when the woman “heard of Jesus” she came and fell down at his feet (Mark 7:24 – 30). She recognized the power of the name of Jesus.

In Acts 3 Peter and John were headed to worship and were interrupted by a cripple begging for money. Peter’s reply: “Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I unto you. In the name of Jesus, rise up and walk.”

And what is love? Giving to meet the needs of others in and of itself is not love! In 1 Corinthians 13 Scripture tells us that it is possible to give away all that you possess, and even to sacrifice your very life, and still not have loved.

Love is what God did in Christ when He offered Him as the once for all, eternal sacrifice for sins. And love is what we do, after having experienced the grace of God in that sacrifice, when God’s grace overflows in us through giving all that we are, all that we possess, to share the good news of that sacrifice with suffering humanity. Love is the overflow of God’s grace in us that meets the needs of others. Giving that is motivated by anything other than the grace of God is not love. And giving that is not done in the name of Jesus lacks the power to make an eternal difference in the lives of those who receive the gift.

We must not be satisfied with the crumbs from this Table. We must come to this Table and receive from it all of the resources that it offers. It offers grace. It offers genuine love. It offers the faith to believe.

And then we must take the resources of grace, love and faith that we receive from this Table and offer it to suffering humanity through the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is Christ Jesus who has taken the physical suffering of humanity upon Himself on the Cross. It is “by His stripes we are healed.” And that healing can only be realized when lost humanity recognizes Jesus Christ as the only hope for their eternal souls.

Let’s not offer suffering humanity mere crumbs from this Table. Let’s offer them all of the abundance of this Table which we have already so freely received. And if you have not received for yourself the grace, the love and the faith offered by this Table, we invite you to come, to take, and to eat and find in Jesus Christ the satisfaction of your soul’s deepest longing.

“If anyone is in heaven, there is no question Mother Teresa is there,” is a sentiment shared by millions of Americans, believers and non-believers alike.  Yet her own words suggest it was not a sentiment Mother Teresa herself believed.

A new book just out from Doubleday, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light, reveals a previously unknown side of Teresa through her private letters written over a period of 66 years. It should be noted this book was not produced by her detractors but rather by those seeking sainthood for the venerable nun. The letters sound what Time magazine calls “…a hodgepodge of desperate notes not intended for daylight…” In the letters, written mostly to confessors, Teresa candidly - and at times tormentedly - expresses not only serious doubts about her faith, but seems resolved that she possesses no genuine faith at all.

An evangelist for Atheism, Christopher Hitchens, uses Teresa’s inner turmoil as revealed in her letters to invalidate any and all belief outside of what can be validated by human reason. He writes in a recent piece for Newsweek,

Now, it might seem glib of me to say that this is all rather unsurprising, and that it is the inevitable result of a dogma that asks people to believe impossible things and then makes them feel abject and guilty when their innate reason rebels.

Hitchens may be right. If all we have is our innate reason to validate for us what otherwise seems impossible, then indeed our efforts are futile, resulting in a chaos of soul like that demonstrated in Teresa’s letters. But the ability to believe impossible things - like the resurrection of Jesus from the dead and ultimately in our own resurrection - results not from innate reason, but from faith.  And that faith is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God. 

Faith does not come from our making sense of things, from our ability to reason things out. Faith is not positive thinking. Faith is not doing more good things in the hopes that by doing so faith will come. Faith is the free and unmerited gift of God granted to those who truly hear His word. ”Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” Faith germinates in the soul when the soul receives with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save it. “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Faith begins where reason ends. Faith assures us precisely because our reason doesn’t. In the words of the hymn writer Edward Mote, “When all around my soul gives way, He then is all my hope and stay.”

In spite of his agenda to demonstrate the futility of belief, Hitchens has made an astute observation when he says,

It seems, therefore, that all the things that made Mother Teresa famous—the endless hard toil, the bitter austerity, the ostentatious religious orthodoxy—were only part of an effort to still the misery within.

Hitchens again is right. It would appear from her letters that when everything around her was giving way, Teresa opted to work harder rather than to trust more. Teresa is evidence that no amount of effort on our part can “still the misery within,” granting us assurance of a relationship with God. After all, who among us has worked harder and yet had less assurance than Teresa? Assurance comes not from what we do but from faith in what Christ has done.

Jesus himself said, “Many shall say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name? and in your name have cast our devils? and in your name done many wonderful works?’ And then I will profess unto them, ‘I never knew you.’” (Matthew 7:22-23). Could it be that Teresa is among the “many” who did “many wonderful works” in the name of Jesus but were trusting in their works to vindicate them in the end rather than the One they were working for? Do Teresa’s letters suggest that she could be among those who will hear Jesus say, “I never knew you”? You are aghast at the thought, because such a sentiment is so contrary to the conventional wisdom that says Teresa, of all people, is in heaven because she served the poorest of the poor and gave up her own life in doing so. But that’s precisely the point.   If anyone is heaven, it won’t be because of the many wonderful works they did in Jesus name. It will be because they received faith as a gift from God, a faith that sustains in the midst of doubt, a faith that gives evidence of the reality of our relationship to Christ even when our innate human reason suggests – as it evidently did in Mother Teresa’s case – that the prudent course is to abandon all hope.

DesiringGOD has posted a video excerpt of John Piper’s message on Romans 5:12-21 in which Dr. Piper succinctly demonstrates why it is not necessary to contextualize the gospel.

 View it here: http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/784_dont_contextualize_the_gospel/

Evangelical social activist and minister Tony Campolo was a guest on The Paul Edwards Program on Thursday, August 23. I  asked him if the Democratic candidates for president in this election cycle had conveniently, and purely for political expediency, discovered that a candidate’s religious faith is a vote getter, to which he replied in part:

I think that both parties can be criticized, and should be criticized. It will be easy for evangelicals to criticize the Democrats. But it’s going to be hard for them this year when the only candidate that they have running for the presidency that has only one wife is a Mormon. I mean, you’ve got to find a bit of humor in that! So both parties are up for scrutiny and need to be judged.

Tony Campolo finds humor in the fact that Mitt Romney - a Mormon - has only one wife? The audio of my question and Dr. Campolo’s response is here. I was up against a hard break and didn’t respond to Campolo’s obvious overture reinforcing the stereotype about Mormons and polygamy, but you hear my shocked laughter, not at what he was saying as much as that he said it. Was this a backhanded slap at Mitt Romney’s faith? Is Mitt Romney the only candidate whose faith is fair game in this campaign simply because it is perceived as out of the mainstream of religious practice?

It’s interesting that Dr. Campolo said that evangelicals - not Republicans - have only one candidate who is running for president who has only one wife. To set the record straight, Mitt Romney is not the only never divorced candidate running for president evangelicals might endorse. Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas and a Southern Baptist minister, has also never been divorced.

My thanks to Jeff Totten of SCORE Ministries for treating my son, Joel, and I to one of the best nights at Comerica Park we have ever experienced. Jeff is the Chapel Leader for the Detroit Tigers, a member of Woodside Bible Church in Troy, and the founder of a great evangelistic organization called SCORE Ministries. 

Our evening began at 5:50 pm in Suite 151 at Comerica Park. Jeff invited about 20 area pastors to a meet and greet with Tiger’s Hall of Fame broadcaster Ernie Harwell.  My son and I had met Ernie about five years ago at a Home Plate event at Comerica Park, also sponsored by SCORE Ministries. But this is the first time we had gotten to spend an extended amount of time with Ernie one on one.

Ernie will be 90 in January. His mind has not diminished and his wit is still sharp. He regaled us with stories, from being one of the few journalists to ever interview Ty Cobb to one of his most embarassing moments as a broadcaster (at least the most embarassing one he could share with “church people”!). The highlight was listening as Ernie recited from memory his famed 1955 poem, “Baseball, A Game for All America” which ended with resounding applause.

Ernie is a gentleman’s gentleman. You would think his fame would make him unapproachable, but nothing could be further from the truth. It has been my honor to have had Ernie as a guest on my radio program twice. The last thing he said to me before leaving the suite last night was, “Paul, you call me any time you need to speak to me on your program.” 

This morning as I was entering the Big Boy for my ritual breakfast the front page of the Detroit Free Press caught my eye and there, gracing the headline above the fold, was a picture of Ernie Harwell. Ernie is still at it, working hard to preserve the old Tiger Stadium at the corner of Michigan and Trumball. I knew at that moment I wanted to talk to Ernie about the Free Press piece. And, after all, he had just told me to call him anytime. But was it too soon to take the great Hall of Fame Broadcaster up on his offer?

Was he just being polite? Did he really mean it? Would I appear to him to be a stalker if I actually called him less than 24 hours after his gracious offer? I worked up the nerve and placed the call from my booth in the Big Boy. As soon as I identified myself Ernie replied, “Paul, it’s been a long time since the last time we spoke last night!” accompanied by a gracious laugh. I apologized for calling him so soon, told him about seeing him featured on the front page of the Free Press, and would he please consider speaking to me on-air once again. Without hesitation, he checked his calendar, and accepted my invitation to join me this afternoon on The Paul Edwards Program to talk about his efforts to see part of the old Tiger Stadium preserved.

If you ever have the privilege of meeting Ernie Harwell, just introduce yourself and be yourself, and Ernie will just be Ernie. You’ll think you’re talking to your dad. And you’ll be warm inside for days after.

Regardless of where you fall on the conservative - liberal spectrum, this video is hillarious!

HT: Evangelical Outpost

The mainstream media wants you to believe that a conservative evangelical church deep in the Bible belt has refused to bury a Gulf War veteran because he was gay. Some in the Christian media want you to believe that the church hasn’t shown the love of Jesus to a dead man’s family. Neither is anywhere near the truth.

Here are the facts. High Point Church, a non-denominational church in Arlington, Texas, had been praying for Cecil Sinclair after Cecil’s brother, Lee (the only member of the Sinclair family who was a member of the church) requested prayer for his brother who had been awaiting a heart transplant. When Cecil Sinclair’s health became critical last week, the family called a staff member from the church to be with them at the hospital. In the hospital, in the moments immediately following Mr. Sinclair’s death, the family asked the staff member if the church would be open to holding a memorial service for their loved one. The staff member assured them the church would be available to help the family in any way appropriate, a response any pastor would give in that situation.

Cecil Sinclair was not a member of High Point Church, yet this church selflessly and sacrificially ministered to his family in the wake of his death, preparing and delivering food for the family and one hundred relatives and friends, along with many other expressions of kindness. The church offered to produce a video retrospective of Mr. Sinclair’s life for use during the memorial service. When the family provided the pictures to the church it was then that the church learned of their intention to make the memorial service a celebration of Cecil Sinclair’s gay lifestyle. One of the photos provided by the family “showed a man with his hand touching another man’s genitalia,” along with other inappropriate photos, according to a statement on the High Point Church website.

The family also requested that “an associate of an openly homosexual choir” officiate at the service and that the homosexual choir sing during the service. “It became clear to the church staff that the family was requesting an openly homosexual service at High Point Church - which is not our policy to allow,” the statement on the church’s website said. After initially agreeing to host the memorial service, the church informed the family it could not do so based on the direction they were taking service. The church then secured - and paid for - another location for the memorial service, which the family declined. The church also produced the memorial video without the inappropriate photos.

High Point Church did not refuse to host the funeral of a gay man, as is being widely reported in the mainstream media. The church refused on biblical principle to allow a celebration of the homosexual lifestyle in its sanctuary, a decision most theologically sound churches would make under similar circumstances. 

It’s not surprising to me that the mainstream media would misrepresent the facts. But the response of some in Christian media has been even more disappointing. High Point Church and its leaders are being accused by Christians of not showing love to the family by not hosting a celebration of his gay lifestyle. I suppose visiting Cecil in the hospital, sitting with his family after he died, preparing meals for the family, paying the rent on an alternative venue, and producing an appropriate memorial video don’t qualify as “showing love” to the family? Others are calling it a “missed opportunity” for the church to reach out to the gay community. Still others have suggested that because homosexuality is a sin like any other sin, the church’s decision not to host a gay man’s memorial would prohibit it from holding memorial services for anyone because, after all, we are all sinners.

These people are missing the point. The church did not refuse to host the memorial service because Cecil Sinclair was gay. They refused to host the memorial service because the family was turning it into a celebration of the man’s sin - his homosexual lifestyle. Churches and ministers bury sinners every day. But we don’t highlight their sin on the big screen while we are doing it. We exalt Christ. We proclaim the gospel. And we celebrate the triumph of the cross over sin and death, none of which the family had in mind for Cecil Sinclair’s memorial service.

High Point Church’s principled and biblical decision was the right one, as is evidenced not only by just how unpopular it is with the main stream media, but also by the knee-jerk and ill-informed response of today’s culturally-savvy, but biblically illiterate Christians.

Listen here to Paul’s interview with Pastor Gary Simons of High Point Church.

All I know about High Point Church in Arlington, Texas is what I have read in the media, plus what I have learned perusing their website. I now know that the church is pastored by the brother-in-law of Joel Osteen.

The MSM wants you to believe that a conservative evangelical church deep in the Bible belt has refused to bury a vet because he was gay. Nothing could be further from the truth. Those of you who know how I feel about Joel Osteen should also know that I am not defending this church for any other reason than that it did the right thing.

Follow this link to read the church’s side of the story, one you aren’t getting from the MSM or even Christian Talk Radio:
High Point Church Could Not Allow an
Openly Homosexual Service in the Church

UPDATE: Paul speaks on-air with Pastor Gary Simons of High Point Church. Listen HERE.

John Piper wants to accept into local church membership persons who were baptized as infants and for conscience sake do not want to be re-baptized as believers. He argues that by doing so he is not accepting their interpretation of what Scripture teaches about baptism. His point is that the mode and timing of baptism should not keep a genuine believer outside the local body of believers. Wayne Grudem seemed to originally agree with that position, but now in an update of his popular Systematic Theology, he has changed his mind.

John Piper writes,

When I weigh the kind of imperfection involved in tolerating an invalid baptism because some of our members are deeply persuaded that it is biblically valid, over against the kind of imperfection involved in saying to a son or daughter of the living God, “You are excluded from the local church,” my biblical sense is that the latter is more unthinkable than the former. The local church is a visible expression of the invisible, universal, body of Christ. To exclude from it is virtually the same as excommunication. And no serious church takes excommunication as an invitation to attend the church down the street.

Piper arugues that when he accepts into church membership believers who were baptized as infants and never baptized as believers, he is not giving any ground at all on his position that baptism is for believers:

I will spend the rest of my ministry trying to persuade you that you and your children should follow through on the full obedience to Jesus and be baptized. In admitting you, I do not give up on my view of baptism. That is the whole point. We are finding a way to work on this disagreement from inside the body of Christ in its local expression.

Read Piper’s position here.

Justin Taylor presents Grudem’s position here.