Thoughts & Actions

Commit your actions to the Lord, and your thoughts will be established… Proverbs 16:3

Baptism Debate: James White vs. Bill Shishko

Here’s an interesting debate I recently discovered from an OPC church in Long Island, NY on the topic of “Credobaptism vs. Pedobaptism.”

Baptism Debate (Part 1)

  • 0:00-11:00 Introduction
  • 11:30-31:30 White’s opening affirmative statement
  • 31:30-34:50 Shishko’s cross-examination
  • 35:10- 55:00 Shishko’s opening statement
  • 55:20-58:15 White’s cross-examination
  • 58:55-1:13:50 White’s second affirmative statement
  • 1:14:15-1:17:15 Shishko’s cross-examination
  • 1:17:45-1:19:57 Shishko’s second negative statement (apparently the rest of Shishko’s statement and White’s 3 minute cross-examination were cut off and are not included in this audio.)

Baptism Debate (Part 2)

  • 0:00-4:40 Continuation of Shishko’s 10 minute questions for White (first 6 minutes are not on the web recording)
  • 4:55-14:50 White’s 10 minute questions for Shishko
  • 15:15-25:00 Shishko’s rebuttal
  • 25:24-35:17 White’s rebuttal
  • 35:38-42:40 Shishko’s closing statement
  • 42:50-49:50 White’s closing statement
  • 51:00-1:14:00 Audience Q/A

My Observation:

  • Shishko sounded consistent throughout the debate in his tone and tempo, whereas White started off calm but as the debate continued, his tone had escalated and tempo had increased – indicating that Shishko was in control of the debate and White was scrambling for thought.
  • In White’s opening affirmative statement, 7 biblical references are cited. Shishko, however, cites 25 biblical references in his opening affirmative statement.

July 20, 2007 - Posted by Will | 2007 Archive, Ecclesiology, Philosophy, Southern Baptist Affairs, Theology, Videos & Audios | | 6 Comments

6 Comments »

  1. [...] White has argued before (debate with Shishko) and argued again in the following manner:  In the Old Covenant when head of households were [...]

    Pingback by Infant Baptism Debate: White vs. Strawbridge–Thoughts and Theological Considerations « Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam | November 10, 2007 | Reply

  2. Pastor Shishko makes a very convincing case for believer’s baptism.

    Comment by Hank Pharis | May 22, 2008 | Reply

  3. Hank, Bill Shishko’s case is for infant baptism, not Believer’s Baptism. It is James White who is making a case for believer’s baptism. So you must have meant one of three possibilities:
    1. You believe Shishko made a very convincing case AGAINST Believer’s Baptism.
    2. You believe James White made a very convincing case FOR Believer’s Baptism.
    3. You believe Shishko made a very convincing case for INFANT Baptism.

    Comment by Will | May 22, 2008 | Reply

  4. No I meant what I said. Shishko made me more convinced of believer’s baptism.

    Comment by Hank Pharis | May 23, 2008 | Reply

  5. Funny…

    Comment by Will | May 23, 2008 | Reply

  6. every time I read or hear a debate on this I too think it makes sense, but there are just some Scriptures that get in the way. When the paedo referenced Matthew 28:19-20 he said disciples are made by “2 parallel tracks”, 1 thru baptism, the other thru teaching,… I’ve never heard anyone interpret that text like that! :-/ I would’ve asked, “So we don’t teach the baptized then?”

    When he references Acts 2 (the prophecy of Joel) he says it refers to physical children. I would ask, “Does that mean the physical babies of believers have the Holy Spirit poured out on them?” He says he gets this understanding from Isaiah 44:3-4 where it says, ”I [God] will pour my Spirit upon your offspring…” He takes that to mean infants, but how can infants fulfill what happens just two verses later, ”This one will say, ‘I am the Lord’s,’”? That sounds like a profession of faith :)

    Interestingly too he says whatever the household did would have been done by the rest of the house (cause he said that was the pattern in that region during that time), so it should follow that since the head repented/believed then was baptized then the rest should too? Sounds like the guy shot himself in the foot.

    He keeps asking, “If there has been a change in the dealing of households in the New Covenant then it should be clear and it is not”.

    Jesus says in Luke 12:51-53:

    Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. For from now on in ONE HOUSE there will be five divided, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

    (or Matthew 10:34-37) Seems like the gospel divides not unites households :-/

    “For whoever does the will of God, he is my brother and sister and mother.” – Mark 3:35

    “But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” – John 1:12-13

    There ya go Pastor Shishko :)

    Comment by jason d | September 23, 2009 | Reply


Leave a comment