|
I think so Jacob. I'm not precisely sure what framework would supplant it.
Assuming the Scriptures were relatively silent regarding the subject of children and the Covenant - perhaps they were mentioned not at all - that there were no Proverbs or commands in the OT or NT regarding raising children in the fear and admonition of the Lord.
My first thought is that it would be a very strange condition for children to be born to parents and be under their care with a fallen human being having no concept on what the Lord's opinion is regarding their upbringing.
My second thought is related to the first. Covenant theology - the notion that children serve the same God as their parents could be demonstrated from the light of nature. In fact, it is notable that those who deny CT outright still practice a modified form of it. It takes a person who is acutely aware of their worldview to figure out a way to organize their life and their children in a way where they could bifurcate the upbringing of their children and have an organic parent-child relationship in every area except how one serves the Lord.
I was listening to Richard Dawkins on The Narrow Mind the other day and he was saying how he considers it child abuse for parents to christen their child and "force them" into a religion before they've had time to "...decide for themselves." My jaw nearly hit the deck when Gene Cook and Jonathan Goundry actually said: "We agree with you...that's why you should be a Baptist." For folks who pride themselves in pre-suppositionalism that was an incredibly naive outlook on how truth is formed in a mind and how a child makes decisions.
I cannot escape my upbringing and my outlook on the world in many ways. There are dispositions in me formed by my family that are inescapable. Nobody, and I mean nobody, has their beliefs and opinions formed in a vacuum. The reason why Dawkins' view is either incredibly naive (or perhaps incredibly sinister because he knows better) is that, if we don't instill the values and beliefs into a child, then someone will. Even the humanists, while they talk about letting children decide for themselves, know full well that they design curricula to form beliefs. Parents who let their children be tossed to and fro by the sea of beliefs among men are fools in my mind.
When I see a child screaming like a brat at their parents and in open defiance of their authority I do not think: "Well, that kid was just born that way." My immediate belief, and the belief of even non-Christians, is that the child is spoiled. That parents are responsible to "drive folly from the heart of a child" is unmistakable from the light of nature.
Now, one may decide that they grant all of the above but still would not grant the paedo position. To me, again, a good chunk of the paedobaptist position is the recognition that Christianity is a maturation process. It's not something were we look, as it were, for people who have somehow fully matured without any external means but by the direct intervention of the finger of God and then we say: "Well, you've got a developed belief - you're now one of us."
Thus, I believe the combination of our natural responsibility toward our children with the concept of Biblical discipleship would make a sound argument for paedobaptism. If it wasn't accepted by all then there would still be the perfunctory "dedications" or some other means that so many Baptists use to say: "I'm going to raise this one up in the fear and admonition of the Lord."
|