Quote:
Originally Posted by North Jersey Baptist  Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilgrim For the record, Charles Spurgeon said of Mark 10: 13-16: THIS TEXT HAS NOT THE SHADOW OF THE SHADE OF THE GHOST OF A CONNECTION WITH BAPTISM. (emphasis his.)
Here is the full text of his sermon: Children Brought to Christ, and Not to the Font | Yes, but the idea that children can be in the eternal kingdom, but not in the visible church (and thus not entitled to the sign of entrance into the visible church) is not logical. | Brother Daniel, the sign is for those who have believed. You know the Baptist stand on that.
History is not without those who have enjoyed benefits of a thing without being identified with that thing. Citizenship is an imperfect example. If you legally immigrated to the United States you would be considered a legal alien. You could enjoy the some of the benefits of this country, but not all. You could not vote, own a handgun, hold public office etc. until you were naturalized. If you bring minor children with you they will enjoy limited benefits as well. It's an imperfect example because all analogies fail.
We will baptize upon a credible profession of faith. It matters not whether the profession is made by a child or an adult. If it is credible baptism will be administered. I believe it is logical because I also believe Baptists have scriptural warrant. To go into that warrant now will just cover ground that has been tread on ad infinitum, ad nauseam. |
But again Bill you have to face the problem that infants can be part of the invisible church, but not part of the visible church.
FWIW, I believe that infants are not entitled to all privileges of the visible church - they are not allowed to take communion or vote in elections. But being members, they must be baptized, because the idea of an unbaptized church member is a contradiction in terms.