Steve Owen
Puritan Board Sophomore
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Originally posted by Martin Marprelate
Baptism at its simplest is supposed to bring the child into covenant with God, though there is no text that indicates that this is so.
Wrong.
In the OT, flesh-circumcision was the sign, and heart-circumcision was the thing signified.
In the NT, water-baptism is the sign, and Spirit-baptism is the thing signified.
Check Galatians 3:27, 1 Corinthians 12:13, Ephesians 1:13, etc. --- If Spirit baptism brings people in the invisible church, then water baptism brings them into the visible church. If the Spirit is the seal of the invisible membership in the covenant, then the water is the seal of the outward membership in the covenant.
With respect, you have not produced any text that shows that infants are brought into the New Covenant by baptism. That is because there is no such text. You have also quoted various texts out of context. Gal 2:26-27. 'For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.' It is by faith that one comes into the Church of Christ. Baptism is the outward sign of something that has already happened inwardly- the sign that one has already trusted in Christ for salvation and is therefore admitted into church fellowship. 1Cor 12:13 and Eph 1:13 also speak of faith as that which brings us into the covenant. I reject the concept of a 'visible' and 'invisible' church. It is deeply unhelpful. We are to strive for a pure church (2Cor 11:2 ) and while we may not achieve it, we should bring into the Church only those who make a credible confession of faith.
What did circumcision signify? Well, to Abraham it was 'The seal of the righteousness of faith which he had while still uncircumcised.' However, it cannot have meant that to the male infants who were circumcised at eight days old. It was a sign of the promise made to Abraham of the Seed who should come (Gal 3:16 ). Abraham is the father of all who believe, not of all who are circumcised (John 8:39, 44 ), nor therefore of those who are baptized without faith.
That is not what the text says. It says that those who are Christ's have the true circumcision, which is not of the flesh but of the heart. Again, v12 shows us that baptism without faith is meaningless.Colossians 2:11-12 is important here too. Just as heart circumcision is analgous to Spirit baptism, so is flesh circumcision analgous to water baptism.
You omit v17 here, which is the clue to the proper interpretation of the text. It is those who come to the Lord with child-like faith, setting aside their human wisdom and worldly philosophies who enter the kingdom. Jesus certainly blessed the little children; what He did not do was baptize them.Originally posted by Martin Marprelate
However some paedo-baptists presume either the election or regeneration of the infants of believers.
Jesus said the kingdom of God belongs to infants who are covenant members (cf. Luke 18:15-16).
One practical problem with not baptizing infants is that they are raised to doubt, and are raised to believe a lie: that they are not covenant members with God. All covenant members are supposed to be baptized, so you force your children to be disobedient to God (by not being baptized) until they finally choose to get baptized on their own.
God tells adults that they have to be like little children to enter the kingdom of Heaven. But you turn Luke 18:17 on its head, and suggest that a child has to become more like an adult before he/she can be saved.
See above for Luke 18:17. Infants do not become covenant members by having water splashed on them. They become members as and when they become regenerate and put their trust in Christ (John 6:45; Heb 8:11). God may have another plan for imbeciles and those who die in infancy (Gen 18:25b), but for the rest of us: 'That which is born of the flesh is flesh'. By nature, we are all children of wrath, and unless we are born again by the Spirit of God, we shall not so much as see the Kingdom of God, much less enter it.
I do not want to give the impression that I am necessarily pessimistic about the prospects for the children of believers. Not at all! My position would be, Presumptive depravity; hopeful salvation. It is a huge privilege to be raised in a Christian home, to be brought to church as a child, to have the Scriptures taught to you and to have an example of godly living. However, as I have said elsewhere, the most important thing that we can do for our children is to pray for them, earnestly and fervently: 'We gave them life in the flesh; You, Father, must give them life in the Spirit!' Like Scott, I have adult children who are unregenerate (though paradoxically, I had them baptized as infants in my foolishness). I certainly do not lose hope for them. 'The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man (that is, one whom God has declared righteous) avails much.' (James 5:16 ).
Grace & Peace,
Martin