Phil D.
ὁ βαπτιστὴς
Just thinking about some issues raised in another restricted-response thread about household baptisms. It does seem that paedobaptist churches face an unavoidable dilemma with regard to the age of non-professing members of households.
Take for instance the following theoretical, yet for the sake of discussion I think legitimate scenario: The newly saved parents (or parent) of a number of children join an evangelical paedobaptist church. Let’s suppose the children are 3 months, 1½, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17... years in age (alright, so it would be a really large family, but again it serves the question). If none of the children profess conversion, which of them should be baptized?
I’ve read about at least one Presbyterian church that addresses this predicament by enforcing an official age cutoff of 12. But are they really then saying that on the sole basis of the children’s physical age they would baptize the 12-year-old, but not the 13 or 14-year-olds? Regardless of where an age limit is placed, one can go down the line asking the same question: Would you really baptize a 1½-year-old, but not a 3-year-old?—or a 7-year-old, but not an 8 or 9-year-old?—etc.?
In the same context one can't help also wondering about the unbelieving adult children of Christians. Are they not, regardless of any other circumstances, still the physical offspring of covenant members, and therefore, on the same principle that their younger siblings are so received, might not they be deemed eligible for baptism as well? There is nothing obvious in the Old Testament standards associated with circumcision to suggest otherwise—in fact quite the contrary.
Yet to avoid the prospect in certain cases of even non-professing adult children of such parents being baptized, some limitations largely dependent on age does seem necessary.
So, I have a couple of honest questions about this.
Take for instance the following theoretical, yet for the sake of discussion I think legitimate scenario: The newly saved parents (or parent) of a number of children join an evangelical paedobaptist church. Let’s suppose the children are 3 months, 1½, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17... years in age (alright, so it would be a really large family, but again it serves the question). If none of the children profess conversion, which of them should be baptized?
I’ve read about at least one Presbyterian church that addresses this predicament by enforcing an official age cutoff of 12. But are they really then saying that on the sole basis of the children’s physical age they would baptize the 12-year-old, but not the 13 or 14-year-olds? Regardless of where an age limit is placed, one can go down the line asking the same question: Would you really baptize a 1½-year-old, but not a 3-year-old?—or a 7-year-old, but not an 8 or 9-year-old?—etc.?
In the same context one can't help also wondering about the unbelieving adult children of Christians. Are they not, regardless of any other circumstances, still the physical offspring of covenant members, and therefore, on the same principle that their younger siblings are so received, might not they be deemed eligible for baptism as well? There is nothing obvious in the Old Testament standards associated with circumcision to suggest otherwise—in fact quite the contrary.
Yet to avoid the prospect in certain cases of even non-professing adult children of such parents being baptized, some limitations largely dependent on age does seem necessary.
So, I have a couple of honest questions about this.
1. What is the biblical basis for determining such an age limit – or for establishing other possible solutions?
2. In essence, how do decisions in this area really differ from those based on the often scorned “age of accountability” concept?
2. In essence, how do decisions in this area really differ from those based on the often scorned “age of accountability” concept?
