INFANT BAPTISM

Briefly, the following grounds have been developed adequately by Reformed theologians in response to the baptistic viewpoint:

(1) God’s command, which obliges parents to have the sign of the covenant placed upon their child(ren), forms the first ground of infant baptism (cf. Gen. 17:12-13; Mt. 28:19; I Cor. 12:13). Read Genesis 17:14 to see how seriously God viewed this command.

(2) A second ground, explicit in God’s command, which necessitates infant baptism of believer’s children, is God’s covenant relationship to them. Since children also belong to the covenant (at least in its external sense) and the church (at least in its visible form), infants are to be baptized (cf. Form for Administration of Baptism).

(3) God’s promise to raise a seed from among the believer’s children forms the basic theological ground for infant baptism which lies behind the divine command and covenant. As covenant-keeping Jehovah, God has sworn an oath to preserve His truth from generation to generation (Acts 2:37). Redemption from sin by the blood of Christ and true faith wrought by the Spirit of Christ is promised to children no less than to adults.

(4) In addition to divine command, covenant, and promise, we baptize infants on the confirmatory evidence of Scripture and ancient church history that baptism is a non-bloody (i.e., looking back to Christ whose blood has been shed) New Testament sacrament that replaces the bloody (i.e., looking forward to Christ whose blood must yet be shed) Old Testament sacrament of circumcision. Consequently, infants must be baptized under the New Testament dispensation just as they were circumcised under the Old Testament dispensation. The foundation for drawing this conclusion is at least fourfold:

First, Scripture itself (Col. 2:11-12; Phil. 3:2-3).

Second, the earliest Christian fathers considered baptism to have come in the place of circumcision, as Justin Martyr testifies (writing forty years after the apostle John’s death), “We have not received this carnal baptism.” Several other early fathers also speak expressly on this point, including Cyprian, Ambrose, Augustine, Basil, and Chrysostom.

Third, the identical meaning of baptism and circumcision is logically supportive of our Reformed position: Circumcision represented the circumcision of the heart (i.e., regeneration and/or conversion); baptism is called “the washing of regeneration” by Paul. As a seal, circumcision confirmed the “righteousness of faith” or the covenant of grace (Rom. 4:2); baptism also seals the covenant of grace and assures the elect that their faith is imputed to them for righteousness.

Fourth, the covenant of the visible church has been essentially the same under both dispensations, of which baptism is now what circumcision was formerly, namely, the visible token and instituted prerequisite to a regular standing in the visible church.

(5) The mark of separation which baptism provides (and God demands) to divide His visible church (Israel) from the ungodly world and heathen (Canaanites, etc.), is yet another basis for baptizing children of believing parents. Thomas Watson has aptly noted: “How can a parent ever look favorably on his child which has not been separated unto the Lord by the water of baptism?”

(6) Finally, we may argue on the basis of No. 5 by way of negation: Since the New Testament sacraments replaced the Old Testament sacraments, a specific New Testament command forbidding infant baptism would be essential for prohibiting such baptism. Since God commanded that infants receive the sacrament of circumcision, a separate command for infant baptism was unnecessary. Hence, the burden of proof for the prohibition of infant baptism must rest on its opposers rather than its advocates. Further, it has been frequently noted that no exception was ever made for anyone being too young when New Testament believers were baptized with their entire households. Certainly very young children, if not infants, must have been included in their number (cf. Acts 10:48; 16:15, 34, 35; I Cor. 1:16; 16:5).

(For particularly helpful studies on the biblical defense of infant baptism, consult John Murray, Christian Baptism; Pierre Marcel, Baptism: Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace; Geoffrey Bromiley, Children of Promise; Herman Hoeksema, Believers and their Seed; John Flavel, Vindiciarium Vindex, vol. 3, pp. 493ff. and Vindiciae Legis et Foederis, vol. 6, pp. 318ff.)

Forward your questions for response in this column to Rev. J.R. Beeke, 55 Robin Hood Way, Wayne, NJ 07470.

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen