Among our friends and family (outside of our church friends...obviously) we would definitely fall in the minority when it comes to the topic of infant baptism. When we joined
Trinity Grace Church the idea of baptizing infants was extremely foreign and, at the time, somewhat heretical. Upon studying more into the
reformed theology beliefs, my ideas began to change. Once we knew we were going to have a baby, I had no doubt that I would baptize my child(ren). This can be a very controversial subject and one that I am very open to debate. Before I go on, let me be clear of one thing. I do not believe that baptizing my child in any way "saves" her. I only pray that she is called by God to his family. That is up to Him...not me. However, the whole predestination topic can open a whole new can of worms :). I ultimately believe that baptizing my child "sets her apart" (from children of non-Believers) and challenges us to continue to raise her in a body of Believers.
R. C. Sproul has a fantastic chapter about infant baptism in his book
A Taste of Heaven. There is nothing in the Bible that explicitly teaches or commands the practice of infant baptism. Sproul challenges all believers to take this highly controversial issue with an extra measure of forbearance. This is a debate that rests ultimately on inferences and implications drawn from Scripture, not on explicit teachings. However, both sides cannot be correct...God either wants us to baptize infants or not. Here are the main parts of Sproul's chapter...
There are 5 main arguments against infant baptism. First, Believers' Baptism (BB) folks believe baptism is a sign of the faith of the person receiving the sacrament. Second, BBers also believe there is a mandate to baptize linked with repentance. Third, a BBer may point out that there are no examples of infant baptism in the New Testament. Fourth, a BBer would note that there are no examples of infant baptism until the 2nd century. Lastly the practice of circumcision in the OT communicated the principle of ethnic separation b/c redemption was accomplised through a nation of people by biological inheritance. In other words, the method of redemption changed from biology to theology. Let's quickly visit the Reformed view of each of the BB's views. First, the Old Testament sign of the covenant was circumcision. This was given to infants so the New Testament sign of the covenant, baptism, should also be given to infants. Second, in the case of adults, or people capable of cognitive thinking, the procedure is to repent and then be baptized...if they have not come to that point before. However, because infants are not capable of cognitive thinking, they shall be given the sign of the New Covenant as they are children of a Believer(s). Third, there is Scriptural evidence for baptizing infants. There are 12 incidents involving the baptism of people in the NT. 9 of these clearly involve adults but 3 of them make mention of "households." The record says "so and so and his household were baptized" (Acts 16:15, 33, 1 Cor. 1:16). We are not sure what "household" means but we do know it refers to children. Fourth, the practice of infant baptism appears to have been very widespread in the history of the church. At the time of the early church, the NT Christian community was much more in tune with the historic continuity of the covenants, and nobody questioned giving babies the covenant sign. Lastly, the NT makes clear that people in the OT were saved in the same way they are saved after the coming of Christ. "Abraham believed and it was counted to him as righteousness." (Gen. 15:6) Not because he was baptized, but because he believed. Clearly, parental generation and propagation of children does not guarantee anyone's salvation. Even a baptized child has no guarantee of being a Christian. The NT makes it equally clear that this was also the case in the OT. Ultimately, the OT sign of the covenant (circumcision) and the NT sign of the covenant (baptism) have a wealth of things in common, the most significant being that both of them are signs of the covenant of God with His people, and both are signs of faith. Circumcision was so important to God in the OT that he threatened to execute Moses when Moses delayed in giving the covenant sign to his children (Ex. 4:24-26). "So, in conclusion, we have chosen to have Sarah baptized this Sunday. I welcome any and all questions but please e-mail me if you disagree or want to debate. As we look forward to this coming Lord's Day, I pray that my daughter will someday be called to the family of God. I also pray that we can raise our daughter as Eunice raised Timothy...(Paul speaking) "but as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus." (2 Tim. 3:14-15)
Pics to follow Sunday's special day as we will also be celebrating two of Sarah's grandfathers' birthdays!
Jude is thinking, "Get these girls off of me!"
