INFANT BAPTISM IS SCRIPTURAL !

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Smoky, May 13, 2003.

  1. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    Baptism of infants is biblical because circumcision in the Old Testament meant the same thing as baptism does in the New, and there are no scriptures in the New Testament that state that infants of believers are now to be treated differently in the New Covenant from the way that infants of Israelite children were treated in the Old! The norm of the Old Covenant always treated Israelite chrildren as part of the covenant community. There is nothing that changes this norm by informing us that children of Christians are to be treated as "outside" the covenant community. In fact, the trend of the New Testament was actually to include people who used to be considered "outside". For example, gentiles, people excluded from the covenant community in the Old Covenant, now make up the majority of the church. Women worship with men in Christian congregations instead of in a separate courtyard outside the temple, and females as well as males are included in New Covenant baptism. Peter told his audience, "Acts 2:38-39 (ESV)
    Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. [39] For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off , everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself." In view of all this, the argument which states that there is no scriptural evidence of infants being baptized in the New Testament holds no water! Including children was already the "norm" and if we are looking for New Testament evidence, we should be looking for scriptures that would deny baptism to infants and not the other way around.
    Both baptism and circumcision were signs of the righteousness we receive by faith and baptism came in the room of circumcision in the New Copvenant:

    Col. 2:11-13 (ESV)
    In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism , in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. [13] And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,

    Romans 4:11 (ESV)
    He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well,

    Deut. 30:6 (ESV)
    And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.

    Ezekiel 36:24-27 (ESV)
    I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land. [25] I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. [26] And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. [27] And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.

    All little children are part of the family of God under any covenant and circumcision was applied before they understood anything about it or before anyone had any knowledge as to whether they would receive the spiritual blessings it symbolized when they reached the age of accountability. This rules out the idea that, since an infant is unable to believe for himself, that he should not be baptized! They are already saved, so they should be allowed to receive the sign of salvation like any believer. When they reach the age of accountability, being brought up by godly parents, then they receive Christ for themselves and it is at this time that their baptism becomes meaningful to them. The bible always instructs "adults" who were converted out of Judaism and Paganism to be baptized as believers, but this was before the "christian family" had time to develop! Everyone would instruct unconverted adults to "believe" before baptism but this doesn't exclude infants born into christian families! The New Testament never tells us about a single adolescent or young adult who had been raised from infancy by parents in christian homes who later received baptism only after he or she expressed faith in Christ! There is not "one shred" of scripture that says that infants born into christian homes should not be baptized!
     
  2. Briguy

    Briguy
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/briguy.gif>

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    1,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Females couldn't/can't be circumsized. Females are baptized. Do you still want to use the first as an argument for the second?

    In Christ,
    Brian
     
  3. thessalonian

    thessalonian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interestingly enough in the new testament women can be circumcized.

    Deuteronomy 30:6
    "Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.

    Baptism is the new circumcision of the heart done by God sending us his holy spirit to dwell within us:

    Hebrews 10:22
    let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
     
  4. CatholicConvert

    CatholicConvert
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2001
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Brian --

    WHAT am I going to do with you????

    There is a very legimate reason that females were not circumcized in the Old Covenant. Circumcision was a prophecy of the coming Messiah. He would be "cut off" in the flesh, as the flesh of the male was cut off, his blood would be shed, as was in circumcision, and he would be a MALE, thus FEMALES could not be circumcised. To circumcise a female would have totally SCREWED UP the typology of the prophetic act of circumcision.

    Now that Christ is our Head in the New Covenant, male and female are baptized into his DEATH, which was HIS CUTTING OFF from the living. Thus, male and female who are baptized, being baptized into His death (Rom. 6:3) participate in a circumcision (a "cutting off") by being "cut off" from the world in Him.

    Brian -- use your typologies and think them through.

    Brother Ed
     
  5. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, here's one:

    Heb 8:8-12 For finding fault with them, he saith,
    No one can be a part of this New Covenant without first knowing the Lord because he says that no one in the Covenant will need to be taught to know the Lord; they will already know Him! Thus, infants, who do not know Him are excluded from being in the Covenant. Only when one knows the Lord may he enter.

    SO as Briguy pointed out: even though Col. 2:11-13 talks of baptism as a circumcision, this circumcision of baptism is not 100% not even 98% like that OT circumcision. There are at least 2 huge differences: (1) Women can be baptized but could not be circumcised (2) Infants could be circumcised but not baptized
     
  6. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, because remember I said that the trend of the New Covenant was to be more inclusive than the Old. The nature of baptism is such that females can participate in the New ordinance, although they were always considered part of the covenant community through the circumcision of the male!
     
  7. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    SmokeEater:

    Since you are such a fan of using typology against plain statements (like Catholics do) why don't you take it one step further? You already say that even though Hebrews 8 says only those who know the Lord can be in the New Covenant, infants can be in it because you accept the circumcision typology over what the apostle plainly states. Why not also say that the woman need not be baptized because the circumcision typology? In fact, why not just create a new religion based completely on typology and ignoring all the plain statements in the NEW TESTAMENT???????
     
  8. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hebrews 8:11 (ESV)
    And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother , saying, 'Know the Lord,'
    for they shall all know me,
    from the least of them to the greatest.

    This is talking about adults!The Israelites, being unable to keep the Law of God perfectly had to be saved by grace like anyone else, and by faith received the Holy Spirit which is the only way we can be counted righteous under the New Covenant. The Holy Spirit gives us the "desire" to keep God's laws. No one is saying that converted adults could come into the covenant without "knowing the Lord" because that's the way we receive the Holy Spirit. Circumcision and baptism, though not identical, have the same meaning and show us the mind of the Lord in including little children as part of his family. When they die they have a free ticket to heaven more then anyone else!
     
  9. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    The bible is full of typology Sola, especially the parables of Jesus, His principle way of teaching!
     
  10. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course it's talking about adults, or rather those who are of a state of reason, but the point is that you will not need to teach adults who are in the Covenant to "know the Lord" if they know Him before they enter. HOWEVER, if you allow infants into the Covenant then when they become adults you will have to teach them to "know the Lord" (confirmation class, cough) because they don't know Him yet. This is a HUGE difference that the apostle points out (and that Jermiah prophesied of) between the Old and New Covenants. In the Old Covenant infants were allowed into the Coveant through circumcision and then when they were of age were taught "know the LORD" but in the the New Covenant all must "know the LORD" prior to entering the Covenant through baptism (the circumcision made without hands).

    Of course the Bible is full of typology, but typology still cannot be used against plain statements! For example, Isaac was a type of Christ. But can we apply Isaac's blindness in old age to Christ typologically? God forbid! Solomon is a type of Christ, but can we apply his polygamy to Christ? God forbid! It is possible to take typology further than God intended! For a good example of this, look at Mat 5:25. Some in the past tried to teach reincarnation & or transmigration of souls by allegorizing this and in defence against those heresies others interpreted it allegorically also and came up with purgatory! The fact of the matter, however, was that it was not allegory to begin with! So, you must be careful in taking typology or allegorizing WITHOUT a plain statement to back up the allegory or typology. This is of course why Jesus explains most of his parables.

    [ May 13, 2003, 08:02 PM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura in 2003 ]
     
  11. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,550
    Likes Received:
    213
    Acts 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
    2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
    3 And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren.
    4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
    5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
    6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
    7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
    8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
    9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
    10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
    11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

    Seems pretty clear to me....
     
  12. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    These scriptures are talking basically about knowing the laws of God. The Israelites in the Old Testament failed to continue in the covenant because they forsook the laws they promised to keep if they were to be the Lord's people and He was to be their God. However, when the better covenant takes affect, they know the Law not because each one teaches his neighbor or his brother saying "Know the Lord" but because the law of God is written on their hearts by the spirit of God..

    Sure, you have to teach adults who "don't know the Lord" before they can enter into a covenant relationship as adults. That's what happens when a little child grows up and reaches the "age of accountability" and reallizes that "he doesn't know the Lord". When he reaches this "state of reason" he reallizes he is no longer unaccountable because of innocense but now needs to be saved like anyone else. At this time he is no longer being taught from within the covenant relationship. He is taught as a sinner in need of salvation! However it is from progressive training from early childhood to adulthood (age of reason), that he finally realizes his lost state. But to deny that an innocent child is part of the covenant community is to fail to see all that the Lord has taught us by the law of circumcising infants under the Old Covenant.
     
  13. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don, I'm not saying that Gentiles or anyone else needs to be circumcised before they can be Christians. The law of circumcision was done away with under the New Covenant and replaced by baptism.
     
  14. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your statements don't seem very plain to me Sola.
    And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all (that is adults-every man his neighbor and brother) shall know me, from the least to the greatest. Heb 8:11 No one every said that adults past the age of accountability could be in the covenant if they did not know the Lord!
     
  15. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hebrews 8.11: Everyone in the New Covenant will know the Lord.

    SmokeEater: Infants don't know the Lord but are still in the New Covenant.

    Sola: Not according to Heb 8.11 that says everyone in the New Covenant knows the Lord.

    SmokeEater: It isn't talking about infants.

    Sola: Exactly; its talking about those who are in the New Covenant and infants are NOT in it because they don't know the Lord.

    SmokeEater: But it says "every MAN" not "every INFANT."

    Sola: Because you can't teach infants; only those who can reason can be taught.

    SmokeEater: See! So it doesn't matter that infants don't know the Lord.

    Sola: Yes it does, because those infants who don't know the Lord will soon become men who don't know the Lord and then there will be a man in the New Covenant telling his neighbor in the New Covenant "know the Lord."

    SmokeEater: That won't happen!

    Sola: How won't it happen? Infants DO grow up, and those very infants who don't know the Lord will become men who must be told "know the LORD" and IF they are in the New Covenant, then there is a problem because there are those IN THE NEW COVENANT being told "know the Lord."
     
  16. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's where the confusion lies! When a little child grows up, he reaches the age of accountability and sees himself as a sinner like everyone else. At this time he is no longer part of the covenant because of innocense. After he believes,he is part of the coventant again. I'm not part of the tradition that believes infant baptism "seals" salvation. Every child must believe when it grows up, baptized or not. But the little child while in the stage of innocense is intitled to the covenant symbol- baptism.
     
  17. Jude

    Jude
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/scott3.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2001
    Messages:
    2,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    Infant baptism can be argued Scripturally, but that isn't the only consideration. One must ask, "what was the practice of the early church?" That is what is missing from many who defend 'believers baptism'.
     
  18. Briguy

    Briguy
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/briguy.gif>

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    1,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi brother Ed, Thanks for your post. I hope you are well. What you said is pretty deep and I will think it through as you asked me to. On the surface I see a lot of symbolism going on with both B and C. I have always argued they were both symbolic of something else. It seems obvious to me Ed, the verse that you and others have used from Duet.(I think) that says circumsision is needed for salvation is deeper then it appears, because by that measure no women of the OT could have been saved. Don quoted a great verse about God knowing the heart and that seems to be the real issue. However, I will think and pray things through.

    In Christ,
    Brian
     
  19. Smoky

    Smoky
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    I understand what you are trying to say Sola, but your argument is invalid because the scriptures say that it's "every man his neighbor" and "every man his brother" that won't be taught to know the Lord in the New Covenant . It doesn't say children in the Covenant won't be taught! When it says all shall know me from the least to the greatest it refers to these adults in context, not to children! Children are taught from earliest childhood, and because of innocense and unaccountability, remain a part of the Covenant. Their understanding is only partial, because if they had full knowledge, they wouldn't be children anymore. I'm using the terms "children" and "adults" loosely and realize that a person can reach the age of accountability and still be a child and that you don't have to be a full adult to fully understand. But when they do become adults, because of previous teaching and training, and in a moments time they realize they are lost sinners in need of repentance like all other adults, and when this happens, they are no longer in the Covenant! So you can't say that there are adults in the covenant being taught "know the Lord" because at this time children lose their innocense and are no longer in the Covenant ! Sometimes, if the child has been taught well, it is out of the Covenant only for a moments time. Wouldn't it be wonderful to be a part of the Lord's Covenant for your entire life accept for this one moments time ? I wish I could say that for myself.

    P.S. to avoid confusion, I think it should be said that when the scriptures say that no adult in the New Covenant will have to be taught "know the Lord" it refers to that knowledge that we need to have about our lost condition and our need to accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior and not to other knowledge that helps us grow in the faith. Evem though a part of the Covenant, we still need to grow in knowledge the rest of our lives!

    [ May 14, 2003, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: Smoke Eater ]
     
  20. ONENESS

    ONENESS
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok, lets say an infant was baptized. Does the infant have to be baptized when he is older?

    God bless
     

Share This Page

Loading...