Featured Is Baptism the New Circumcision?

The credo-baptist positions stated by Biblicist, Michael Wren, Moriah, and Scarlett and others certainly seem like a plausible, reasonable interpretation of Scripture.

But Colossians 2:11-12 still troubles me.


Colossians 2:11-12
English Standard Version (ESV)

11 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, 12 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.

Here is how this verse literally reads to me:

1. We are circumcised into Christ by a circumcision made without hands.
2. God removes something from us (by putting off the body of the flesh)
3. God removes "this body of the flesh" in this circumcision made without hands.
4. This circumcision made without hands is Christ's circumcision, the Christian circumcision.
5. This Christ circumcision (Christian circumcision) occurs at the time of baptism
6. We are buried with Christ at the time of baptsim
7 We are also raised up in baptism by our faith in the power of God.

To me these verses say that baptism does not save. It is our faith in God at the time of our baptism that saves.

But to interpret the Greek word for baptism (baptisma) in these verses to mean anything other than "to dip/immerse in water" seems like a real over-reach. If the Greek word always means to dip/immerse in water, disallowing that sprinkling and pouring can be substituted, as valid alternatives , then how do Baptists justify interpreting "baptisma" as a baptism of the Holy Spirit?

If God says "baptism" he means water baptism unless He specifically states otherwise.

In the OT, circumcision did NOT save infants. But it was a sign of promise that God WOULD save them if they grew up and placed their personal faith in Him.

Jews in Jesus day were baptizing Gentile infants to bring them into the Jewish faith to worship the God of Abraham. This baptism did not save them, it just was a mark of promise.

Jesus and the disciples continue the practice of household conversion without any mention to the Jews that their children had to convert to the new faith in a different manner than what they had done in the old covenant.

There is no mention of infant baptism in the NT because it wasn't necessary. Everyone assumed that infants of believer's were brought into the New Covenant in the same way as in the Old Covenant.

In both convenants, the sign DOES NOT SAVE ANYONE!

The infant is given the promise of salvation at the time of the sign, but then that child must fulfill his side of the covenant when he is older and place his faith and obedience in God. It is the individual's faith that saves him, not the "mark" or "sign" he received as an infant.

One criticism of credo-baptists is that when the Philippian jailer converted, that his whole house believed and praised God. It says nothing about infants.

But if I came to the home of the Wilson family (Mr. Wilson, Mrs. Wilson, John age 18, Mary age 12, Luke age 4, and Thomas age 1) and announced to them that they had just won a prize for alot of money. How would I record the event?

"I went to the house of the Wilson family today and told them that they had just won ten thousand dollars. They did not believe it at first, but when I showed them the cashier's check, they all believed, rejoiced and asked me to stay for dinner."

Or would I have said it this way:

"I went to the house of the Wilson family and told them that they had just won ten thousand dollars. The parents and older children did not believe me at first, and of course the 4 year old and the 1 year old did not understand me, but when I showed the older children and the parents the cashier's check, the parents and the older children who had reached an age of discernment, believed, rejoiced and asked me to stay for dinner."

So the statements by Luke, the writer of Acts, inspired by the Holy Spirit, do not give any support for the credo-baptist view that it was only the adults who were baptized. It just demonstrates that infants could be included without having to expressly exclude them in giving the details of what happened.

 

It seems like I and my credo-baptist brothers and sisters are speaking past each other. I doubt that we will ever see eye to eye on this issue.

Bottom line is this: If you are Lutheran, Roman Catholic, Anglican, Methodist, etc. and you believe that your infant baptism is your automatic ticket into heaven, YOU ARE DEAD WRONG! If you are living a life of sin and disobedience to God, even though you were baptized, you may one day wake up in Hell!

Salvation has always been by God's grace, received through faith. Circumcision itself never saved anyone in the OT and baptism by itself has never saved anyone in the NT or today.

If you are living a life of sin, disobedient to God's will, REPENT now! Call out to Christ to forgive you of your sins, to be your Lord and Savior, and strive to follow his will for your life.

But, don't just repent and believe by faith in Christ today...do it everyday of your life!

You are not saved by baptism or any other work or good deed. You are saved by grace through faith. We orthodox Christians may believe that God gives the promise of salvation in infant baptism, but the realization/activation of the benefits of that promise (eternal life) does not occur until you turn to Christ as an adult or older child, place your faith in him, repent, and choose to follow him.

Without your personal faith in Christ as your Savior, and repentance, your baptsim has no significance other than getting wet!

Repent and believe by faith in Christ as your Savior!

 

Salvation has always been by grace through faith.

Salvation occurs by a circumcision of the heart, a spiritual circumcision, made without hands, but according to the verse quoted, it occurs at the time of "baptisma"=dipping/immersion in water.

It isn't the immersion that saves, it is the power of the Holy Spirit that saves. But in that verse, the clear, simple grammatically correct interpretation, says that this spiritual circumcision occurs at the time of water immersion.

 

I can't speak for the RCC but as a Lutheran, I can tell you this:

Yes, we believe God regenerates in infant baptism, like planting a seed in fertile ground. But if that child grows up and rejects God, lives a life of willful sin, the seedling will die, and the promise of eternal life will die with it.

Personal faith in Christ and repentance is always required for salvation in Lutheran theology, whether you are an infant or an adult.

If an adult non-believer wants to be saved, all he has to do is believe in Christ as his personal Savior, repent of his sins, and choose to follow Christ. We also believe he should be baptized. But he was saved by the power of the Holy Spirit, when God caused him to believe and repent.

He was not regenerated at the time of his baptism, but before when he believed. He was saved, like Abraham, before receiving the sign of the covenant.

For infants, we believe the salvation paradigm of the Old Testament continues into the New Covenant: the infants of believers receive the sign of promise, the sign of the promise of salvation, first. Then to receive the benefits of that promise, they must grow up and place their faith in Christ as their personal Savior, repent of their sins, and follow Christ.

One difference between Lutherans and some Baptists, is that this act of expressing faith and repenting is a one time event for some Baptists. We Lutherans believe that repentance, expressing faith in Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, choosing to follow His will, is a DAILY event for the rest of our lives.

We are not saved by trying to do good deeds, being a good person, going to church regularly, etc. We believe that we are saved by grace, through a personal faith and relationship with Christ.

Unfortunately, there are a good many Lutherans and orthodox Christians who believe that simply being baptized guarantees them salvation. They obviously were not paying attention in Lutheran worship services, Sunday School, or in their catechism (doctrinal teachings).

God plants a seed of faith in infant baptism. Yes, if that child dies at age 9 months we believe that God will save him. But if that child is not instructed in the ways of God and grows up to live a life devoid of God, he will not be saved.

Bottom line: Lutherans believe like Baptists that salvation is ONLY by grace, received through faith. Our difference is that we believe God can plant the seed of faith in an infant and then the infant when older must express faith in Christ, repent and follow him, where Baptists will say that God does not do anything at baptism. The child must reach a certain age and then make a decision for Christ, repent, etc.

So in actuality, we arrive at the same place: individual repentance, faith placed in Christ as our personal Savior, a decision to follow Christ and his will as expressed in his Word.

If you do not believe that the Lutheran Church teaches these doctrines, I encourage you to go to the website of the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod, www.lcms.org and read the section on Lutheran doctrine. Two good books to read are: the Lutheran Difference by Concordia Publishing and Spiritual Baptism by Saarnivaara.