Baptism of Mentally Handicapped

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I agree with you on that truth, was just saying that God could have chosen to have applied towards those unable to receive Jesus through faith the blessing of salvation, as he could have lected to save all infants/those mentally challenged in His mercy. Could He do that? For sure, but did He? Not sure can prove for/against fully fromscripture, so we do end up trusting in God to do the right and just thing. None deserve to be saved, but God could have provided them the means to get saved.

David,

The matter is not what God is capable of doing, it is what God has actually done.

You tend to say one thing then contradict what you have said with another thing. For example, contrast what you stated in the above with this:

The God as he reveals Himself in the Bible, and most of all in His Son Jesus would love and provide salvation to be extended towards all infants, would he not?

Here you are trying to smuggle in a view that salvation should be extended to all infants, given some revelation you see in the Bible. This sentimentality is not helpful, nor is it accurate. You need to be more precise in exactly what you are trying to say to avoid having to walk back previous statements you have made when you are challenged. You also need to be mindful of what has been pointed out to you herein, especially since this very thread is taking place in a paedo-baptism sub-forum, where the answers given are to be from those that hold to paedo-baptism. This necessarily excludes yourself, given your affirmation of the LBCF, from providing answers to the questions posed. As what I have quoted demonstrates, you seem to be trying to brink the rules (testing the rules by coming close to breaking them) by posing statements affirming contrary views, albeit couched in a question. Please do not do this.

 

[Dachaser]

may I ask a question? This for information so that I may better understand how water baptism is viewed by those holding to infant baptism. Infants of saved parents are baptized as a sign of them being under the covering of their parents as being part of the community of God, but would still need to have a later "born again" experience to make them really part of it, correct? So just saved parents would have ifants baptized, correct?

 

[Edward]

So just saved parents would have ifants baptized, correct?

That would be the ordinary expectation (or, at least, one of the parents being a professing believer) but does not appear to be an absolute requriement. But while we can know whether or not someone has made a public profession of faith, we can't really know their heart and whether they are really saved, can we? And that would not impact the efficacy of the baptism.

You might read Chapter 56-5 of the PCA Book of Church Order, which provides guidance for the pastor to use in the Baptism. (Page 163-164 of this PDF http://www.pcaac.org/wp-content/upl...rint-for-web-bookmarks-links-rev.-10-5-16.pdf )

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

may I ask a question? This for information so that I may better understand how water baptism is viewed by those holding to infant baptism. Infants of saved parents are baptized as a sign of them being under the covering of their parents as being part of the community of God, but would still need to have a later "born again" experience to make them really part of it, correct? So just saved parents would have ifants baptized, correct?

For us Protestants (and Scripture!), there is nothing about baptism that implies the act of regeneration (being "born again") in the soteriological meaning. Baptism always points to the Cross (God's sign) and to God's own words (His seal) that all who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved. See also here.