# Baptism in the Patristic Age



## eqdj (Oct 12, 2010)

I really appreciate Dr. Fesko's summary comment of baptism in the Patristic Age in his "Word, Water, and Spirit: A Reformed Perspective on Baptism"(pg. 35)



> When asking questions of historical theology, one should be cautious and not appeal to one aspect of a theologian's views to claim evidence for one particular position apart from an examination of the whole. In this case, one should not merely investigate whether infants were or were not baptized, but also, when they were, seek the theological reason. While there might be a parallel between current Baptist practice and that of Tertullian, the two practices seem worlds apart theologically. Equating the two positions is like saying that Baptists and Roman Catholics believe the same thing about baptism of adults. The same must be said about historical defenses of Protestant paedobaptism. Investigators should stipulate the very different theological assumptions underlying early expression on infant baptism. It is therefore important to observe the characteristics and theologies of an expressed view of baptism, but also to offer some analysis as to why a view was expressed in the manner it was.



Dr. Fesko's comment on baptism in the early church is consistent with other published paedobaptist authors, cf. Prof. David Wright "Infant Baptism in Historical Perspective" and Profs Hendrick Stander and Johannes Louw's "Baptism in the Early Church"


----------



## eqdj (Oct 13, 2010)

I would also add to the list of paedobaptist authors with a similar view of the Baptism in the Patristic Age: Sinclair Ferguson in "Baptism: Three Views"


----------

