Checking up on my "understanding" of paedo baptism.

[Joseph Scibbe]

(Please correct me if I err)

I have been recently think about the issue of baptism and I am finding myself leaning toward paedo (in the Preyterian sense). I want to check to see if I am getting it or way off so here goes:

When God made His covenant of circumcision with Abraham he made it with his descendant who is Christ (singular offspring Christ from Gal 3). Circumcision was required of all those who were under the covenant and their children. That was old covenant and the new covenant under Christ (offspring from Gal 3) requires that the covenantal terms continue with the new sign of the covenant (which, I think, most Baptists admit is baptism) be applied to the children as well. And while we have no explicit directives to baptize infants the language is of household baptisms just like we saw household circumcision in the OT and the connection would have been evident to the 1st Century Jewish converts.


So, am I getting it or am I flopping on the deck like a fish out of water spewing silliness everywhere?

 

[Contra_Mundum]

I think,
1) your first point is: that you see God making a covenant with Abraham, which is (in a deeper sense) a covenant with his Seed, Messiah;

2) your second point: a visible, bodily sign of covenant participation was given to those subordinate members (claimants) of this covenant, which included their own offspring;

3) your third point: the Seed now come himself, a new stage of covenant progress has come also, but the covenant is still basically the same, the sign has changed, but it is still to be given to all the subordinate members (claimants) of the covenant, which includes their offspring;

4) the NT data, both didactic and historic, does not conflict with the reading, but offers many points of corroboration, including the reception of entire households on the noted profession of a single prominent head of that house.

If this reflects your basic understanding, then I think (in limited, general outline form) you understand what this side is saying.

I would add, that we do not see evidence in the NT that children are removed from inclusion, but rather counsel is given to parents for them consistent with covenant principles; that children are directly addressed in NT teaching, both positively (Eph.6:1) and with warnings (1Jn.5:21); that our Lord explicitly stated that the Kingdom of Heaven belonged to such infants (Lk.18:15) as he took up in his arms, etc. (See Mk.10:1-16, Husbands, Wives, and Children in His Kingdom). There seems to us to be rather a general tone of continuity concerning the treatment of believers' children, from one covenant era to the next. If anything, the applicability of baptism to females as well as males (Gal.3:28) highlights the visible widening of the application of the blessings of this age, over the previous.


Finally, may I add that if you (and this is true for anyone) change your mind on baptism, please just go silently about it. There is no virtue in trumpeting such transference of allegiance, something that happens far too often. How embarrassing as well, when (as sometimes happens) a man "switches back" to his former views. Better to simply defend what one believes now, and make no apologies for what he formerly defended. If it is spiritual conviction, then it came from God anyway, not from one's penetrating insights, 1Cor.4:7, "What do you have that you did not receive?"

 

[Joseph Scibbe]

Finally, may I add that if you (and this is true for anyone) change your mind on baptism, please just go silently about it. There is no virtue in trumpeting such transference of allegiance, something that happens far too often. How embarrassing as well, when (as sometimes happens) a man "switches back" to his former views. Better to simply defend what one believes now, and make no apologies for what he formerly defended. If it is spiritual conviction, then it came from God anyway, not from one's penetrating insights, 1Cor.4:7, "What do you have that you did not receive?"

Absolutely, the only "trumpeting" you will hear from me is that I would change my confessional standards in my profile and that won't even be announced.