Infant Baptism?
- Thread starter Zork
- Start date
- Status
FCC
Puritan Board Freshman
Good morning Ronny,
You will ignite a debate with this question! I can't think of many doctrines that divide the Reformed like infant baptism does. Welcome to the fold by the way!
To answer your questions, "Is it Biblical?" As a Reformed Presbyterian I will answer yes it is biblical! The WCF gives you an introduction to the doctrine so I would say follow up with the scripture references and prayer. Then study some other Reformed authors on the topic to learn more about it and pray! I would recommend Berkhof's Systematic Theology as a good starting point. He deals with the topic very well (in fact, it was Berkhof who first started me on the long road to infant baptism!).
Second, "does it make you less Reformed?" I would say no it doesn't. Some will disagree I am sure, but it doesn't make you less Reformed. Many of the most faithful ministers that I am aware of are Reformed Baptists. We are all growing and learning so continue to study and to learn! Spend much time in prayer and Bible reading so that you can grow in your sanctification!
May the Lord bless you in all the riches of His grace!
David
You will ignite a debate with this question! I can't think of many doctrines that divide the Reformed like infant baptism does. Welcome to the fold by the way!
To answer your questions, "Is it Biblical?" As a Reformed Presbyterian I will answer yes it is biblical! The WCF gives you an introduction to the doctrine so I would say follow up with the scripture references and prayer. Then study some other Reformed authors on the topic to learn more about it and pray! I would recommend Berkhof's Systematic Theology as a good starting point. He deals with the topic very well (in fact, it was Berkhof who first started me on the long road to infant baptism!).
Second, "does it make you less Reformed?" I would say no it doesn't. Some will disagree I am sure, but it doesn't make you less Reformed. Many of the most faithful ministers that I am aware of are Reformed Baptists. We are all growing and learning so continue to study and to learn! Spend much time in prayer and Bible reading so that you can grow in your sanctification!
May the Lord bless you in all the riches of His grace!
David
Infant baptism grows out of the Old Testament belief and practice that children born to believing parents are part of the covenant community and should be recognized as such. As in any covenantal sign, it holds out the promises of blessing to those who remain faithful to the covenant, and curses if the covenant is broken. As a parent, I recognize my role as a steward of the children God has given me and the awesome responsibility of bringing them up as covenant-keepers.
Historical lesson here.
Being Reformed has to do with theology and practice. The same goes for Reformed Baptists. You can't separate the two. The Baptists who put together the London Baptist Confessions never claimed to be Reformed even though they came out of their tradition. I believe they were noted as being Particular Baptist noting that they were not Reformed but held to the same tenants concerning the 5 points of Calvinism and a form of Covenant Theology (that did differ) from the Reformers.
Is infant Baptism biblical? I would say it is but you would have to understand that the Scriptures are one book and you would have to understand the continuity of the Bible in relationship to some of the things that are abrogated. The Continuity / Discontinuity issue plays into this discussion. Reformed Theology historically holds to a stronger continuity of the scriptures than the Particular Baptists held and hold to. So they aren't the same. It has to do with theology and practice.
While Luther was a Reformer he is not considered to be a Reformed Theologian. There is also something called the Radical Reformation which is heresy. Those people might be considered to be reformers but they are not at all Reformed.
You might want to ask others for recommendations on what books you can read online to help you understand Covenant Baptism better from both the paedo-baptist and credo-baptist positions.
Being Reformed has to do with theology and practice. The same goes for Reformed Baptists. You can't separate the two. The Baptists who put together the London Baptist Confessions never claimed to be Reformed even though they came out of their tradition. I believe they were noted as being Particular Baptist noting that they were not Reformed but held to the same tenants concerning the 5 points of Calvinism and a form of Covenant Theology (that did differ) from the Reformers.
Is infant Baptism biblical? I would say it is but you would have to understand that the Scriptures are one book and you would have to understand the continuity of the Bible in relationship to some of the things that are abrogated. The Continuity / Discontinuity issue plays into this discussion. Reformed Theology historically holds to a stronger continuity of the scriptures than the Particular Baptists held and hold to. So they aren't the same. It has to do with theology and practice.
While Luther was a Reformer he is not considered to be a Reformed Theologian. There is also something called the Radical Reformation which is heresy. Those people might be considered to be reformers but they are not at all Reformed.
You might want to ask others for recommendations on what books you can read online to help you understand Covenant Baptism better from both the paedo-baptist and credo-baptist positions.
Interesting?
Kim G
Puritan Board Junior
If you ask a Presbyterian, they will say it is biblical. If you ask a Reformed Baptist, they will say it is not biblical. I have heard the arguments for both sides and am stuck in the middle.
Some Presbyterians say you must be Presbyterian to be truly reformed. But many do not take it that far. Obviously Reformed Baptists do not agree with infant baptism and they consider themselves reformed.
Okay, will do that. Thanks for the input.
So if I agree with the London Baptist Confession it doesn't really make you "Reformed".
So you must agree with WCF then?
This is going to bother me until I understand it.
Ai ja jai.
---------- Post added at 02:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:52 PM ----------
If you ask a Presbyterian, they will say it is biblical. If you ask a Reformed Baptist, they will say it is not biblical. I have heard the arguments for both sides and am stuck in the middle.
Some Presbyterians say you must be Presbyterian to be truly reformed. But many do not take it that far. Obviously Reformed Baptists do not agree with infant baptism and they consider themselves reformed.
Thanx, very insightful.
But are there rules?(Like if you don't agree with that one point ,you are disqualified?)
I read a lot of commentaries about it last night. SO CONFUSING.
True what you say about Baptists(Read London Baptist confession.) No mention of it there.
Edward
Puritanboard Commissioner
It depends on the denomination. Some Presbyterian denominations require all members to subscribe to the Confession; others just require subscriptions by the officers. And among those that require subscription to the standards, some allow those officers to take exception to a particular provision of the standards if that exception does not strike at the heart of the doctrine. (A not uncommon exception in some presbyteries of the PCA, for example, would be for family recreation on the Lord's day). Infant baptism, however, should be one of those doctrines for which exception should not be made for those who subscribe.
This might help you a bit. I wrote it years ago and have had to edit it a bit since I became Reformed. I first wrote it as a Reformed Baptist.
http://www.puritanboard.com/blogs/p...storical-understanding-reformed-theology-316/
http://www.puritanboard.com/blogs/p...storical-understanding-reformed-theology-316/
Peairtach
Puritan Board Doctor
If a person doesn't agree with Calvinistic i.e. Reformed doctrine of salvation, he isn't Reformed in any sense.
(a) Total depravity
(b) Unconditional election
(c) Particular redemption
(d) Irresisitible grace
(e) Perseverance or preservation of the saints.
These truths attest to God's total sovereignty in salvation which is the hallmark of Reformed theology, along with Reformed theology's teaching on the covenants (i.e. Covenant Theology) as the way in which God relates to His creatures.
Presbyterians and Dutch Reformed would view the Reformed Baptist approach to the Covenant of Grace in the New Testament, and therefore also to the Church, as somewhat, if not very, half-baked.
Many would still be willing to talk about "Reformed Baptists" if they hold to Reformed soteriology, and have some kind of commitment to Covenant Theology, which nevertheless brakes down or gets garbled when we reach the New Testament.
Don't be anxious. The Lord will lead you into all truth if you seek his guidance in prayer and carefully search the Scriptures and compare Scripture with Scripture.
Neither side believes from Scripture that baptism is necessary for salvation. That's definitely not biblical or Reformed.
Many of our dear brothers in Christ on this board are Reformed Baptists who subscribe to the 1689 London Confession.
Curt
Puritan Board Graduate
Yes, Ronny. There are differing perspectives here on the PB, regarding baptism. At times this can cause division, although most on the PB act like ladies and gentlemen.
J. Dean
Puritan Board Junior
That's because we've had our coffee!
Seriously, while I grew up full immersion, I don't have a problem with infant baptism (save for the Catholic and Orthodox understandings of IB).
Constantlyreforming
Puritan Board Sophomore
I suggest you read three books on the subject.
The Bible, as one book, Genesis through Revelation
William the Baptist
Jesus Loves the Little Children, by Daniel Hyde
The Bible, as one book, Genesis through Revelation
William the Baptist
Jesus Loves the Little Children, by Daniel Hyde
Hi.
As a new Reformed believer I never heard of Baptizing infants.
I was studying the WCF last night and I came across Infant Baptism, Is it Biblical?
Does it make me less Reformed if I don't agree with that one point?
Thanks in advance.
Help Please.
It would, in conjunction with some other points, make you what today is called a Reformed Baptist. The two terms together modify one another: it is not "Reformed", simply - it is Reformed Baptist, with Baptist distinctives appended to and modifying standard Reformed doctrine. But it is not baptist simply, it is Reformed Baptist, with a calvinistic, and indeed a Westminsterian and covenantal confession.
Marrow Man
Drunk with Powder
I moved this thread to the Baptism forum since that seems more appropriate.
If the WCF copy you have came with the footnotes, then that should answer the question. Consider that not only the Westminster divines held to this view, but virtually all of the 16th century Reformers, who were "sola Scriptura." Obviously they felt it was biblical.
If you are Baptist as your signature indicates. It will not be just this one point with which you will differ. I would suspect your view of church government will also be different from the WCF.
If the WCF copy you have came with the footnotes, then that should answer the question. Consider that not only the Westminster divines held to this view, but virtually all of the 16th century Reformers, who were "sola Scriptura." Obviously they felt it was biblical.
If you are Baptist as your signature indicates. It will not be just this one point with which you will differ. I would suspect your view of church government will also be different from the WCF.
rbcbob
Puritan Board Graduate
I tend to say that Reformed Baptists are "further reformed". Paedobaptists (infant baptistizers) and Credobaptists (believer baptizers) get along fairly well on this board.
Personally, I think William the Baptist was a better book on mode than it was on subjects but it is still worth a read.
I would also read some books from the other side. Unfortunately, many use dispensational reasoning. Perhaps some good credo recommendations should be made as well. When I studied the subject, I read books from both perspectives before I came to a conclusion.
Here are some credo side books:
1. From Paedobaptism to Credobaptism by Gary Crampton (Is the best one out there in my opinion because it is not dispensational or anti-continuity)
2. Baptism of Disciples Alone by Fred Malone (Southern Baptist, so a lot of the arguments are anti-continuity)
3. Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace by Paul Jewett (Haven't read it but has been recommended)
Paedo Side
1. William the Baptist
2. Covenant Baptism by Peter Bloomfield
3. Baptism in Scripture and History by Rowland S. Ward
Obviously there are many more that you may want to go with.
GulfCoast Presbyterian
Puritan Board Senior
Aye! All Paedobaptists are also Credobaptists!
Constantlyreforming
Puritan Board Sophomore
Andres
Puritan Board Doctor
Here is a short blog post I wrote in December titled, Why I Chose to Have my Infant Son Baptized. I wrote it with the target audience of friends/family who weren't familiar with paedobaptism, so it's a very simple read.
Mathetes
Puritan Board Freshman
I'm curious how Baptist and Presbyterian views on church government differ. Don't they both believe in a multiplicity of elders?
For what it's worth, when I deconverted from Roman Catholicism and went church-searching for a good biblical Protestant church, I attended two of the Presbyterian churches here in Toronto for quite a while. I was still undecided on the issue of paedo/credobaptism when I started attending a Reformed Baptist church, so it's never been the issue to make me choose between one or the other. But after I thought about it for a while, it seems to me that circumcision was in times past a seal of the old covenant. And with the coming of Jesus, baptism has become the seal of the new. On this, I think we agree. But it seems to me that while one is born into the old covenant, one is reborn into the new, as per John3:5. Now, I don't refer to John 3:5 because of the reference to water. I don't believe that Jesus is speaking of baptism, but instead referring to Ezekiel 36:25-27. But if that is a passage about regeneration, then it appears to me that one has to be regenerate to be a part of the kingdom of God. If so, then if baptism is in fact a seal of the new covenant, then the seal should be administered when one is in fact a part of said covenant.
Now, I have heard the objection that we don't really have a window into a person's heart and that a person may be baptized and then become an apostate. But I don't think that we were ever intended to have an infallible criteria to determine someone's regenerate state. As per John 15:8, if bearing fruit is sufficient to prove one's status as a disciple, then it should be a sufficient criteria to allow baptism.
Ok that was long-winded, but I'm just curious what the paedo response to that would be.
A lot. Probably should start another thread though.
jgilberAZ
Puritan Board Freshman
Not trying to argue ... truly just seeking information ... as a relatively recent reformed (Baptist) myself. Well, I say recent reformed, but that's not entirely correct. My studies have led me to calvinism, then reformed theology (for the most part) ... only recently though aligning myself with a reformed baptist church instead of a Dispensational baptist church.
That said ... as scripture is our rule and authority ...
What is the scriptural support showing that baptism in the new covenant is the same (or a replacement for) circumcision in the old covenant?
Thanks.
That said ... as scripture is our rule and authority ...
What is the scriptural support showing that baptism in the new covenant is the same (or a replacement for) circumcision in the old covenant?
Thanks.
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but for a Baptist, the seal of the New Covenant is the Holy Spirit, not baptism.
GulfCoast Presbyterian
Puritan Board Senior
The vast majority of Baptist churches are congregationalist, and many SBC churches are very anti-elder rule. See this polemic, for example: http://baptistcenter.com/11 Wring Revision.pdf
Mathetes
Puritan Board Freshman
I thought that was Pentecostals, but we may be talking about different things.
nicnap
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I prefer to say Full-baptists (a.k.a covenantal baptists/Presbyterians/household baptizers/ and if we must paedobaptists) and half-baptists (professor/"believer" only baptists).
- Status
