one baptism question

[JennyG]

Is it all right if I start up again just ONE of David's baptism questions?
What is the difference been baptism before and after Christ?
(Maybe this is an old PB warhorse that I just don't know about - please forgive me if so)

 

[Marrow Man]

From a Presbyterian perspective, Jenny, you might find the following statements (from the ARP Directory of Worship, which is different from the Westminster Directory) helpful:

The sacrament of baptism not only shows God’s grace but also is a means by which His grace is communicated to the elect, for “by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God’s own will, in His appointed time.”

In the administration of baptism, the emphasis is on God’s bringing people into covenant relationship with Himself. Baptism is not primarily a means through which one signifies a commitment to Christ. The baptism of children is not intended as a sign of their parents’ faith. Nor is it an act of dedication by the parents, giving up their child to God and seeking from God a blessing upon their child. All these things may accompany baptism, as our response to God. Nonetheless, the primary focus must be on God’s initiative to establish a covenant with His people: marking them as His own, assuring them of the truth of His promises, and calling them to covenant faithfulness.

The sacrament of baptism shall be administered only once to each person. The one who comes to faith after receiving Christian baptism does not need to be and should not be baptized again. Baptism is the sign of God’s covenant with His people, signifying and sealing all that He has promised to them and all that He requires of them. It is not a sign that one has repented and now believes. Consequently, though one might have been in the bondage of sin and without faith when he was baptized, God’s promises were nonetheless made to him and God’s demands were nonetheless placed upon him. His sin and unbelief did not make void the promises of God or nullify
His demands. As the apostle says, “What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar…”

 

[Herald]

And representing the Reformed Baptist view:

Chapter 29: Of Baptism

1. Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him; of remission of sins; and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.
( Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2;12; Galatians 3:27; Mark 1:4; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:4 )

2. Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.
( Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36, 37; Acts 2:41; Acts 8:12; Acts 18:8 )

3. The outward element to be used in this ordinance is water, wherein the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
( Matthew 28:19, 20; Acts 8:38 )

4. Immersion, or dipping of the person in water, is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance. ( Matthew 3:16; John 3:23 )

 

[Herald]

These opposing views have been brought to you courtesy of the Puritan Board, your friendly neighborhood theological repository.

 

[rbcbob]

 

[Osage Bluestem]

Are there any groups that just aren't sure so they baptize their infants by pouring or sprinkling and when those children grow up and profess faith rebaptize them with full immersion? That way we wouldn't miss anything.

 

[Marrow Man]

Are there any groups that just aren't sure so they baptize their infants by pouring or sprinkling and when those children grow up and profess faith rebaptize them with full immersion? That way we wouldn't miss anything.

Yes, we call those mainline denominations.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

Are there any groups that just aren't sure so they baptize their infants by pouring or sprinkling and when those children grow up and profess faith rebaptize them with full immersion? That way we wouldn't miss anything.

Yes, we call those mainline denominations.

Well, I'm confused about baptism and I can see it both ways. I'm afraid not to baptize my children and I'm worried that we should follow Christ in obedience in baptism when we profess faith...It's a tight spot really.

 

[Marrow Man]

The Reformed/Presbyterian perspective is that baptism is to be administered only once, but the children do publicly profess faith at a later time (and must do so before becoming communicant members of the church). But unless one believers in baptismal regeneration, it is not possible to administer baptism at the precise moment of conversion, so it will have to be "before" or "after" in some sense. Furthermore, I think it really hinges on one's doctrine of the church (what/who constitutes the "visible church" to be more precise).

 

[Osage Bluestem]

The Reformed/Presbyterian perspective is that baptism is to be administered only once, but the children do publicly profess faith at a later time (and must do so before becoming communicant members of the church). But unless one believers in baptismal regeneration, it is not possible to administer baptism at the precise moment of conversion, so it will have to be "before" or "after" in some sense. Furthermore, I think it really hinges on one's doctrine of the church (what/who constitutes the "visible church" to be more precise).

There are Godly men who oppose one another on this. That really bothers me, because both make good points.

 

[Willem van Oranje]

The Reformed do not claim to know whether or not their children are already regenerated at the time that they are presented for baptism. It may be sometime after baptism, including all the way to just prior to the individual's death at old age. It may be before baptism, even in the womb (a la John the Baptist.) And nothing hinders that it may possibly occur at the moment of baptism in some cases.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

The Reformed do not claim to know whether or not their children are already regenerated at the time that they are presented for baptism. It may be sometime after baptism, including all the way to just prior to the individual's death at old age. It may be before baptism, even in the womb (a la John the Baptist.) And nothing hinders that it may possibly occur at the moment of baptism in some cases.

When one who was baptized as an infant is made aware of his election because that one now has saving faith in Christ and is assured of his salvation, should that one be baptized as an outward sign of an inward reality that shows he has died with Christ and been raised to walk with him in a newness of life?

 

[Willem van Oranje]

No, first of all because re-baptism is impossible.

Secondly, he should do what the puritans called "improving upon his baptism" by looking back at his baptism as the outward sign and seal of the inward reality which has now become actual, and striving to live in thankfulness to God's gracious covenant which was promised to him as an infant when he was baptized. A seal of God's promise was placed on him as an infant, which has now come to fruition.

It's like a stamp on a letter which is later delivered. The outward sign and seal of baptism points to the grace of regeneration just as well if it occurs before the conversion, as it does post-conversion. Some would even say, it's better.

---------- Post added at 01:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:32 PM ----------

Take some time to study this subject and be clear in your own mind before you go ahead. Whatever you do, baptism should/can only be administered once.

Here is a book you may find helpful.

 

[Herald]

The Reformed do not claim to know whether or not their children are already regenerated at the time that they are presented for baptism. It may be sometime after baptism, including all the way to just prior to the individual's death at old age. It may be before baptism, even in the womb (a la John the Baptist.) And nothing hinders that it may possibly occur at the moment of baptism in some cases.

When one who was baptized as an infant is made aware of his election because that one now has saving faith in Christ and is assured of his salvation, should that one be baptized as an outward sign of an inward reality that shows he has died with Christ and been raised to walk with him in a newness of life?

David,

If you're asking that question of a Baptist, then yes, the individual should be administered believers baptism. Baptists do not believe that infant baptism is a qualified baptism. Therefore, an individual who is later administered believers baptism is being baptized for the first time. It is not re-baptism. That is the Baptist position.

 

[Willem van Oranje]

I should add that as a church member you ought to seek the counsel of your pastor and elders on this matter.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I should add that as a church member you ought to seek the counsel of your pastor and elders on this matter.

I imagine they are going to slap me with a broom. I'm supposed to be a firm paedo baptist.