zsmcd
Puritan Board Freshman
I am in transition from being a paedo to credo Baptist. Even so, I still struggle with how the implications of credo(only) baptism plays out practically in our ecclesiology. I hear a lot now about churches fencing off baptism from anyone in adolescence until they have experienced the pull of the world and the flesh and are outside of their parents home (even if they show real signs of faith and repentance). While I understand the concern with how American Christianity has made baptism almost meaningless due to a sort of easy believism, I feel that this is more of a 'pragmatic' approach to protecting baptism than it is a biblical approach.
- How is Paul able to address children in the church in Eph 6 and Col 3 if they are not a part of the covenant community? Is it assumed that these children are baptized believers?
- If we fence off baptism from possibly regenerate young believers aren't we keeping from them the sign of the covenant that they have a right to? Wouldn't we be disobeying Christ's command to baptize the disciples we make, regardless of their age and experience outside of the home/local church?
- If we do baptize young children, how does church discipline work itself out when a baptized 12 year old church member becomes unrepentant? Where is the line drawn between church and family discipline?
- How is Paul able to address children in the church in Eph 6 and Col 3 if they are not a part of the covenant community? Is it assumed that these children are baptized believers?
- If we fence off baptism from possibly regenerate young believers aren't we keeping from them the sign of the covenant that they have a right to? Wouldn't we be disobeying Christ's command to baptize the disciples we make, regardless of their age and experience outside of the home/local church?
- If we do baptize young children, how does church discipline work itself out when a baptized 12 year old church member becomes unrepentant? Where is the line drawn between church and family discipline?
