 A
Contemporary Reformed Defense of Infant Baptism
(c) 2005 R. Scott Clark. All Rights Reserved.
I appreciate Scott Clark,
D.Phil. - Professor of Church History and Historical Theology -
Westminster Seminary California for his permission to post this on my website
please check out the link:
Among Western Christians there are four major
views on baptism:1
1.) Baptism is the
means of spiritual renewal and initial justification and sanctification through
the infusion of grace received in it, in such a way that one cannot be saved
ordinarily without it. Baptism communicates saving grace, by the working of its
own power. Children of all church members and unbaptized adult converts must be
baptized (Roman Catholic).2
2.) Baptism is a
public testimony to one's faith in Jesus Christ. Only those who have reached the
age of discretion can make such a profession of faith. Therefore, only those who
are able to confess Christ should be baptized. (Baptist). 3
3.) Baptism is so
closely related to the gospel that through it, Christians receive eternal life
and without baptism there can be no assurance of salvation. Both the children of
believers and unbaptized adult believers should be baptized (Lutheran). 4
4.) Baptism is a means
of sanctifying grace and a gospel ministry to the people of God. It is a sign
and seal of the Covenant of Grace illustrating what Christ has done for his
people and sealing salvation to the same. Therefore covenant children of
believing parents as well as unbaptized adult converts should be baptized.
(Reformed).5
Protestants uniformly reject the Roman Catholic view of baptism as unbiblical
and sub-Christian since it replaces faith as the instrument of justification.
Among Bible-believing Protestant churches, the Baptist view is easily the most
common and the Reformed view is probably the least well known. The view labeled
Lutheran is probably somewhere in the middle in popularity.6
Unfortunately, many Bible-believing Christians assume that all infant baptizing
(paedobaptist) churches are identical.7 This essay is intended in
part to change that perception. I believe (perhaps naively) that if more
Bible-believing Christians understood the Reformed view of baptism, they would
accept our explanation of what God's Word says about baptism. I also intend to
give Reformed believers a clearer understanding of what God's Word says about
baptism and to answer objections which are often made against the Reformed
position.
Endnotes
* Revised August, 2004. References to the Greek
New Testament are drawn from the United Bible Society's Greek New Testament 3rd
edition and the Nestle-Aland 26th edition. The references to the Hebrew Bible
are drawn from the Biblia Hebriaca Stuttgartesnsia (© 1977). References from
the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the O.T. used by the N.T. authors,
abbreviated LXX) are from the Rahlfs edition. In most instances I have provided
my own English translations. Nevertheless, this essay has consulted a number of
English Bible translations, among them the New International Version (©1984,
International Bible Society), the New American Standard (1971) and the Revised
Standard Version (1951).
1 These categories are rough and ready.
For example, by Baptist I do not mean only those who attend Baptist
congregations, but rather most non-infant baptizing evangelical congregations in
North America. Note also that there are other Christian traditions not in this
list which wield some influence in North America. For example, the Campellite
tradition (The Church of Christ; the Christian Church) teaches a type of
baptismal regeneration, (formally resembling the Lutheran position) but denies
infant baptism (formally resembling the Baptist position).
2 See the Catechism of the Catholic
Church (1994), 1210-84.
3 The Baptist Faith and Message adopted
by the Southern Baptist Church (San Francisco, 1962), Article 8 says, "Christian
baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer's
faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Savior, the believer's death to sin, the
burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in
Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the
dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church
membership and to the Lord's Supper. The Lord's Supper is a symbolic act of
obedience whereby members of the church, through partaking of the bread and the
fruit of the vine, memorialize the death of the Redeemer and anticipate his
second coming." The Baptist position has received the significant support of
Karl Barth in his Church Dogmatics.
Many Baptistic churches also allow the
practice of baby dedication. It would appear that this rite substitutes for
baptism of the children of believers. Why? Because believers instinctively know
that they need to present their children to God. Like the altar call this is a
human substitute for divinely instituted covenant signs and seals of baptism and
the Lord's Supper. Baptism is the sign of entrance or initiation into the
visible Covenant assembly (church). Baby dedication fulfills this function.
Similarly, the altar call often effectively replaces the Lord's Supper as an
opportunity for believers to respond to God's grace.
Regarding the mode of baptism there are
two major procedures: effusion (sprinkling, pouring) and immersion. Historically
orthodox Christians have accepted any mode of Christian baptism. Baptists,
however, usually acknowledge only immersion. Although this has not always been
the case. "The original Baptists did not immerse" (B. B. Warfield, "The
Archeology of the Mode of Baptism," Studies in Theology [Oxford, 1932], 347,
n.10). This also unites them with the Campbellites and distinguishes them from
the Reformed position. The latter have historically practiced effusion.
The argument over mode is really an
argument about what is the appropriate action in baptism to symbolize the truths
of baptism. If baptism is the gospel made visible and if we are baptized as an
act of identity with Christ's death, then how we ought best symbolize those
truths?
The Reformed practice of effusion draws
from the rich history of the Biblical practice of sprinkling for sanctification
and salvation. The typical Hebrew term for effusion/sprinkling is Zaraq (e.g.,
Exodus 29.16-21) which is translated with a variety of terms in the LXX. Two of
the more interesting passages for understanding the Biblical background and
basis for the Reformed practice of effusion are the Passover painting of the
door-posts with the blood of the Lamb (Exodus 12:22) and Exodus 24:1-8.
In the former case, the Hebrew verb "to
dip" is Tabal which was translated in the LXX with Baptizen, apparently
strengthening the Baptist case. Yet, notice that the hyssop branch was "dipped"
but the redeeming blood was "touch[ed]" (RSV) to the door-post. In the latter
case, Moses "took the blood and sprinkled (Zaraq/Kataskedannumi) it upon the
people, and said, "Behold the blood of the covenant which the LORD has made with
you...". This is the sort of image Peter meant to invoke when he spoke of the
sprinkling (Rantismos) of Christians with the blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:2).
In fact the word baptize and its
cognate Baptein is used routinely in the LXX to describe ceremonial washings.
The Jews were not in the habit of immersing objects for purification. Look at
two notable immersions in the Old Covenant Scriptures. Peter compares God's
judgment-flood to baptism (1 Peter 3:20,21, See also 2 Peter 3;6,
7). Notice in the case of Noah's baptism who was dry and who was immersed. The
same is true of Moses' "baptism" in the Red Sea (See 1 Corinthians 10:1-13).
Exodus repeatedly reminds us that Moses and the Israelites went through "on dry
ground" (See Exodus 14:16, 22; 15:19; Psalm 66:6; Hebrews 11:29). Paul
explicitly makes the point that Israel was "baptized in the sea" and yet it was
dry baptism. The only ones immersed were Pharaoh's armies. It would seem, in the
Israelite mind, that to be immersed would constitute an identification not with
the God of the Exodus, but Pharaoh. This would hardly be appropriate for
Christian baptism.
"Why," one might ask, "in the New
Testament, do people go "down" to or "in" the river to be baptized?" (See
Matthew 3:6,16; Acts 8:38). It is not certain that either John or Jesus was
immersed. Practically, if one is to baptize in the desert, one must stand in the
water. In the mass baptism of Acts 2:41 it is unlikely that 3000 people were
immersed in the city's water supply. If the Ethiopian Eunuch was immersed, so
was Philip who baptized him. Both men are governed by the same Greek preposition
(Eis). So, if the immersionist view is correct, that the jailer was immersed,
then both men went "into" (i.e., were immersed) the water. More likely, both men
went "to" the water or perhaps both men stood "in" the water. For more
information on the verb Baptize see J. W. Dale, Baptizo (Philadelphia, 1869 [repr.
1991-5]). See also Jay Adams, The Meaning and Mode of Baptism. Reformed churches
who sprinkle infants do so on strong Biblical grounds and not out of sentiment
or personal preference.
4 Article 9 of the Augsburg Confession
(1530) says, "Of Baptism they teach that it is necessary to salvation, and that
through Baptism is offered the grace of God, and that children are to be
baptized who, being offered to God through Baptism are received into God's
grace. They condemn the Anabaptists, who reject the baptism of children, and say
that children are saved without Baptism."
5 The Heidelberg Catechism (1563), Q.69
says, 'How is it signified and sealed to you in Holy Baptism, that you have part
in the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross? Thus: that Christ instituted this
outward washing with water and joined therewith this promise: that I am washed
with his blood and Spirit from the pollution of my soul, that is, from all my
sins, as certainly as I am washed outwardly with water, whereby commonly the
filthiness of the body is taken away; Q.70: 'What is it to be washed with the
blood and Spirit of Christ? It is to have the forgiveness of sins from God
through grace, for the sake of Christ's blood, which he shed for us in his
sacrifice on the cross; and also, to be renewed by the Holy Spirit and
sanctified to be members of Christ, that so we may more and more die unto sin
and lead holy and unblamable lives'; Q.72: 'Is then the outward washing with
water itself the washing away of sins? No, for only the blood of Jesus Christ
and the Holy Spirit cleanse us from all sin'. See Belgic Confession (1561),
Art.34; Art. 27 of the Thirty Nine Articles (1662); Westminster Confession
(1647), chapter 28.
6 The Southern Baptist Convention is
America's largest Protestant denomination. The Evangelical Lutheran Church of
America (ELCA) and the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) are smaller, but
much larger than all the confessional Reformed denominations added together.
7 The technical word for those who
baptize the children of believers is paedobaptist from the Greek word for child
Pais plus the Greek Baptizo which has been brought directly into English.
| 