Baptism

A Study of Baptism in Scripture, Part 1

By Dan Miller Wed, 09/14/2011 - 11:00pm

The investigation of historical evidence for believer’s baptism1 has been less profitable than one might wish. It did little to persuade my paedo-baptist friends to convert to credo-baptism. And the ensuing discussion made me a little concerned about whether they are still my friends. Before going forward with the last part of the discussion, let’s look at biblical evidence for infant and believer’s baptism.

Apostolic practice

First, what do the Scriptures say was done under the supervision of the apostles? The book of Acts tells of new believers who were baptized and welcomed into the church. The baptism of believing adults was part of the missionary endeavor of the church. Jesus commanded it in the Great Commission.

In Acts 8:36-38, Philip finishes explaining the gospel to an Ethiopian eunuch.

And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?” And Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he replied, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”2 And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him.

Baptists sometimes point to v. 37 as a clear statement about what it takes to be baptized: faith. But a closer look will show that it doesn’t logically exclude infant baptism. The eunuch asks, “What prevents me from baptism?” Peter answers: faith. “Me” in this question is an adult. What prevents an adult from being baptized? Faith. Reformed paedo-baptists would give the same answer today. Like Philip, they refuse to baptize an adult who does not give a credible profession of faith. But the eunuch only asked about himself. He didn’t ask about infants.read more

The Reformers' Defense of Infant Baptism

By kenrathbun Mon, 07/18/2011 - 11:00pm

Reprinted with permission from Faith Pulpit (Apr-Jun, 2011).

Sola Gracia, Sola Fide. Sola Scriptura. These affirmations are held to be the guiding principles of the Reformers. However, one of my professors in graduate school, a Catholic scholar of the Reformation, openly questioned the Reformers’ commitment to the last of these principles: sola scriptura. At the time I quickly dismissed his query, considering the source of the objection. But later, as I studied the Reformation at another university, I began to rethink his idea, especially regarding infant baptism. I concluded it was important to revisit the 16th century baptismal controversy in order to understand how the Reformers justified infant baptism.

Baptists see the Reformers’ defense of infant baptism as a concession to a historical practice over the Word of God. Is that a correct assessment? Did the Reformers violate their own guiding principles in defending infant baptism?

The issue of infant baptism affected many other areas of doctrine in the Reformation, including the use of church discipline, the concern for the purity of the lives of church members, and especially the practice of allowing the unsaved into the membership of the Reformers’ churches. All of these issues in the Reformation have left tangible results in the contemporary church scene and deserve further investigation.1

This article will briefly explore how the Reformers defended infant baptism.2 The three major recognized Reformers are Ulrich Zwingli, Martin Luther, and John Calvin. I will add a lesser-known Reformer, Martin Bucer, who also was prominent in the controversy over infant baptism.read more

  • 816 reads

Baptism in History, Part 4: Historical Arguments for Believer's Baptism

By Dan Miller Thu, 03/10/2011 - 12:00am

Read Parts 1, 2 and 3.

Either we should baptize only believers or we should baptize believers and their babies. One of these must be right; the other must be wrong. One is old and apostolic; the other is newer. For the purpose of this paper, assume this much: The very early church practiced one teaching; the other developed later in the life of the church.

In the baptism debate, history seems unsatisfactory for two reasons. First, history is not clearly on either side of the debate. There were at least a few ancient Christians who seem to have practiced each baptismal system (or something near to it). And many old sources are vague enough that both sides claim them. Together, these mean that everyone comes away believing that they are in agreement with the vast majority of historical figures.

Second, very few early church figures take either of the Protestant views of baptism. Like modern credo-baptists, Justin Martyr taught believer’s baptism and claimed that such teaching was apostolic. But he also conflated baptism with regeneration. Baptists can point to him as the earliest clear witness for believer’s baptism, but have trouble with his view of regeneration. Early church history offers even less comfort to Protestant infant baptizers. I know of no one before the Reformation who held to infant baptism and avoided errors such as baptismal regeneration, infant communion and infant damnation.read more

Baptism in History, Part 3

By Dan Miller Tue, 10/05/2010 - 11:00pm

Baptism of AugustineRead Part 1 and Part 2

We have seen evidence that some in the very early church may have baptized believers only. And we have seen that in the second through fourth centuries there was a mixture of practices, with both infant and believer’s baptism. At the beginning of the fifth century something happened that caused infant baptism to become the widespread practice of the church. That something was a someone—Augustine. Perhaps no single person except Jesus and Paul had a more powerful influence on the teachings of the church than did Augustine. Everyone who sought to be orthodox throughout the Medieval and Reformation periods called himself Augustinian. Though I am not an authority on Augustine and I have not read all that he wrote on baptism, I want to note a few things that might give pause to the acceptance of his thinking on baptism.

In Confessions (A.D. 398) Augustine tells of his formative experiences with baptism.read more

Baptism in History, Part 2

By Dan Miller Tue, 08/10/2010 - 11:00pm

Read Part 1.

The writings of the third and fourth centuries reveal varying teachings on baptism. These include baptismal regeneration, baptism as a replacement for circumcision, and baptism as a step of faith. The church accepts some of these arguments today. Others have been rejected. Conclusions some claim are apostolic but which are based on rejected propositions should be viewed with skepticism.

Tertullian, in On Baptism (early 3rd century), argues against infant baptism: “[T]he delay of baptism is preferable; principally, however, in the case of little children.”1 He gives several reasons. One is that the infant is “innocent.” The church under the more theologically precise Augustine soon rejected the “innocence” of infants. But if we read Tertullian generously, as not necessarily commenting on original sin, but as asserting that the status of an infant is “safe,” then the church agrees (see the Westminster Confession of Faith, Calvin, Hodge, Shedd, and Warfield [all referenced by Boettner2] and Spurgeon3). Although Augustine later rightly contradicted Tertullian’s words, Tertullian may have stood on a relatively orthodox basis when he argued for credo-baptism.read more

Baptism in History, Part 1

By Dan Miller Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:00pm

The very early tradition of the Christian church

An examination of baptism in the first few centuries of the church brings up many questions. The most important of these is, what did the Apostles teach in Scripture? But both paedobaptists1 and credobaptists can easily read Scripture in light of their own tradition. This series focuses on history. What was the very early tradition of the Christian church? Part 1 focuses on the period closely following the completion of Scripture. In this period, each writer has either first-hand or second-hand exposure to an Apostle. Part 2 will explore the next period: what was taught and practiced between the very early church era and Augustine? Part three will focus on Augustine: what was Augustine’s contribution to the doctrine of baptism?

Eusebius: “brought up” then baptized

What did those with close exposure to the Apostles teach? In The History of the Church, written in the 4th century, Eusebius relates this story:read more

Our Understanding and Practice of Baptism

By Warren Vanhetloo Mon, 05/18/2009 - 11:00pm

BaptismWhat is to be our understanding and practice of baptism today? As I have endeavored to do in recent issues, we need to think separately of form and meaning. There is but one form of water immersion anywhere in Scripture, one person submerging another and raising that other one up out of the water. There are no specific words to be said at such a time. There are no restrictions as to where baptism might be done (in early Michigan, people chopped a hole in the ice for immersions).  There is no restriction as to who might be qualified to perform an immersion. It would seem that the form is completely undebatable, yet for the last ten centuries or so, there have been major differences.

The significance of the action of submerging and raising, as these surveys have shown, has differed with additional revelatory action by God. The immersions of John were a witness of the individual’s repentance for the remission of sins (Mark 1:4). Immersions by disciples of Jesus continued the personal testimony of the one immersed and added John’s identification of Jesus as the promised Messiah. The teaching of water immersion was to declare one’s death to a sinful past and beginning of a new walk. Jesus later added the coming of His own physical death to the figure (Matt. 20:22-23).
read more

  • 463 reads

Infant Baptism As Sin

By Greg Linscott Fri, 03/20/2009 - 5:49am

Justin Taylor highlights the mini-controversy surrounding Mark Dever’s labeling of infant baptism as sin
Rick Phillips of Reformation21 provides another paedo response, while Ben Wright draws a parallel to Fundamentalist practices

  • 712 reads