Introduction

At CityLights Church, we love our children! The Bible teaches that children are a heritage from the Lord (Psalm 127:3) and Jesus Christ himself joyfully welcomed children in his presence (Mark 10:13-36).  As parents, we are commanded to train up our children in the Lord (Proverbs 22:6; Ephesians 6:4) and our children in the church are called to obey their parents in the Lord (Ephesians 6:1).  Christian children are considered holy as a result of their parents standing in the New Covenant (1 Corinthians 7:14). 

Because of the value that the Bible places on children, it is important that churches have a theology of children and understanding their relationship to Christ and the church.  This begins by understanding how children of believing parents are seen within the context of the believing community, the church.  Understanding this helps us know how to care for, minister, and disciple our children. 

At CityLights, we root our beliefs, practices, and convictions in the Bible.  At the same time, we recognize we are influenced by our theological tradition. In other words, we build our theology on the Bible while recognizing our interpretation is influenced by our tradition which assists us in how we develop theological convictions. 

CityLights Church is a church in the Reformed tradition which recognizes various beliefs within the doctrine of the Reformed tradition. We do not exclude beliefs that belong in the broad flow of Reformed convictions.  We stand together in the Gospel and recognize that we can disagree theologically with others on finer points within our theological tradition.  As a result, our theology of children is shaped by our view of Scripture in light of our reformed convictions. 

Below you will find a “sketch” of our view of children in light of the Bible’s teaching of children.  In order to do this, we will go from Genesis to Revelation to see how children are viewed in the Bible. 

Biblical Covenants

At CityLights Church, we teach what is known as “covenant theology.”  Covenant theology is a framework for interpreting the Bible’s overall story.  It helps explain the Trinity, how humans relate to God, the person and work of Jesus Christ, the sacraments (baptism and Lord’s supper), justification by faith alone through grace alone, our assurance of our salvation, and how we are to live the Christian life in obedience. The Bible’s story is told through these covenants (with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Israel, David, and the New Covenant).  These covenants and the blessings attached to these covenants included children. 

Then God said to Noah and his sons with him, “Understand that I am establishing my covenant with you and your descendants after you, (Genesis 9:8-9)

I will confirm my covenant that is between me and you and your future offspring throughout their generations. It is a permanent covenant to be your God and the God of your offspring after you. And to you and your future offspring I will give the land where you are residing—all the land of Canaan—as a permanent possession, and I will be their God.” (Genesis 17:7-8)

“All of you are standing today before the Lord your God—your leaders, tribes, elders, officials, all the men of Israel, your dependents, your wives, and the resident aliens in your camps who cut your wood and draw your water—  so that you may enter into the covenant of the Lord your God, which he is making with you today, so that you may enter into his oath 13 and so that he may establish you today as his people and he may be your God as he promised you and as he swore to your ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. I am making this covenant and this oath not only with you, but also with those who are standing here with us today in the presence of the Lord our God and with those who are not here today. (Deuteronomy 29:10-15)

“And they shall be my people, and I will be their God. I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear me forever, for their own good and the good of their children after them. I will make with them an everlasting covenant, that I will not turn away from doing good to them. And I will put the fear of me in their hearts, that they may not turn from me. I will rejoice in doing them good, and I will plant them in this land in faithfulness, with all my heart and all my soul.” ‭‭Jeremiah‬ ‭32:38-41‬ 

For the promise is for you and for your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:38)

As these passages show, when God establishes a covenant with people, there are certain blessings and expectations attached to the children of those who are in covenant with God. 

The Kingdom of God

Jesus’ ministry was centered on the concept of kingdom and him as the King. His announcement of the kingdom of God arriving included an invitation to children to come to Him as the king.  Jesus rebuked his disciples who rejected children and welcomed the children to come to him. 

Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray, but the disciples rebuked them. Jesus said, “Leave the little children alone, and don’t try to keep them from coming to me, because the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” (Matthew 19:13-14)

“See to it that you don’t despise one of these little ones, because I tell you that in heaven their angels continually view the face of my Father in heaven. (Matthew 18:10)

When the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonders that he did and the children shouting in the temple, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” They were indignant 16 and said to him, “Do you hear what these children are saying?” Jesus replied, “Yes, have you never read: You have prepared praise from the mouths of infants and nursing babies?” (Matthew 21:15-16)

The Local Church

The Bible teaches that there has been, and always will be one Church.  Yet this one church is both universal and local.  The local church is known as the visible church whereas the universal church is known as the invisible church.  The visible church is made up of the professing men and women and their children who gather together to worship together in local expressions. The invisible church is made up of elect believers from every nation throughout all of history.  

Every local church will consist of both people who are actual believers (and are part of the universal, invisible church) and unbelievers (who may in fact be false professing believers) (1 Corinthians 5; Hebrews 6; 10). 

Because of the reality that the local church consists of professing believers and their children (true and false believers mixed together), the Bible’s teaching provides us with an explanation of how to interact with the children in our local church.

The Old Testament Church - Israel

When God provided the Ten Commandments to the Old Testament church,  Israel, God was providing the church with instructions on how to live as God’s covenant people who had been redeemed.  One of these commands is given explicitly to children, which shows us that children had expectations and privileges as being a part of the church, God’s visible covenant community. 

Honor your father and your mother so that you may have a long life in the land that the Lord your God is giving you. (Exodus 20:12)

In this church, children were the subject of discipleship. 

“Listen, Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.  Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength.  These words that I am giving you today are to be in your heart. Repeat them to your children. Talk about them when you sit in your house and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. (Deuteronomy 6:4-7)

We also see God giving promises to the children of professing believers provided they have the faith of their parents. They live within the local church, God’s visible covenant community, and have the benefits of church life and hear of God’s covenant promises provided through the work of Jesus’ Christ that is available to them by faith.  

But from eternity to eternity the Lord’s faithful love is toward those who fear him, and his righteousness toward the grandchildren of those who keep his covenant, who remember to observe his precepts. (Psalm 103:17-18)

For the promise is for you and for your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:38)

The New Testament Church - Local Churches

In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul, using covenantal ceremonial language, writes that the children of one believing parent are considered “holy” or “set apart.’ They are set apart upon being born into a Christian family due to the faith of one believing parent. 

For the unbelieving husband is made holy by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy by the husband. (1 Corinthians 7:14)

Paul, in giving instructions to the churches in Ephesus and Colossae, instructs the children of those local churches by reiterating the ten commandments. 

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, because this is right. Honor your father and mother, which is the first commandment with a promise, 3 so that it may go well with you and that you may have a long life in the land. (Ephesians 6:1-3)

Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. (Colossians 3:20)

When we put everything together, we see similarities in how the children were viewed in the Old Testament church and in the New Testament church.  A child born into an Israelite home was born into the covenant community and a child born into a Christian home was born into the covenant community.  To be born into a covenant community, the local church, is to be born with the intention of being discipled in order to come saving faith.

Children of believers are born into the visible church, not the invisible church.  The Bible is clear that physical descent does not guarantee salvation. Israelite children were born into physical Israel not spiritual Israel just like children born of believers are born into the visible church not the invisible church.  John Piper, a Baptist pastor, writes of the privilege of children born into a Christian home:

Christ did purchase privileges for the children of believers {or} it would seem to be pointless to say, “The promise is for you and for your children” (Acts 2:39), and to say, “His righteousness is to children’s children” (Psalm 103:18), if there was no more significance to a Christian ancestry than a pagan one. There is a good that comes to the children of believers. God says in Jeremiah 32:39, “I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear me forever, for their own good and the good of their children after them.” This “good” is not the guarantee of faith, but the gift of God’s word (Deuteronomy 6:6-7), the restraint of God’s discipline (Ephesians 6:4), the demonstration of God’s love (Colossians 3:21), and the power of prayer (Job 1:5). God has ordained, regularly and normally, to work through these means for the salvation of the children of believers.

To summarize John Piper’s point, children of believers have the privilege of being under God’s care in the church and receive privileges such as being under God’s word.  While being a child of a believer doesn’t guarantee salvation, God “regularly and normally” works through the local church to bring about the salvation of the children of believers.  This doesn’t mean these children do not need to believe on their own, but we can have hope that God can, and often will, bring about saving faith to the children of believers. 

Sacraments

One of the most important things a local church does is related to the sacrament of baptism.  And one question that believers think through is how does the sacrament of baptism relate to the children of believers.  Within the Reformed tradition, there exists two views related to the recipients of the sacrament of baptism. Those in the Reformed tradition (particularly, Presbyterians) practice infant baptism while others (particularly, Baptists) practice infant dedication instead of baptizing.  Both are accepted by serious-minded Christians within a reformed theological framework.

Those who believe in infant or child baptism (called paedobaptists) believe that baptism is primarily a sign of one’s initiation into the visible, or local church.  As stated above, the local church consists of professing believers and their children, and as a result, baptism is to be made available to both professing believers and their children.   Others who don’t believe in infant or child baptism (called credobaptists) believe baptism is primarily a sign of one’s initiation into the invisible, or universal church.  Bible believing reformed Christians are found in both “baptismal camps'' related to this issue. 

Paedobaptists believe in a strong continuity in the Bible between baptism and circumcision as covenant signs of initiation into the visible church even though both signs refer to spiritual realities yet to be experienced by the children of believers.  Rooted in an understanding of God’s covenant with Abraham and the promises of the gospel given to him that were sealed through a physical sign (circumcision) available for believers in the covenant promises and their children, paedobaptists believe that the New Testament sign of baptism should be given to professing believers and their children.  

Credobaptists see baptism as a sign offered to only those who profess faith in Christ.  While they agree with paedobaptists that God takes initiative in bringing us salvation and that God has made promises, they see baptism as having a different purpose, one that precludes infants or young children from receiving baptism. They see baptism as something exclusive to believers wherein believers are signifying their commitment to Jesus Christ and to his people, the church, as well as the church affirming the believer’s profession of faith in Jesus Christ.  They prefer to delay baptism until the child can make a conscious decision and commitment to Jesus Christ and his people.  As a result, some prefer to dedicate their children to the Lord.

While dedication and infant baptism come from different views of Scripture, both are rooted in understanding commitment to faithfulness.  Those who adhere to infant dedication and believer’s only baptism see both acts as expressing our commitment to God and his church, while those who adhere to infant baptism and believer’s baptism see both acts as expressing God’s commitment to us. 

What does this all mean?

The visible church is a spiritual family that includes all types of people, whether single, married, dating, engaged, and married with children.  God has established since the beginning of creation that children were involved in his visible covenant people and received many of the blessings associated with being a part of the visible, local church.  Because of this, we are to teach, pray for, and disciple our children toward the love of Christ as their Savior.  

A Concise Explanation of Infant Baptis

To begin understanding infant baptism, one has to understand how the story of the Bible is told through covenants. Understanding the role of covenants in the Bible helps explain the Trinity, how humans relate to God, the person and work of Jesus Christ, the sacraments (baptism and Lord’s supper), justification by faith alone through grace alone, our assurance of our salvation, and how we are to live the Christian life in obedience. The Bible, after all, is a covenant book.  In other words, it is meant to be read as a covenant that God has made with his people, centered on an overarching promise that God will be our God and we will be his people.  In fact, the Bible is a covenant book so much so that the reason we use the terminology “Testament” to describe the Old Testament and New Testament is because Testamentum is the Latin word for covenant! A covenant can simply be described as a God given relationship between himself and people that includes blessings and obligations.  

Covenant of Works

The first covenant in the Bible is the covenant that God entered into with Adam in the garden. This is often called the Covenant of Works because Adam’s relationship with God was based on works as opposed to grace.  When God created Adam, Adam was made to be the head of the whole human race not merely from a physical, earthly family sense but in a representative sense.  Adam’s relationship with God was initiated by God.  God created Adam as the head of the human race who had a special relationship with God as his image bearer.  God entered into a unique relationship with Adam that was unlike any other relationship he had with the rest of creation.  Adam, as the head of the race, was given the authority to rule over God’s creation.  This relationship involved God blessing him with a wife and the enjoyment of God’s presence in the garden.  Everything Adam needed was taken care of by God.  

However, this covenant with Adam also involved blessings and conditions.  Adam had to be fruitful and multiply as well as rule over the earth (Genesis 1:28). In addition, Adam was given a stipulation that he not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:16-17).  These commands and blessings were intermingled.  The blessing was in obeying the commands God had given him.  Adam was given a clear choice to either obey God in everything or disobey.  If Adam had kept the terms of the covenant, he, and his descendants, would have continued to remain in the Garden in God’s presence as God’s people and enjoying God’s provision.  As a sign of this covenant, the tree of life was placed in the garden symbolizing the life that Adam would have enjoyed had he kept the conditions of the covenant.

We know that Adam ended up breaking the covenant through the deceitfulness of the serpent in Genesis 3.  As a result, Adam, and his descendants, have received the curse of covenant breaking instead of the blessings.  Humans were banished from God’s presence and were no longer God’s treasured people enjoying God’s provision.  The ground became cursed and Adam and Eve would suffer toil and hardship.  Because Adam, as our representative of the covenant, broke the covenant, we, as his descendants, have inherited the curses of the covenant.  This is why Paul said in Romans 5:15-17 and in 1 Corinthians 15:22 that Adam’s disobedience brought condemnation and death to his descendents.  

All human beings are born still under the covenant of works that still stands. Because our representative broke the covenant, we are guilty as covenant breakers.   God requires perfect obedience in order to receive the promised blessings of the covenant rather than the curses.  But because all human beings are born sinners, none of us is capable of meeting the requirements of this covenant.  Our works cannot save us because we cannot obey fully.

Covenant of Grace

After Adam broke the covenant of works, God instituted a new covenant that would cover the rest of the Bible - the Covenant of Grace.  Contrary to the Covenant of Works, the Covenant of Grace would mean that the keeping of the covenant requirements would not depend on man’s obedience but on God’s grace and Christ’s obedience as our better representative. The Covenant of Grace is announced with God’s pronouncement to the Serpent that the physical seed of the woman would produce one who would ultimately crush the serpent.  God, as the covenant initiator, promises that he himself would put “enmity” between the offspring of the woman and the serpent.  God himself demonstrates his grace and sovereignty as the covenant maker who will ensure that these new covenant obligations are met. 

The rest of Scripture is the unfolding of this covenant promise beginning in Genesis 3:15.  From Genesis to Revelation, this Covenant of Grace God makes with humans through Christ unfolds.  Jesus, the champion of his people, is the offspring from the woman (Luke 3) who battles Satan head on in the wilderness as he’s tempted and ultimately defeats him on the cross and in the empty grave.  And the covenant of grace will ensure that the heart of the covenant, “I will be your God and you will be my people” will be accomplished.  

The Covenant of Grace promised in Genesis 3:15 is administered throughout the Old Testament through promises, prophecies, types (such as Passover and circumcision), ordinances, sacrifices, and the like. All of these were types or shadows of Christ, as the Bible says, “Therefore, don’t let anyone judge you in regard to food and drink or in the matter of a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of what was to come; the substance is Christ.” (Colossians 2:16-17).  In saying all of these pointed to Christ, we are saying that Old Testament believers were saved by grace through faith, the same way that we are.  Whereas we look BACK at the work of Christ, they looked FORWARD to the work of Christ.  This is why Paul could say, “They all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ.” (1 Corinthians 10:3-4).  As a result, salvation was only for those not who participated in the covenant EXTERNALLY but INTERNALLY, by faith.  Just because you were a part of the Old Testament “church” - Israel - did not guarantee your salvation. You still needed faith to be saved. 

Covenant with Abraham

So how does understanding the continuity between the Covenant of Grace in the Old Testament and New Testament help us get to infant baptism?  It all begins with the covenant God made with Abraham, which was the formal inauguration of his overarching covenant of grace.  This covenant with Abraham becomes the foundation for the future covenants in the Bible leading up to Christ.  The covenants that God will make with Moses, David, and ultimately the New Covenant in Christ will magnify and clarify the promises of God to Abraham, to be a God to him and his children.

In Genesis 17, a ninety-nine year old Abram was still struggling with his faith to believe in God’s promises that he would make him into a nation, bring about blessing through him, and give him a land.  In the previous chapter (13 years prior to Genesis 17), the childless Abram, in his doubt, took matters into his own hands, and at the suggestion of his wife Sarai, had a baby with her servant Hagar.  However, this was not the promised heir that God had in mind.  In Genesis 17, the Lord clarifies the terms of the covenant that he made with Abram. God commands Abram to walk before him and to be blameless.  In addition, God changes Abram’s name to Abraham and institutes the covenant sign of circumcision, signifying that it is an eternal covenant that God is making with Abraham, his family, and others outside of Abraham’s family.  The sign of covenant served as both a sign and seal of righteousness that Abraham had by faith (Romans 4), but would also be a visible sign that Abraham and his heirs were “cut off” as belonging to the Lord and a part of his covenant people.  As Adam was commanded to be fruitful and multiply, so now Abraham will now be the one through whom God expands his people across the earth.  Like Adam, Abraham stands as a familial representative and the sign was given not only to him but his descendants who would enjoy the blessings of the covenant if they had the same faith in the promise as their patriarch, Abraham.

The sign of this covenant was important because although it was a physical sign, it meant to point to spiritual realities:

“Your name will no longer be Abram; your name will be Abraham, for I will make you the father of many nations. I will make you extremely fruitful and will make nations and kings come from you.  I will confirm my covenant that is between me and you and your future offspring throughout their generations. It is a permanent covenant to be your God and the God of your offspring after you. And to you and your future offspring I will give the land where you are residing—all the land of Canaan—as a permanent possession, and I will be their God.” (Genesis 17:5-8)

In this passage, the covenant refers to God’s permanent promise to be a God to Abraham and his children. In addition, it will involve the receiving a permanent possession where God will eternally be the God of Abraham and his people.  Taken together, we can see this covenant was about salvation - God’s intention of having a people for himself to be God to them.  And in order to confirm this eternal, salvific promise, God commanded Abraham to be circumcised along with his male children in order for them to be reminded of God’s promise to fulfill the covenant that he would be making with Abraham.  Although Ishmael and other males in Abraham’s household received the sign of the covenant, the promises were only by faith through the promised line of Isaac.  

Paul would later explain in Romans 4 that this sign of circumcision was spiritual in nature in that it stood for Abraham’s justification by faith:

Is this blessing only for the circumcised, then? Or is it also for the uncircumcised? For we say, Faith was credited to Abraham for righteousness.  In what way, then, was it credited—while he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? It was not while he was circumcised, but uncircumcised.  And he received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while still uncircumcised. This was to make him the father of all who believe but are not circumcised, so that righteousness may be credited to them also.  And he became the father of the circumcised, who are not only circumcised but who also follow in the footsteps of the faith our father Abraham had while he was still uncircumcised. (Romans 4:10-12)

Paul was saying that circumcision was given to Abraham as a seal of his righteousness by faith.  What’s interesting to note is that in this covenant, the sign of circumcision that was given as a seal of righteousness was given to Abraham’s children: Ishmael, who would NEVER go on to have faith, and Isaac, BEFORE he had faith.  

It is helpful to see circumcision’s meaning as “cutting off” the people of God unto God himself.  Circumcision was to mark off who belonged to God visibly and those who didn’t belong to God as part of his covenant people.  To be circumcised was to belong to God. In this case, not only did Abraham belong to God but also his family.  So circumcision not only meant to be seen in a salvation sense but also membership into God’s family visibly. Thirdly, circumcision is used to refer to the new birth, that is, to be born again.  To be OUTWARDLY circumcised was to be a pointer of needing to be INWARDLY circumcised. Many in Moses’ day to Jeremiah’s day lacked the reality of what circumcision pointed to - to be regenerated in your heart:

“Circumcise yourselves to the Lord; remove the foreskin of your hearts,” (Jeremiah 4:4)

This covenant with Abraham is the grounds of other covenants in the Bible leading to the New Covenant.  This is why Paul can say:

27 For those of you who were baptized into Christ have been clothed with Christ. 28 There is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male and female; since you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise. (Galatians 3:27-29)

In other words, salvation is the result of God keeping his promise he made to Abraham.  The New Covenant in Jesus is essentially the same as the covenant with Abraham, but better in that Jesus Christ brings the blessings to fruition and expands them. Jesus Christ is the promised Offspring who is the fulfillment of the promised Seed to Eve who would crush the Serpent. Jesus Christ is the ultimate fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant.  Jesus entered the Abrahamic line and received circumcision (Luke 2:21). And Jesus fulfilled the ultimate reality of circumcision by being “cut off” for us, which was also symbolized by his baptism (Luke 12:50). Jesus Christ is the Offspring through whom the world would be blessed:

Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say “and to seeds,” as though referring to many, but referring to one, and to your seed, who is Christ. My point is this: The law, which came 430 years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously established by God and thus cancel the promise. For if the inheritance is based on the law, it is no longer based on the promise; but God has graciously given it to Abraham through the promise. (Galatians 3:16-18)

Not only that, Jesus is the fulfillment of the promised king who would come from Abraham, of the tribe of his grandson Judah, and the son of David who would reign on the throne.  These show that all the covenants work together to bring about Jesus Christ.  Jesus Christ didn’t remove the covenants, he ultimately fulfilled the Covenant of Grace from Genesis 3:15 that included the covenant made to Abraham and the covenant made to David that he would have a Son who would be an eternal king.  To be “in Christ” is to be a child of the Abrahamic promise:

You know, then, that those who have faith, these are Abraham’s sons. (Galatians 3:7)

The purpose was that the blessing of Abraham would come to the Gentiles by Christ Jesus, so that we could receive the promised Spirit through faith. (Galatians 3:14)

And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise. (Galatians 3:29)

So how does this tie into infant baptism?

If there’s one overarching Covenant of Grace, and the Abrahamic covenant is the covenant through which salvation comes, then we need to see how circumcision relates to baptism.  As circumcision as a bloody sign refers to being “cut off”, belonging to God and his people, new birth, and justification, so baptism as a bloodless sign also refers to an outward sign of justification, belonging to God and his people, and our new birth.  Circumcision was the sign of entrance to God’s visible people in the Old Testament.  Baptism is the sign of entrance to God’s visible people in the New Testament.  As circumcision was given to Abraham because he was justified, so is baptism given to those who are justified.  However, as circumcision was given to Abraham’s children, so baptism is given to the children of those who are believers like Abraham.  Although the sign changes, the entrance into God’s family, baptism/circumcision, remains the same.  In circumcision, God spoke to Abraham to say that He would fulfill his promises to Abraham and his children if they, like Abraham, had saving faith; so in baptism, God speaks to us saying that he would fulfill his promises to us and our children if our children, like their parent believers, have saving faith.  Circumcision never assured God’s promises to Abraham and his descendants - only faith could do that. The same holds true for baptism - baptism doesn’t assure us of God’s promises to us and our children - only faith could do that.  However, we adhere to the sign because it is a promise that God WILL keep his promises if we have saving faith in Him as seen in the work that baptism and circumcision signify - the work of Jesus Christ on our behalf.  As Peter said at Pentecost after Jesus ascended to heaven, in referring to salvation, reiterating the promise given to Abraham in Genesis 17:

“For the promise is for you and for your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:38)

The sign was given to the children of Abraham, and by extension the children of believers, because the overarching promise of the sign and of the Covenant of Grace is that God will be a God to believers and their children - the promise given to Abraham (“I will be your God and you will be my people”) which finds its fruition ultimately in Revelation in the New Earth:

Look, God’s dwelling is with humanity, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and will be their God.” (Revelation 21:3)

In a nutshell, it can be said to summarize the case for infant baptism, “God promised to be a God to believers and to their children. He gave a sign to Abraham to illustrate that promise and he repeated the promise in the New Testament and gave a new sign to illustrate that promise.” This does not mean that all children of believers are saved, but that if they have the saving faith of their believing parents, they will inherit the same promises given to them by God - for God to be their God and for them to be His people.  

Baptism then for our children signifies that, like those who were circumcised before Christ, belong to the community of believers VISIBLY and EXTERNALLY through the giving of the covenant sign.  However, children, like all people, are only saved by INTERNALLY believing the promises that the sign given to them signified - much the same way Isaac and all the Old Testament saints needed to believe.  Just like Abraham’s circumcision was something that looked BACKWARD at what already happened internally inside him, circumcision for his children was something that looked FORWARD to what should happen to his children, provided they followed in the footsteps of Abraham's faith.  This is comparable to baptism.  The baptism of believers is to look BACKWARD at what already happened internally inside them, and baptism for their young children is to look FORWARD at what should happen internally inside them provided they follow in the footsteps of their parents faith. 

Now perhaps you may be thinking, “I have always thought circumcision was done primarily to mark someone off as being Jewish or being from Israel in the Bible.”  However, the Bible shows that circumcision was not intended to be a mark of Jewish ethnic or national identity.  It was always meant to be an outward physical sign of an inward spiritual reality (that is, circumcision of the heart).  Romans 2:28-29, Romans 4:11, Deuteronomy 30:6, and Jeremiah 9:25-26 help us understand this:

‘Look, the days are coming—this is the Lord’s declaration—when I will punish all the circumcised yet uncircumcised: Egypt, Judah, Edom, the Ammonites, Moab, and all the inhabitants of the desert who clip the hair on their temples. All these nations are uncircumcised, and the whole house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart.’” (Jeremiah 9:25-26)

In addition, the fact that both Ishmael and Esau who did not inherit any land promises, were both circumcised. They were not Israel yet received the sign of the covenant - not because of their ethnicity or nationality but because of the relationship with their believing father.  We can also say that, as stated above, Abraham’s faith was not primarily ethnic or nationalistic in that he was looking at the promises earthly, but rather eternal and heavenly promises.  In fact, Jesus makes this point about Abraham’s faith looking toward Jesus:

Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; he saw it and was glad.” (John 8:56)

Abraham also was not looking toward an earthly, physical land but a spiritual land:

By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed and set out for a place that he was going to receive as an inheritance. He went out, even though he did not know where he was going.  By faith he stayed as a foreigner in the land of promise, living in tents as did Isaac and Jacob, coheirs of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God... But they now desire a better place—a heavenly one. Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them. (Hebrews 11:8-10; 16)

Given these realities, it should come as no surprise that as we see Abraham, who was told to circumcise his entire household of males in Genesis 17, we see the baptism of households in the book of Acts (for example, Acts 16; 1 Corinthians 1:16).  Because the covenant with Abraham in Genesis 17 ultimately leads to the New Covenant with Jesus, and the covenant signs of both have similar meanings, we should expect to see both household circumcisions in Abraham’s time being applied to professing adult believers in the Abrahamic promise who had never received the sign that pointed toward Christ along with their children and household baptisms in the church age for professing adult believers who had never received the sign of the covenant that looks back on Christ work and their children. 

Some Frequently Asked Questions

Why is it important for infants/young children to be baptized?

B.B. Warfield once said, “The argument in a nutshell is simply this: God established his Church in the days of Abraham and put children into it. They must remain there until He puts them out. He has nowhere put them out. They are still members of His church.” Infants and young children of adults professing believing church members should be baptized because they are considered members of the visible church along with believing parents.  Not only was this true in the Old Testament but in the New Testament as well. This is why Paul could address children in the church in his letters to the Ephesians and Colossians:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, because this is right. (Ephesians 6:1)

Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. (Colossians 3:20)

In addition, in the Old Testament, children were considered “members” of the Old Testament church in that they were present during covenant renewals (Deut. 29:10:13; Josh. 8:35; II Chron. 20:13), they were present in the assembly (2 Chron. 20:13; Joel 2:16), and promises were given to them (Isa. 54:13; Jer. 31:34; Joel 2:28).

Weren’t only believers baptized in the book of Acts?

Yes, but there are actually household baptisms as well as individual ones in Acts. The Bible speaks of both individual baptisms (Acts 8:12; 8:36-38, 9:18) and household  baptisms (Acts 10:48; 16:15, 16:33; 18:8, 1 Corinthians 1:16). Individual baptisms can be easily explained given the context. Two of the three individual baptisms were specifically two people not present with their families. Philip baptized the Eunuch on a road and Ananias baptized Paul when he was in Damascus. That leaves one other which is in the context of crowds gathering where men and women were baptized upon the profession of their faith. In addition, we are dealing with first generation believers so we can safely expect that the priority in Luke’s mind in writing Acts is that a church of believers of all nations is being formed. So every baptism conducted by the church in Acts isn’t mentioned but only those that show how Acts 1:8 is being fleshed out. Luke’s book is not about every baptism conducted but about the mission of the church, to both Jews and Gentiles. 

But infants don’t understand what’s going on, right?

Yes, but that’s the same for Isaac, and Jacob, both children of the promise by faith. They were all still saved by grace through faith. Every complaint about babies not understanding baptism can be raised about circumcision.

What has changed in God’s covenant with humans before Christ and after Christ? Colossians 2:11-12 shows the continuity between both covenant signs. 

But I was always taught that baptism was a public display of my faith.

It’s important to note that while believer’s baptism is public, for adult believers, and is a result of your faith, it is not primarily a public display of your faith. It is a visible sign that God gives us to assure us of his promises and the initiation into the visible church. It is a sign and seal of God’s grace in displaying the saving benefits of Christ. In baptism, we are seeing a visible display of the gospel.  Our faith in baptism is primarily how we receive the blessings of baptism as believers, but it’s primarily a sign of the gospel, not a public display of faith.  In this sense, baptism is not primarily what WE say to God and others but what GOD says to us and to the world. 

Are there any benefits to the infants/young children baptized if they don’t know what’s going on?

Here are a few benefits:

• Just like Abraham’s circumcision along with his sons marked Abraham and his family as belonging to the Lord, so does baptism of infants and children signify that, as covenant heads of family, we belong to the Lord. (Joshua 24:1-16) In baptizing children because of covenant parents, we are essentially saying, as parents, all that we have belongs to the Lord and we commit to the spiritual development of our children because our children are receiving the same sign we receive. In other words, we are committing publicly to build our households on the promises of God.

• The baptism is a picture of the gospel for both the parents and the church, seeing the reminder that God’s grace alone can wash away the sins of the child. It reminds the parents and church that only God can do what the sign signifies, and no amount of good parenting can make the child holy.

• Baptism also signifies God’s pledge to us. Baptism is God’s own continuing, visible pledge to his church that he will fulfill his covenant promises to those who place their faith in him.

• Baptizing the children essentially states, “By the marks of this sacrament I promise that anyone who trusts in my mercy through the blood Christ will have his sins washed away and will be as pure before me as the water that flows from this font so that we will be in holy union forever.”

• Baptizing the child makes the parents accountable to the covenant community. This is bigger than just giving advice or correcting parenting. Essentially we are saying the children are fellow members of the body and we are all invested in his/her spiritual growth.

• In baptizing infants and children, we are essentially saying that the children of believers have a unique relationship with the Lord that the children of unbelievers don’t have (1 Corinthians 7:12-14). They receive means of grace through being taught the Word of God, experience God’s presence, can worship God, etc. 

How is baptism beneficial for adults if it’s not primarily a public display of our faith?

We refer to the signs of baptism and the Lord’s Supper as sacraments.  By saying they’re sacraments, we mean they are visible signs of God’s invisible grace.  In other words, the sacraments make what we hear visible.  God has made promises for us through his word, and through the sacraments, we can see and feel what he has promised us.  Throughout the Bible, as God has made covenants, he has given signs of his promises - the Tree of Life to Adam, the rainbow to Noah, the Passover to Israel, and baptism and the Lord’s Supper to the church of the New Testament.  These signs are meant to engage our senses and reassure our faith.  God is gracious in knowing that his people need these reassurances to strengthen our faith.  And he graciously gives us these visible reminders of his promises that he will keep.  Sacraments are not only signs, but also seals.  By seal, we mean that they are a visible pledge that God makes to confirm his promises.  It’s God putting a “stamp” in a sense that he will do what he said he would do. 

Doesn’t baptizing infants and young children make us Catholics?

The Catholic view of infant baptism is that baptism is for salvation.  In that sense, infants are baptized to be “saved.” And while infant baptism is seen as a distinctly Catholic idea, it has been the practice of the church since the days of the early church.  And the reformers during the Protestant Reformation (when Protestantism was birthed as a result of splitting from the Catholic Church) such as John Calvin and Martin Luther affirmed the baptism of infants.  In fact, while the reformers often disagreed on many things, they agreed on justification by faith alone, through grace alone, in Christ alone including infant baptism.  While the rationale for the Catholics in regards to infant baptism is salvation, for the reformers, it was rooted in an understanding of the Covenant of Grace. 

Baptism Propositions

1. Baptism marks the entrance into the local church's visible community. 

2. Baptism marks the entrance into the Christian life biblically, as opposed to a sign of Christian maturity. (it is a sign of initiation rather than a badge of maturity)

3. Baptism is a means of grace rather than merely an ordinance. 

4. The baptismal candidate might not fully understand the meaning and significance of baptism when being baptized. Often it is more appreciated as the convert grows in the Lord. 

5. Not everyone we baptize is truly a follower of Jesus. (1 John 2:19; Acts 20:29-30). In fact, we have no sure confidence that anyone we baptize is truly regenerate. 

6. The Bible does not command us to do any “legwork” to affirm the credibility of baptismal candidates.

7. We should expect to baptize unregenerate people as normative (as the Apostles did) (for example, Acts 8; 1 John 2:19, Acts 20:29-30).

8. The exact moment of regeneration, as subsequent to baptism, is subjective and cannot be nailed down to an exact moment in our human understanding. In fact, it is possible to be regenerated without even knowing. 

9. Credible profession of faith rather than infallible evidence of regeneration should be the basis by which a professing convert is baptized. 

10. The God ordained means of removing an unregenerate person from the church is church discipline, not baptism.  The pattern of the New Testament church in dealing with false converts is reactive (discipline) rather than proactive (in analyzing baptismal candidates).  In other words, we assume salvation until proven otherwise through church discipline rather than assume lack of conversion until proven otherwise (through “fruit examination”)

11. To not participate in baptism is disobedience to God’s commands and a forsaking of a means of grace toward the baptismal candidate. 

12. To withhold baptism or delay baptism is to say that the person is not a part of the visible “family of God.” 

13. To withhold baptism or delay baptism for a professing convert is in disobedience to the Great Commission. 

14. The argument to delay baptism or withhold baptism is more about wisdom rather than Bible. 

15. Re-baptism as a sign of recommitment to Christ is unnecessary.  There is also no rebaptism taught in the Bible, whether for true converts or false converts who repented. 

16. The Bible does not explicitly state infants should be baptized nor does it explicitly state only believers can be baptized nor does it explicitly state women can partake in communion.

One of the main objections to paedobaptism espoused from credobaptists is that infant baptism is not found in Scripture.  John MacArthur has said:

Here’s the first one, and this would be enough: Infant baptism is not in the Scripture.  Scripture nowhere advocates or records any such thing as the baptism of an infant. It is, therefore, impossible to support infant baptism from the Bible. It is not in the Bible. There’s not an incident of it, there’s not a mandate, there’s not a call for it, there’s not a description of it - it doesn’t appear. In fact, if you go back in history (and I’m going to do that a little bit with you), you will find that historians have affirmed this fact.

However, Bible believing Christians who hold to sola Scriptura recognize that a single verse to prove or disprove a doctrine is not necessary because of what can be deduced from the totality of Scripture.  The Westminster Confession even states the following:

The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture…

In other words, that which can be deduced from Scripture can be sserted as truth.  This does not just include doctrines (such as the Trinity or the deity of the Holy Spirit) but also ecclesiastical practices that are widely accepted among churches that must be deduced from Scripture rather than explicitly stated by way of command or example.  Here are examples of implicit ecclesiastical biblical practices, like infant baptism, that can be deduced from Scripture rather than based on explicit command or example. 

Church Membership

Jonathan Leeman, a Baptist pastor, defines church membership as “a formal relationship between a local church and a Christian characterized by the church’s affirmation and oversight of a Christian’s discipleship and the Christian’s submission to living out his or her discipleship in the care of the church.” Yet it’s clear that church membership is biblical only in that it is deduced from Scripture rather than based on a command.  Joel Webbon, a Baptist pastor, in writing for Acts 29 writes that church membership is implied from Scripture.  He writes of five pieces of evidence of church membership implied through the metaphor of the “body of Christ”, through the command to submit to elders, through church discipline, through excommunication, and through the responsibility of elders to care for the flock.  While not explicit, these are all implicit evidence of church membership. Matt Chandler writes that church membership can be deduced from the election of deacons in Acts 6, from the numerical record of those added to the church in Acts 2, and in how widows were meant to be treated in 1 Timothy 5.

Communion for Baptized Only

Baptist pastor Brian Hedges writes, “the majority of Christians throughout history have believed that only baptized people should participate in Eucharistic meal.”  He bases his view that communion is for baptized believers only based on the example in Acts 2 in that those who participated in baptism were mentioned as having participated in the breaking of bread.  In addition, he writes, “In 1 Corinthians, when Paul talks at length about communion (in chapter 11), the assumption from earlier in the letter (chapter 1) is that he is writing to baptized Christians.” Got Questions also states, “It is not stated in Scripture that a person must be baptized before being able to receive the Lord’s Supper” yet the authors argue that communion is for baptized believers only because, “The Lord’s Supper is to be partaken of only by believers in Jesus Christ. Baptism is intended to be an identifying mark of believers in Christ. Therefore, some churches require water baptism before a person can partake of the Lord’s Supper. However, again, Scripture nowhere gives us this instruction.”

Church on Sundays

John Piper writes that church on Sundays can be deduced from Acts 20 when Luke writes that the church in Troas gathered on the first day of the week. He also writes that in 1 Corinthians 7 that the collection taken the first day of the week indicates a church gathered on Sunday.  However, it should be noted that one can argue that Paul only writes that a collection from each person be put aside and stored indicating individual believers were to store their own collection on the first day without reference to formal giving in a church gathering.  This is also confirmed historically where tithing was not noted as being a part of the formal worship gathering.  Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, it is deduced the church gathered on Sunday because that was the day in which the resurrection occurred.  

Historically speaking, it can be argued from silence that given the Jewish Christians ongoing dilemma in keeping their Jewish traditions (such as circumcision) while they were Christians, it’s hard to imagine there not be a protest about changing the date of the gathering from Saturday to Sunday.  Norman H. Young writes that it is flawed to use Acts 20 as indicative of an ongoing church practice, saying, “The meeting on the first day just prior to Paul’s departure is one of several meetings Paul held with believers while he was in transit…if the first day was not just a random occurrence, but a purposeful and regular day for Christian meeting, it is astonishing that Luke makes no mention of its special significance.”

Delayed baptism as opposed to spontaneous baptism

Baptist pastor Caleb Morell argues against spontaneous baptism using church history.  He writes, 

“Historically, baptisms have been treated as planned rather than spontaneous events. The Didache (96 AD) instructs baptismal candidates to fast for one or two days leading up to the baptism (Didache, 7:4). In the fourth century, Cyril of Jerusalem required those seeking baptism and membership to complete forty lectures, a process described by one historian as “long and arduous.” The same was true of Ambrose of Milan who only baptized Augustine after the customary season of “intense Lenten preparation and a course of postbaptismal instruction.” 

Yet Baptists such as JD Greear and Tom Schreiner argue for spontaneous baptism.  Greear writes, “After all, every single baptism recorded in the New Testament, without exception, is spontaneous and immediate. For New Testament believers, the pattern was alarmingly simple: Believe, confess, get baptized. There was never a gap between when a person trusted Christ and when that person was baptized. Not one.” Schreiner writes, “In the NT era it was unheard of to separate baptism from faith in Christ for such a long period. Baptism occurred either immediately after or very soon after people believed. The short interval between faith and baptism is evident from numerous examples in the book of Acts.” 

However, Baptists like Morell typically argue against spontaneous baptisms in writing that the baptisms in Acts are descriptive rather than prescriptive.  He states, “In a book where thousands are converted and dozens of churches are started, he mentions only nine instances of baptism. In fact, Paul’s entire first missionary journey goes by without a single mention of baptism (see Acts 13–14). This suggests that the baptisms actually recorded are unusual or even inimitable.  Three features characterize the baptisms in Acts: The baptisms recorded all involve ‘first converts’ in a historically-redemptively significant setting, nearly every baptism is accompanied by supernatural acts of the Holy Spirit, and each baptism takes place in response to believing the Apostolic message.” Gordon Fee, a Pentecostal, and Douglas Stuart, an interdenominational evangelical (both of whom are egalitarian), as quoted by Morell, write, 

“Luke’s interest does not seem to be on standardizing things, bringing everything into uniformity. When he records individual conversions, there are usually two elements included: water baptism and the gift of the Spirit. But these can be in reverse order, with or without the laying on of hands, with or without the mention of tongues, and scarcely ever with a specific mention of repentance, even after what Peter says in 2:38–39. . . . Such diversity probably means that no specific example is being set forth as the model Christian experience.”

Morell continues, “Even if Acts set forth a uniform pattern of spontaneous baptisms, such a pattern wouldn’t necessarily warrant the practice of spontaneous baptisms in our churches today. One of the first lessons of hermeneutics is that descriptive does not necessarily mean prescriptive.”  It is important to note that both Baptist and Pentecostal leaders who are writing against spontaneous baptisms as prescriptive in the book of Acts caution against using the baptisms in Acts as “the model Christian experience” given the missionary nature of the book.  

Rituals in church gatherings

Various rituals in church gatherings are either no longer practiced in the church (or perhaps practiced in only a select group of churches or modified)  or are practiced as part of the church gathering that were not commanded to be practiced as a part of the gathering.  One ritual is the “holy kiss.”  Got Questions states, “Whether or not the holy kiss should be a tradition we carry on today is not clear in Scripture.”  Baptist pastor Albert Martin has said that the holy kiss comes at the end of a list of other imperatives in 2 Corinthians 13 that believers would unanimously agree are required, such as comforting one another, agreeing with one another, and living in peace with one another.  Valeriy A. Alikin, in The Earliest History of the Christian Gathering, writes that the holy kiss was “one of the most common elements of the early Christian assembly” and became a “liturgical act” which is commanded multiple times in the Bible. The early church practiced this “holy kiss” after the prayer for the Eucharist elements.  

While all churches believe in the principle of giving to the church, there’s no explicit command or example of tithing/giving/offering being taken as part of a church gathering.  Alikin writes that Paul commanded money to be put aside and stored on the first day of the week, but not that a collection was taken. Yet there’s no clear scriptural indication that the collection of tithes and offerings took place in church gatherings or was commanded to take place as part of the gathering. 

Believer’s evangelizing

While no specific command exists for believers to evangelize, Professor Tim Beougher from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary argues the command for believers to evangelize is implicit because God calls believers witnesses in Acts 1 and ambassadors in 2 Corinthians 5, the example of scattered church members in Acts 8, the fact that the gospel is called a stewardship, and Paul’s command to church leaders to “equip” the church for ministry in Ephesians 4. 

Various communion related practice

The Bible does not mention by command or example women taking communion nor does it speak of communion actually taking place during a church gathering.  In fact, Valeriy A. Alikin, in The Earliest History of the Christian Gathering, notes that according to Paul in 1 Corinthians, communion was actually a meal at the end of the day rather than elements observed in a church gathering. The Didache confirms this as presenting Communion as an actual meal enjoyed on Sunday evening.  In regards to women, reformed minister Jonty Rhodes writes, “Is there an explicit example of a woman eating the Lord’s Supper? Perhaps not.  But once we’ve carefully put together texts on the place of women in the church and the purpose of the supper, we should conclude not just that Christian women may take communion, but that they must unless they are under church discipline.”

Definitions:

Credobaptism - Baptism is just for believers

Paedobaptism - Baptism is for believers and their children

Where Both Sides Agree:

1. Baptism Visibly Portrays the Atonement of Christ

   1. Redemption and remission of sins are essential to the work of Christ and baptism signifies this truth.  Baptism reminds us of the baptism that Christ endured for us on the cross (Luke 12:50). 

2. Baptism Signifies Union with Christ

   1. Baptism represents spiritual union with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:1-5)

3. Baptism Signifies our Union with the Church

   1. Baptism shows we have all been baptized into one body (1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 4:1-6)

   2. This union with the church is represented in belonging to the local church. 

4. Baptism Signifies being Baptized into the Holy Spirit

   1. Baptism symbolizes the Spirit being poured out onto the church (1 Corinthians 12:13; Acts 1:5; Matthew 3:11)

5. Baptism Signifies Our Consecration to God

   1. Baptism, much like circumcision, signified belonging to God and being set apart for his service. (Colossians 2:11-12)

6. Baptism Does Not Save

   1. Ultimately baptism is a sign, but we are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Where Both Sides Disagree:

1. Infant Baptism Mentioned in the Bible

   1. Credobaptist - The Bible is clear that believers are to be baptized (which paedobaptists would agree on the Bible’s clarity on that), yet the Bible is not clear on infants of believers being baptized.  If this was a command, then it would be as clear as believers’ baptism. There are no commands nor examples of this taking place in the New Testament. If the Bible doesn’t command it, then it’s forbidden. 

   2. Paedobaptist - Many doctrines in the Bible are not clearly spelled out (such as the Trinity or deity of Christ), yet we can infer them from multiple verses.  In addition, the burden of proof lies on the credobaptist to show that a sign of belonging to the covenant community (in the OT, circumcision) given to children changed in the NT. If a sign was given to the children before the book of Acts, what verse shows that it changed?  In addition, the fact that households were baptized in the Bible (Acts 10:48, 16:15; 31-34) gives evidence that the children of believers were most likely baptized, not just the adult converts. The Bible doesn’t forbid it so it can be done. 

2. The Spiritual Realities of Baptism and the Recipients of the Sign of Baptism

   1. Credobaptist - Because baptism conveys spiritual realities (as noted above), it should only be given to those who have truly experienced those spiritual realities (Romans 6).

   2. Paedobaptist - Circumcision also conveyed the same spiritual realities as baptism (Romans 4:4; Colossians 2:11, Jeremiah 4:4) yet was a sign given to the children of believers. In other words, if, in the OT, a sign conveying spiritual realities was given to children of believers, then it should be given to the children of believers in the NT, since both convey the same promises and spiritual realities. 

3.  Members of the New Covenant Community

   1. Credobaptist - While it is true that children were apart of the covenant community in the OT, and did receive a sign of belonging to that community (circumcision), the sign of belonging to the new covenant community is a sign for believers because the Bible promises that the New Covenant would be made up of only believers (Jeremiah 31:31-34) such as members of the new covenant all knowing the Lord. 

   2. Paedobaptist - The New Covenant describes something that is not fulfilled until Christ returns.  Thus, the realization of all new covenant members being true believers won’t happen until Christ returns and separates the “wheat and the chaff” and ensures that “everyone will know the Lord.” Right now, the New Covenant community (the local church) consists of believers and unbelievers, adults and children, who will one day be separated between believer and unbeliever when Christ returns.
      
      

4. Church History

   1. Paedobaptist - From the earliest church records dated in the second century, infant baptism was the predominant practice in the church.  In fact, an early church father, Origen (185AD -253AD) writes that “The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants.”  It was not until the 1500s that Christians started questioning infant baptism.  To this day, most Christian denominations practice infant baptism, with the exception of Pentecostal, Baptist, and many non-denominational churches. 

   2. Credobaptist - The church is imperfect and history is filled with imperfect doctrines.  For example, some in church history believed infant baptism provided regeneration for infants.  We know that doctrine in church history can be wrong. The Jewish people in the Bible wrongly believed circumcision saved. The church is not infallible and has had many doctrinal errors.   In addition, there are some historic records that talk about baptismal candidates receiving training, something infants could not have had. 

5.  Letters to the Churches

   1. Credobaptist - Paul’s letters to churches specifically are addressed to “saints” on many occasions, meaning Paul assumed that the church was made up of Christians. 

   2. Paedobaptist - Paul mentioned children in two of his letters in giving them commands (Colossians and Ephesians) and mentioned that children of at least one believing parent are considered holy (set apart) (1 Corinthians 7:14). 

6. False Baptisms and Re-baptisms

   1. Credobaptist - If you are a false convert baptized, and you receive Christ later, you would need to be baptized again since the first was invalid. 

   2. Paedobaptist - The Bible never speaks of re-baptisms and explicitly mentions “one baptism” (Ephesians 4:5-6).  Also, Simon the Sorcerer (Acts 8:9-24) was baptized but a short time later, showed himself to not be a genuine convert, yet when he repented, he was not baptized again. 

7. Mode of Baptism

   1. Credobaptist - The proper mode of baptism is full immersion in water.  The Greek word for baptism means this and when baptism is mentioned in the Bible, the words, such as “went into the water”, describe going into a full body of water (Matthew 3:16, Mark 1:5; John 3:23; Acts 8:36-38)

   2. Paedobaptist - There are places in the Bible where baptism cannot be immersion (Leviticus 14:6, 51; Acts 1:5; 1 Corinthians 10:2; Hebrews 9:10-23).  In addition, only one passage in the NT mentions the mode of baptism (Acts 1-2 - which refers to baptism/Holy Spirit as being “poured” - in fact, whenever baptism of the Holy Spirit is referenced, it points to being “poured out”) and other mentions of baptism describe the location rather than the mode of baptism. There are also places where immersion would not have been possible or likely (Acts 9:17-18; 10:47; 16:32-33).

8. Interpreting Acts 2:38-39

   1. Credobaptist - The order Peter lists is to repent and be baptized. The promise Peter mentions is the promise of the Holy Spirit that is available to everyone (including “children and all who are far off”) yet is only applied to “those whom the Lord calls.” This verse is about the availability of the gospel to all. 

   2. Paedobaptist - The promise Peter mentions is the promise of the Holy Spirit, which was promised to Abraham (Galatians 3:14).  Peter is speaking to a Jewish audience who would have understood the prophetic promise given to the Jews. When Abraham mentions the promise being for the people, their children, and all who are far off, they would have understood that to be the same formula given to Abraham in Genesis 17 when God institutes circumcision.  As a result, the Jewish audience who was just told they killed their Messiah (the one through whom circumcision itself pointed to), would now see the connection between circumcision and baptism and would have known it was for their children as well. It is worth noting that if baptism was now the covenant sign, and children were no longer to receive it, there probably would have been an uproar over this because the Jewish children had received a covenant sign before, and now Peter was saying they would no longer receive it.  As one author notes, this event, if the infants and children were NOT baptized, would have been the biggest excommunication in the history of the church.

Final Consideration

In many church traditions, baptism is often given much later after conversion and instead of being seen as an entry point into the church, or rather the beginning of one’s discipleship journey (Matthew 28:18-20), it becomes a “badge of maturity” offered only for those who have demonstrated spiritual growth over the course of some years.  However, the Bible does teach us in the book of Acts that a believer's baptism is best seen as “convert’s baptism” - a sign of initiation and the first act of obedience for new converts. 

1. Baptism’s primary purpose is not a public declaration of faith.  Its primary purpose is membership with the local church, a sign of initiation into God’s community.

2. Because it is a sign of initiation, it is meant to take place in the beginning of the Christian life (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 2).  In other words, it’s not a “badge of maturity” for those who have reached a certain point in their maturity.  Whether it’s spontaneous, during the first days, weeks, months, or even years of your walk with the Lord, it is meant to be at the beginning. 

3. Because it’s a sign of initiation at the beginning of the Christian life, age of the believer needn’t be a factor.  If one can profess faith at 3 years old or 93 years old, baptism needn’t be withheld from someone who can profess faith in Jesus and be a part of the church.  

CityLights Church is a church in the Reformed tradition which recognizes various beliefs within the doctrine of the Reformed tradition. We do not exclude beliefs that belong in the broad flow of Reformed convictions.  We stand together in the Gospel and recognize that we can disagree theologically with others on finer points within our theological tradition, especially as it relates to baptism.  We agree so strongly on primary issues related to the gospel and the doctrines of grace that we can rejoice with fellow covenant members in our church who see things differently.  As a result, we have adopted the Gospel Coalition’s statement of faith as it concerns baptism:

We believe that baptism and the Lord’s Supper are ordained by the Lord Jesus himself. The former is connected with entrance into the new covenant community, the latter with ongoing covenant renewal. Together they are simultaneously God’s pledge to us, divinely ordained means of grace, our public vows of submission to the once crucified and now resurrected Christ, and anticipations of his return and of the consummation of all things. 

As a result, we make room for both infant baptism and infant dedication.  Those in the Reformed tradition (particularly, Presbyterians) practice infant baptism while others (particularly, Baptists) practice infant dedication.  Both are accepted by serious-minded Christians within our theological framework and both are respected here at CityLights Church and supported by our pastors. 

The baptism of an infant or young child is an act by the believing parents by which the child is welcomed as a covenant member of the church and a partaker of the benefits and responsibilities of being in covenant with God.  

Baptism is a sign and seal of God’s covenant of grace that God has made to believers and their children.  This is rooted in how one understands the Bible’s teaching of salvation in both the Old Testament and the New Testament.  In the Old Testament, God made promises to believers and their children related to salvation.  These promises were given to Abraham in Genesis 12, 15, and 17.  These promises are the foundation of the gospel message (Galatians 3:8) and given through an eternal covenant God made with Abraham and his children, including the promise of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 3:14).  These promises taken together reveal God’s gospel plan to save a people for himself. And in order to confirm this eternal promise of salvation, God commanded Abraham to be circumcised along with his children in order for them to be reminded of God’s promise to fulfill the covenant that he would be making with Abraham.  This sign of circumcision was a sign of Abraham’s righteousness by faith (Romans 4:11) and was given to Abraham’s children before they had faith.  In other words, Abraham’s circumcision was after he had faith and Isaac’s circumcision was before he had faith.  

However, in both circumstances, in order to receive the promises that the sign signified (righteousness by faith), faith was necessary.  The timing of the sign did not matter because the sign pointed to the gospel - faith ultimately matters in receiving that which the sign points to.  The child’s faith did not matter in the case of circumcision in the history of God’s people because the child had no idea what was happening. It was the parent’s faith that mattered to God.  And the hope was that, as the child grew up, the parental faith would pass into the child’s heart too. 

The New Covenant in Jesus is essentially the same as the covenant with Abraham, but better in that Jesus Christ brings the blessings to fruition and expands them.  Jesus Christ is the ultimate fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant.  Jesus entered the Abrahamic line and received circumcision (Luke 2:21). And Jesus fulfilled the ultimate reality of circumcision by being “cut off” for us, which was also symbolized by his baptism (Luke 12:50). Jesus Christ is the Offspring  that was promised to Abraham through whom the world would be blessed. 

Because the Bible makes it clear that baptism and circumcision are related (Colossians 2:11-12), in many ways, what is true of circumcision is also true of baptism as it relates to the people of God.  Baptism is the sign of entrance to God’s visible church in the New Testament.   As circumcision was given to Abraham because he was justified, so is baptism given to those who are justified.  However, as circumcision was given to Abraham’s children, so baptism is given to the children of those who are believers like Abraham.  Although the sign changes, the entrance into God’s visible family, baptism/circumcision, remains the same.  In circumcision, God spoke to Abraham to say that He would fulfill his promises to Abraham and his children if they, like Abraham, had saving faith; so in baptism, God speaks to us saying that he would fulfill his promises to us and our children if our children, like their believing parents, have saving faith.  Circumcision never assured God’s promises to Abraham and his descendants - only faith could do that. 

The same holds true for baptism - baptism doesn’t assure us of God’s promises to us and our children - only faith could do that.  Just like Abraham’s circumcision was something that looked BACKWARD at what already happened internally inside him, circumcision for his children was something that looked FORWARD to what should happen to his children, provided they followed in the footsteps of Abraham's faith.  This is comparable to baptism.  The baptism of believers is to look BACKWARD at what already happened internally inside them through the Holy Spirit’s regeneration, and baptism for their young children is to look FORWARD at what should happen internally inside them provided they follow in the footsteps of their parents faith.  Infant baptism reminds us that God’s grace precedes our faith.  We, like helpless babies, are passive as it concerns God’s promises to us.  He initiates, and through the Holy Spirit, we respond in faith. 

We adhere to the sign because it is a promise that God WILL keep his promises if we have saving faith in Him as seen in the work that baptism and circumcision signify - the work of Jesus Christ on our behalf.  As Peter said at Pentecost after Jesus ascended to heaven, in referring to salvation, reiterating the promise given to Abraham in Genesis 17:

“For the promise is for you and for your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:38)

In a nutshell, it can be said to summarize the case for infant baptism, “God promised to be a God to believers and to their children. He gave a sign to Abraham to illustrate that promise and he repeated the promise in the New Testament and gave a new sign to illustrate that promise.” This does not mean that all children of believers are saved, but that if they have the saving faith of their believing parents, they will inherit the same promises given to them by God - for God to be their God and for them to be His people. 

Those who prefer infant dedication to infant baptism believe that God takes initiative in bringing us salvation and that God has made promises.  However, they see baptism as having a different purpose, one that precludes infants or young children from receiving baptism. They see baptism as something exclusive to believers wherein believers are signifying their commitment to Jesus Christ and to his people, the church, as well as the church affirming the believer’s profession of faith in Jesus Christ.  They prefer to delay baptism until the child can make a conscious decision and commitment to Jesus Christ and his people.  As a result, they prefer to dedicate their children to the Lord.

The dedication of an infant or young child is an act by the believing parents by which they symbolically offer their child up to God for his purposes and his glory as well as committing themselves to raise the child in the Lord. 

In 1 Samuel 1:27-28, we see an example of infant dedication in the story of Hannah dedicating Samuel to the Lord for his service:

I prayed for this boy, and since the Lord gave me what I asked him for, I now give the boy to the Lord. For as long as he lives, he is given to the Lord.”

In addition, Joseph and Mary also presented Jesus in the temple in Luke 2:22-24:

And when the days of their purification according to the law of Moses were finished, they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (just as it is written in the law of the Lord, Every firstborn male will be dedicated to the Lord and to offer a sacrifice (according to what is stated in the law of the Lord, a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons.

Infant dedication makes sense in light of the repeated commands given to parents as it concerns their responsibility to raise children in the instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4).  Infant dedication allows parents the opportunity to express their understanding of God entrusting them the responsibility to raise their children in the Lord and the parent’s commitment to adhere to God’s commands related to parenting their children in the Lord.