Baptist Covenantalism (pt.2): Why We Don't Baptize Infants

[SpotterVideo]

Which of the Two Baptisms is required for salvation?

Water baptism was a part of the Old Covenant system of ritual washing. The Old Covenant priests had to wash before beginning their service in the temple. When Christ was water baptized by His cousin John in the Jordan River, He was under the Old Covenant system. He also only ate certain foods, as prescribed by the Old Covenant. Christ was water baptized by John and then received the Holy Spirit from heaven. The order is reversed in the New Covenant. A person receives the Holy Spirit upon conversion, and then believers often declare their conversion to their friends and family through a New Covenant water baptism ceremony.

The conversion process is described below.

Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

(A person must “hear” the Gospel, and “believe” the Gospel, and will then be “sealed” with the Holy Spirit.)



Which baptism is a part of the salvation process, based on what the Bible says?
What did Peter say below?

Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Acts 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.


Based on Luke 3:16, and John 1:33, and Acts 11:15-16, the most important thing about the word "baptize" in the New Testament has nothing to do with water. The Holy Spirit is the master teacher promised to New Covenant believers in Jeremiah 31:34, and John 14:26, and is found fulfilled in Ephesians 1:13, and 1 John 2:27. Unfortunately, many modern Christians see water when they read the word "baptize" in the text.

Based on the above, what is the one baptism of our faith found in the passage below? How many times is the word "Spirit" found in the passage, and how many times is the word "water" found in the passage?

Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (See 1 Cor. 12:13)

“baptize” KJV

Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Water or Holy Spirit?, See Eph. 1-13.)

Luk_3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:

Joh_1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;

Joh_1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

1Co_1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (See Eph. 4:1-5)

Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Old Covenant - New Covenant)


How many people have been saved by the Old Covenant water baptism of John the Baptist?

Who did John the Baptist say is the greatest Baptist that ever lived in Luke 3:16? What kind of New Covenant baptism comes from Christ?

New Covenant water baptism is a beautiful ceremony which allows new believers to declare their conversion to the whole world.

[soundmin]

Before I start I will say that I grew up baptistic in my sacraments and was a 1689 affirming Reformed Baptist for about 8 years. I argued against infant baptism in Seminary but never really challenged my own traditions. When I did, I began to see that my traditions had prevented me from seeing the whole counsel of God as it related to this issue.

Not a topic that can be debated on this kind of forum but there are many errors in your arguments. Just to name a few, you say that there is no explicit example or command to baptize infants. That is an argument from silence. I could easy counter argue and say that there are no explicit commands not to baptize infants and examples of households being baptized where it's possible that infants were included. Likewise, if you want to talk about arguments from silence, for more than 2, 000 years that covenant promises were for parents and their children, where is the explicit abrogation of this principle in the New Testament? You would imagine that the Jews would have been outraged by the idea that their children were no longer partakers in the covenant promises, but yet there is absolute silence... Perhaps it is because this principle was not abrogated. In his first epistle to the Corinthians Paul specifically calls the children of at least one believing parent holy (vv 12). Jesus has children (Matthew 19:13-15, Mark 10:13-16) and infants (Luke 18:15) brought to Him and He blesses them, "for of such is the Kingdom of God'. 

You might argue that the new covenant sign of baptism is not equivalent to the Old Testament sign of circumcision. I would disagree, and so would the Baptist preacher John Piper, who in commenting on Colossians 2:11-12 said, "So the image of spiritual circumcision is closely connected with the image of baptism... It's probably right, therefore, to say that baptism has replaced circumcision as the mark of being the people of God."1 

You would say that all people must make a profession of faith before they are baptized, at what age do you accept that profession? At 6 years old my daughter could quote, word-for-word multiple consecutive verses of Scripture from multiple books in the Bible. She talked about God all the time, about how much she loved Him, even regularly said that she loved me second most because she loved God more than anyone else. Is this not a child like faith? The kind of faith that Christ said we should all have? Would you baptize her? Or do you wait until a child has had a chance to be sent into the world, to be put though a public school system, to be put though a public university... Do you not understand that the way we raise children, for the most part, in the west is very different than the way that 1st century Christians raised their children? ALL of their children were believers because that is what you did! Children were not thrown to the wolves under the guise of libertarian freedom. Presbyterians do not argue that baptized children are saved any more than Baptists argue that professing Christians are saved. We follow God's command to raise up our children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4) and I promise you that by doing so they will be believers. This does not mean that they will not fall away, this does not mean that they will have an authentic faith as they get older, but the same is said about baptized adults. I think it dangerous to teach our children that they are no a part of the covenant promises, that they are not holy (set apart).

So when do you baptize people? 10 years old, 13, maybe 18? Show me in Scripture where it tells us at what age a person can be baptized. You don't baptize children, but I am guessing like many baptists you will do infant dedications. Show me where that is done in the New Testament. Some of the most brilliant biblically sound theologians throughout history have believed the Bible to teach, implicitly, infant baptism. John Owen, Jonathan Edwards, B.B. Warfield, R.C. Sproul, Joel Beeke just to scratch the surface. Is it possible that you are wrong and they are right? I would say yes, it's possible. Is it possible that Presbyterians are wrong and Baptists are right, it's possible. Scripture is not explicit on this teaching one way or another, this being true I think it wise to err on the side of caution and continue the practice of giving our children the covenant sign seeing as the word of God never commanded us to stop.


1. John Piper, What is Baptism and How Important Is It?, Desiring God, 20 July 2008.

[mrhartley]

When you read Colossians 2:11-12 you skipped over the “having been buried with him in baptism” part. It says we’re circumcised by Christ having been buried with him in baptism.
Where does the circumcision happen according to the text?…when we were baptized.

[soundmin]

Last comment after watching the rest of this. We have some straw man arguments here. (We cannot just read a verse that has circumcision and baptism in it and connect them...) Really? Don't know any Presbyterians that do that. What you seem to be arguing is that the circumcision Paul is talking about is spiritual, which Presbyterians do not deny, but then you argue that the baptism he is talking about is physical. So should we conclude that we are saved by baptism? Certainly not! If it were this easy to dismantle infant baptism I don't think we would have so many sound theologians that practice it. Please, if you really want to know the argument for infant and household baptism from a Presbyterian perspective read a Presbyterian. I recommend the short book "What About Baptism?" written by Dr. Robert Rayburn.

[HARDKILLdotORG]

So because it "doesn't explicitly say we must baptize infants" it therefore explicitly means we should not baptize children? I don't think that is a good argument. If it's silent. To me, that argues to understand it as it always has been understood. Which he freely admits was understood in the Old Testament to mean baptize infants. He needs to instead argue how he jumps to his new and what became human tradition to only baptize older kids and adults. The burden of that is on HIM to prove that.