Sunday, January 20, 2013

Why we baptize whole families.


Because that is how it was done in Acts. The earliest Church in action

Acts 1:5
Acts 2:38
Acts 2:41
Acts 8:12
Acts 8:13
Acts 8:16
Acts 8:36
Acts 9:18
Acts 10:48
Acts 11:16
Acts 16:15
Acts 16:33
Acts 18:8
Acts 19:3
Acts 19:4
Acts 19:5
Acts 22:16

In some of the verses above entire families were baptized. Baptists say that because an infant isn't mentioned means we cannot assume. We have to read these verses in light of Jesus' words in Matthew: "Then let the little children place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked those who brought them. Jesus said, let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these. When he had placed his hands on them, he went on form there. Mt 19,13-15

In light of theses verses how could you keep a child from his hand? This is one of two sacraments which means that the grace of God is imparted to the child. Follow the words of Jesus- no "dedications" but  baptism- have him or her be touched by Jesus. Not to be crass, but infant baptism "worked" for my three and it is a wonder in God's faithfulness to watch him bring each one into saving faith. Dear God, thank you for your faithfulness. .

Do not hinder them!



Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. jojo gadgetJanuary 21, 2013 at 10:40 AM

    I agree that infants should be baptized and scripture supports that. But I don't necessarily like the argument that it worked for G, B, and G. Because my siblings were baptized too and haven't come to saving grace... yet. Also some Mormans believe in that same vein of thought (the "do not hinder them" rather than the scriptural references) that post-humous conversions are acceptable and that is unacceptable in my opinion!

    Anyway thats why Grey (and others) always tell me anecdotal evidence can't be relied on haha because there's always anecdotal evidence the other way around too. But listing all those Scripture references? .. Can't argue with that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. duff gordonJanuary 21, 2013 at 12:03 PM

    jojo-It is true that children of believers are "children of the covenant" and not necessarily elect. I have confidence in God working His miracle in your siblings. Why? I just do. Have them read this blog- I like to think it is grace filled and that the law is only used too bring people to Christ.

    ReplyDelete
  3. GreyJanuary 27, 2013 at 11:44 AM

    You could also add the symbolic extension of circumcision to baptism:

    Colossians 2
    11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

    And by extension of being circumcised on the 8th day, we have infant baptism.

    Let each be convinced in his own mind.

    ReplyDelete
  4. duff gordonApril 13, 2013 at 9:19 AM

    A true son of the Reformation.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)