This morning I want to ask two questions and attempt to answer the first of them. The second question I will try to answer next week. The first question (and the one I will try to answer this morning) is, “Is the practice of infant baptism a practice that the Bible mandates, or should baptism be restricted to believers?” And the second question (which I will answer next week) is, “In the end, why does our answer to this question really matter anyway?”

There are a number of reasons I want to ask and try to answer these questions this morning. They are the following:

1. Next week we will baptize a couple and receive them into our membership who were baptized as infants. So, for their sake, as well as all of us who witness this, I want us to know why this is an important thing to do. For, surely we are doing this for more than simply the fact that this is the practice we have done at Cornerstone or that we do as Baptists. Surely it is rooted in Scripture. I believe it is, and I want to show us why this morning.

2. In two weeks Jonathan, Nathan, and I will be going to a pastors’ conference in which John Piper will speak. We all really look forward to this conference, anticipate enjoying hearing our brother preach, and know we will come back more focused and revived for our tasks as elders. However, there I am pretty sure that one of the themes of the conference is going to be lessening the importance of believers’ baptism. In essence, I believe this conference will advocate answering my last question this morning, “Why does it all really matter anyway?” with the response, “It doesn’t – at least enough to keep someone from your membership.” So I want us as elders to have our minds already engaged around the text regarding this matter before we go to the conference.

3. With the growing number of babies coming along in the church, some parents might be asking if it is their responsibility, according to Scripture, to baptize these infants, and if they do not baptize them, they need to know why they are choosing otherwise.

4. There are a growing number of Baptists returning to our historical roots of realizing God’s sovereignty in the Scripture and the need for a plurality of elders in the church. And with this crowd comes those who then, because they do not see these things in a Baptist church, opt to join a Presbyterian church in hopes that they might hear biblical truths and be aligned more biblically. Now, there a governmental issues here as well to discuss, but in the end, these individuals are making a decision to believe the Bible advocates the baptism of infants as the regular practice of baptism. So, are these people right? Is this a move we should all make? Should we do away with our Baptist ties and join the Presbyterian Church of America? I think the answer is, “No,” but I want you to know why as I try to answer the question before us this morning.

Therefore, these are four reasons why I engage in answering these this question this morning. No doubt, there are many other reasons I could have listed, but these are the dominant ones on my mind this morning.

With that said, however, I do want to make an up-front apology. There is probably a more systematic way of answering this question by taking all the texts that paedo-baptists (those who baptize infants) use and showing why I think they cannot be used to support this practice, instead of simply trying to take our one text in Colossians this morning and expounding it. However, I have an agenda in doing what I’m doing this morning, and it is to teach you how to study the Bible. That is to say, if I were to skip around from text to text in order to try to hit on my topic this morning, you would not be taught how to handle the Bible. For you cannot do such a thing in your “quiet time” each morning. However, if I just look at these few verses in Colossians 2, my hope is that at the end of this sermon say, “I could have said that. I could have done what he did. He didn’t say anything that isn’t very clear in the text. Anyone could have seen that!”

I want you to be doing this kind of Bible study in your time of personal bible study. So, my overarching aim is not simply to answer every question about the practice of infant baptism, using every text, but it is to teach you how to study your Bibles. However, I do think our text this morning is in many ways adequate to answer our question, and so it is to this text that we turn this morning.

Now, to be fair to those who practice infant baptism, I want to try to sum up their argument before I look at the text this morning. And I think this will be good for us because we have probably answered their claims of infant baptism as ludicrous without understanding why they practice it. We might have said, “Your children won’t be saved just because you baptize them” (which is true, and is the reason why a majority of those who hold to this practice baptize their children), but for many (e.g. our PCA brothers) they would agree with you that their children won’t be saved simply because they are baptized as infants. So, we need to understand their argument.

Those who advocate the practice of infant baptism would probably say that they don’t simply look at a certain text to advocate this practice, for they agree that the Bible never has an example of an infant being baptized (though they might appeal to the household baptisms – making an inference that there were infants present and often ignoring the clear statements that the entire household heard the word and/or heard the word and believed) and never a command to baptize infants. Rather, what they point to are the broad biblical structures and teachings that support this practice. What are these broad biblical structures and teachings to which they would point?

Well, it begins with Abraham. In Genesis 17:1-14 God reiterates his call of Abraham to himself and tells him that he will multiply his offspring and that all of his descendants should be circumcised as a mark of the covenant. Now this did not mean that all of Abraham’s physical descendants were actually children of God, for we see this traced out throughout the rest of Scripture.

Thus, in Jeremiah 9:23-26, Jeremiah writes, “Thus says the LORD, ‘Let not a wise man boast of his wisdom, and let not the mighty man boast of his might, let not a rich man boast of his riches; but let him who boasts boast of this, that he understands and knows Me, that I am the LORD who exercises lovingkindness, justice, and righteousness on earth; for I delight in these things," declares the LORD.’ ‘Behold, the days are coming,’ declares the LORD, ‘that I will punish all who are circumcised and yet uncircumcised –Egypt , and Judah, and Edom, and the sons of Ammon, and Moab, and all those inhabiting the desert who clip the hair on their temples; for all the nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised of heart.’”

Then, Paul confirms this in Romans 2:29 and Romans 9:6-8, writing, “But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God” and “But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; neither are they all children because they are descendants of Abraham, but, through Isaac your descendants will be named.” So it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

Finally, the second Scripture reading we had this morning included this text from Galatians 3:25-29, “But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are offspring of Abraham, heirs according to promise.”

Thus, it is clear that not all of those who were Abraham’s descendants, (i.e. those physically circumcised) were children of God (i.e. spiritually circumcised – circumcised of the heart). However, even those who were not children of God were blessed and set apart (with physical circumcision), for they were Abraham’s descendants. This did not guarantee they would become children of God (i.e. undergo the circumcision of the heart) but it did mean that they were part of the covenant community.

Then, the next step in the argument is that there is a parallel between baptism and circumcision, to the point that baptism replaces the act of circumcision to show who is the in covenant community. And we see that in our text this morning don’t we? Colossians 2:11-12 says, “In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.” So, there is clearly a connection with circumcision and baptism here somehow.

Thus, the final step in the argument would go, “Because there is a parallel with circumcision and baptism, and circumcision was applied to infants who were physical descendants of the people of God, even though there was no guarantee they would truly become the children of God, so should the physical descendants of those who are the people of God (the church) be baptized as infants, though it is no guarantee that they will truly become children of God.”

So, you see the broad structure and teachings throughout the Bible that might lead one to this conclusion. And, as I have said, there are a few texts here and there that might be pointed to as well which I do not want to take up this morning. However, the main argument is the one that I’m giving you this morning, so that if you showed the individual texts did not pan out toward infant baptism, a paedo-baptist would appeal to this broad layout of biblical structure and teaching.

But is this what the Bible really teaches? Let’s look at our text this morning in an attempt to answer that question. And particularly this morning I want to focus on verses 11 and following.

Paul tells these Colossian believers, “In [Christ] also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead” (vv. 11-12). So, as we said, here is a clear parallel with baptism and circumcision. However, is the parallel with physical circumcision or with something more?

The answer is that it is paralleling something more, namely, spiritual circumcision, or what Paul in other places has called circumcision of the heart. He makes this clear saying it is the circumcision “made without hands.” Therefore, what is demonstrated through baptism is that spiritual circumcision has occurred. Paul clarifies this even more writing in the verses that follow, “And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.”

Thus it is a parallel to that which spiritual circumcision is, namely, that you have been made alive together with Christ, that your sins have been forgiven, that you do not stand under the condemnation of God, that the law no longer hangs over you, and that the evil has no power of you.

That is to say, there is something more to show here than that you are a physical descendant of one who is a child of God, it is showing that you have had this inward reality of the putting away of the flesh and have been made anew. It thus belongs as a sign only to those who have been “raised with [Christ] through faith.”

Therefore, we would say that there is a reason that there are only the baptism of believers in the new covenant and why infant baptism is not taught or practiced. It is because baptism does not belong to those who are of physical descent. It belongs to those who are of spiritual descent, as we read in Galatians 3:29, “And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring heirs according to the promise.” It is a sign not paralleling physical circumcision exactly but paralleling spiritual circumcision, the circumcision of the heart. Therefore, only those who have tasted and have known this inward spiritual reality of the circumcision of the heart should take on the sign of baptism. It is a sign for those who have believed, a visible symbol, showing what has occurred in their lives. And next week we will be able to witness this proclamation go forth in the baptism of three individuals.

So this morning, what should be our response to this text? I want to name four things.

1. Examine yourself to see if this inward spiritual reality of circumcision of the heart has occurred. Has God changed your life as you placed your faith in Christ, trusting in his death, burial, and resurrection as the full payment for your sins, relying utterly on his work on your behalf? Maybe it was baptism that you’ve trusted in for years or walking the aisle of a church or praying a prayer, and you’ve never known God’s transforming power of making you a new creature in Christ. Maybe you went through some external sign meant to show an inward reality but do not know the true, inward, spiritual reality. You’ve walked the aisle or been baptized but you’re not a true believer, much as those who are spoken of as being physically circumcised but not spiritually circumcised. And just as circumcision profits nothing apart from faith, so do our external signs mean nothing apart from saving faith. Therefore, you need to place your hope and faith in Christ, turning from your sin and relying on his payment on the cross as your only hope to stand righteous before God. If this is you, this is your needed response today.

2. For those who examine their lives and attest to this reality, you need to realize afresh this morning the transformation that has occurred and praise God – live a life of thanksgiving and obedience. It’s so easy to forget the drastic change that has happened internally and is easy to ignore. However, we must not, so respond to this miracle with unbridled praise and living a life of obedience to God’s word, loving him more than anything else and despising sin.

3. Allow the peace of Christ to rule your hearts. Did you notice the work of Christ in this? It is not your own work that has saved you. So, maybe you’ve been deceived by the devil that your labor makes you appear in good standing with God and not the work of Christ on your behalf. Then take time and meditate on these realities listed in these verses. He has disarmed Satan, crushing his power over you and nailed your sin to the cross, if you are his child. So, quit living in false guilt that haunts you and begin to rest in Christ’s finished work on the cross that is symbolized in baptism.

4. Finally, be baptized. If you have repented and believed but have not been baptized, then this is the biblical prescription to make public the inward reality that has occurred in your life. It is Jesus’ version of the altar call if you will. We often invite people to come up front in churches, but Jesus’ invitation is to be baptized to make public the reality of your salvation, your faith and repentance. So if you have become a believer, then you need to make public your faith through baptism.

In any of these, I invite you to come and talk with me or fill out the card in your chair. Whatever your response needs to be this morning, may Christ and his work be exalted this morning as we publicly and corporately worship our Lord in singing a song of declaration and praise for Christ’s great work on our behalf – “It is Well.” It indeed is well, for Christ has died for our sins.

Grace be with you. Amen.

SHOULD WE PRACTICE INFANT BAPTISM? - PART 1