Paedo-Baptism Answers Baptized in the Trinity

Status
Not open for further replies.
Christopher88

Christopher88

Puritan Board Sophomore
I am 99% Presbyterian the 1% is baptism. The area I struggle with in padeo baptism is this, and this being my only draw away from full confession.
A. Being baptized in the trinity before the Spirit of God (baptism of fire) is upon the child
B. Col. 2:12-14 appears to be a credo scripture. Buried under the water with Christ, rise up with new creation in Christ.
Why is regeneration not required to receive a sign which scripture seems to teach does.
Thank you.
 
Christopher88 said:
I am 99% Presbyterian the 1% is baptism. The area I struggle with in padeo baptism is this, and this being my only draw away from full confession.
A. Being baptized in the trinity before the Spirit of God (baptism of fire) is upon the child
B. Col. 2:12-14 appears to be a credo scripture. Buried under the water with Christ, rise up with new creation in Christ.
Why is regeneration not required to receive a sign which scripture seems to teach does.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
My 2 cents:

I would search older threads. I am sure Mr. Religion would not mind providing. It has been discussed/debated at length on many PB threads.

The better question is not why should we apply to infants, but rather what verses explicitly tells us not to apply the covenant sign to the infants? Why....well....
Circumcision (covenant sign) was commanded for the infants in the OT, but it symbolized the spiritual reality of "heart circumcision". Hopefully if you grasp that first...the logic of the "Paedo" argument will follow.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Christopher88 said:
I am 99% Presbyterian the 1% is baptism. The area I struggle with in padeo baptism is this, and this being my only draw away from full confession.
A. Being baptized in the trinity before the Spirit of God (baptism of fire) is upon the child
B. Col. 2:12-14 appears to be a credo scripture. Buried under the water with Christ, rise up with new creation in Christ.
Why is regeneration not required to receive a sign which scripture seems to teach does.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Christopher,

Welcome to PB!

You posted in the right place, wherein only paedo-baptistic members may respond.

Go here:
https://www.puritanboard.com/forums/paedo-baptism-answers.122/

A casual review of the thread titles will likely tickle your interest and contain much discussion of the matter at hand. For example:
https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/what-is-baptism-what-does-it-do.82455/#post-1036566

https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/scriptural-basis-for-paedo-baptism.79751/#post-1007452
 
C. M. Sheffield said:
Hearing one side of a matter certainly makes things easier. ;)
Click to expand...
I will overlook the response wherein it is not permitted, given the recent influx of new members who may not be aware of the rules for Baptism discussions. ;)

Get the "other side" (anti-paedobaptism) here:
https://www.puritanboard.com/forums/credo-baptism-answers.123/

Debate or discuss both sides here:
https://www.puritanboard.com/forums/baptism.57/

@Christopher88, if you want this thread to be moved to the general discussion of baptism forum, I (or one of the mods if I am absent) am happy to do so. As things stand, only paedo-baptists may respond to your questions in this thread.
 
Christopher88 said:
I am 99% Presbyterian the 1% is baptism. The area I struggle with in padeo baptism is this, and this being my only draw away from full confession.
A. Being baptized in the trinity before the Spirit of God (baptism of fire) is upon the child
B. Col. 2:12-14 appears to be a credo scripture. Buried under the water with Christ, rise up with new creation in Christ.
Why is regeneration not required to receive a sign which scripture seems to teach does.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Note that Christ was not buried underneath the earth in the way that the dead are in our culture. He was buried in an above-ground sepulcher--no form of baptism, including full immersion, looks like being carried into and laid down in a sepulcher.

Also note Romans 6:3-5, another favorite passage of the immersionists:
3Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.
Click to expand...
Paul teaches that baptism symbolizes union with Christ i his death, burial, and resurrection. What form of baptism looks like dying on a cross, being buried in a sepulcher, and rising again from the dead? There's not one.

A key point that immersionists tend to miss: just because something symbolizes something else, doesn't mean that it has to look like that something else.

Circumcision symbolized to Abraham the righteousness he received by faith (Rom 4:11). Who would claim that it looks like what it symbolizes? Who would claim that a lamb being slain and sacrificed on an altar looks like Christ on the cross? At the same time, who would deny that the sacrifices of the Old Testament symbolized Christ's sacrifice?
 
Christopher,

I think Tyler's post is very helpful if you are struggling with the mode of baptism in the Colossians 2 passage. I'm wondering if what you are struggling with is not the issue of the mode of baptism but what baptism symbolizes, as v. 12 has us participating in Christ's baptism through faith: "buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God" (NKJV). Can you clarify?
 
Over the past week I did some study and discussion with an officer of my church. Circumcision look towards the promise of Christ, and Baptism looks back towards Christ. It is mark of being God's and this mark is to be applied to our children, as God is covenantal and family is in the covenant like it was with Abraham.

Baptism is not a mark of being saved, but a mark of being in the covenant of God. Like Israel the visible and invisible church. Scripture does seem to apply this mark to the whole family.

Is this on the right track?

Could someone please post verses I need to study? Also please keep this thread Padeo only, I know the baptist side well enough to argue it. I do attend a Baptist seminary. (haha)
 
Christopher88 said:
Baptism is not a mark of being saved, but a mark of being in the covenant of God.
Click to expand...

Baptism is the sign and seal of salvation, but it is not salvation itself. One may have the sign, but not the thing signified.

The non-elect in the visible church only belong to the external administration of the covenant of grace. Strictly speaking, only the elect are really in the covenant.

Westminster Larger Catechism

Q. 31. With whom was the covenant of grace made?

A. The covenant of grace was made with Christ as the second Adam, and in him with all the elect as his seed.

Gal 3:16; Rom 5:15-21; Isa 53:10-11.
 
Christopher88 said:
Over the past week I did some study and discussion with an officer of my church. Circumcision look towards the promise of Christ, and Baptism looks back towards Christ. It is mark of being God's and this mark is to be applied to our children, as God is covenantal and family is in the covenant like it was with Abraham.

Baptism is not a mark of being saved, but a mark of being in the covenant of God. Like Israel the visible and invisible church. Scripture does seem to apply this mark to the whole family.

Is this on the right track?

Could someone please post verses I need to study? Also please keep this thread Padeo only, I know the baptist side well enough to argue it. I do attend a Baptist seminary. (haha)
Click to expand...
Keep going brother!

I too was once where you were at. Even once I was initially convinced of the Paedo position being biblical, I still had a few occasions of "Credo-relapse" :chained:since it was all I had ever been taught. I wanted to share with you one article that helped me and was the "shorter" of my many study aids.

http://resources.thegospelcoalition...w-my-mind-has-changed-a-letter-to-my-daughter

Go to the link and you can download a letter that I think will walk you through a good understanding of the Paedo position, as it was written by a father who was Credo prior to having his mind changed to Paedo. I hope this helps.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have been on this journey myself recently, and it has been quite a difficult one. I commend you for your labor. It is certainly worth it.

If I may, I would like to say how helpful Vos and Dabney have been to me in this struggle. If you would like to PM me, I would be happy to provide the relevant sections from Vos' Reformed Dogmatics and Dabney's Lectures in Systematic Theology that "sealed the deal" for me with respect to accepting paedobaptism. They may not have the same effect on you, but I found that the combination of these two resources answered many questions that no others (of which I am aware) had attempted to answer (on top of just being extremely astute theologians in general).
 
Discipleship is never equated, in the absolute sense, with salvation. The sign marks out the person (generally), with an ingrafting with the local church alone. Disciples are students.


19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Mt 28:18–20.

Nothing here about waiting until they make a confessions-which as well, would be no better than mere speculation....
 
Last edited:
Christopher88 said:
I am 99% Presbyterian the 1% is baptism. The area I struggle with in padeo baptism is this, and this being my only draw away from full confession.
A. Being baptized in the trinity before the Spirit of God (baptism of fire) is upon the child
B. Col. 2:12-14 appears to be a credo scripture. Buried under the water with Christ, rise up with new creation in Christ.
Why is regeneration not required to receive a sign which scripture seems to teach does.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
I too struggled with this issue. This book sealed the deal for me on infant baptisms. Don't let the format fool you. It is a brilliant book. This is a modernized edition. I highly recommend it.
William: The Baptist https://www.amazon.com/dp/159638218X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_ad4yBbCEF5EE4
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top