Introduction
Having discussed the nature of baptism (or immersion) according to the Scriptures, we can now turn our attention to the subjects of baptism. Here we are answering the question: “Who ought to be immersed?” There have been, of course, many answers to this question over the years. While teaching that adults must be “initiated into the mystery of salvation,” the papists simultaneously teach that “the Church and parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.”1 Presbyterians, of course, teach that “Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one or both believing parents are to be baptized.”2 The Baptist position, which I believe to be the only biblical position, is that only those who have been united to Christ Jesus through faith are the proper subjects of immersion. In other words, only those who have professed faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and whose profession is credible, ought to be baptized. I will put forward two arguments for this position. These arguments are very simple because the issue is very simple: the Bible nowhere teaches that any except those who believe on Jesus Christ ought to be baptized.
Argument #1: Only Believer’s Baptism Meets the Signification of Baptism
The ordinance of immersion is not a rite of initiation into the church of God. As we saw in the previous post, it is an outward testimony of an internal reality. It is a sign signifying a spiritual truth. In Romans 6:3-4 we read, “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore 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.” Baptism, in other words, represents the believer’s union with the Lord Jesus Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection. If this is the case, then it stands to reason that only those who are actually united to Christ Jesus ought to receive this sign of being united to the Lord Jesus Christ. Anything else is a falsehood.
This necessarily precludes any but those who have a credible profession of faith from being baptized. Simply closing your eyes and praying the so-called “sinner’s prayer” does not mean that one is united to Jesus Christ. If we abide in Christ, there is fruit that follows from that union (John 15). If a person is given a new heart, that new heart (nature) will look different from the old heart (nature). This is not perfectionism, but there will be a change in life for the one who truly belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ. After all, he himself taught us this: “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life” (Jn. 8:12).
Additionally, no child is born united to Jesus Christ, regardless of their parentage. We are all born under sin, whether Jew or Gentile (Romans 3). So, to give an infant this sign is to tell a lie before both God and man. At the same time, God can save any person at any time he so chooses. It is, of course, possible for God to redeem infants as well as older children. But until they profess faith in Jesus Christ, they ought not receive the ordinance which testifies that they have been united to Jesus Christ.
Argument #2: The Only Examples of Baptisms are of Those Who Believe
In Matthew 28:19, it is those who are taught (made disciples) who are to be baptized. In John 4:1-2, the disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ baptized those who were made disciples. In Acts 2:38, Peter called upon the Jews to repent and be baptized: repentance comes before baptism. We see in verse 41 that those who gladly received the word were baptized. In Acts 8:12, those who believed the gospel preached by Philip were baptized. In Acts 8:36-38, Philip baptized the Ethiopian eunuch upon his profession of faith that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. In Acts 9, Paul was baptized after his conversion to Jesus Christ. In Acts 10, those who received the Holy Ghost after the preaching of Peter were baptized. In Acts 18:8, Crispus along with his household and many of the Corinthians believed and were baptized. Notice that those in his household believed: “And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.”
In Acts 16:15, Lydia was baptized upon belief, along with her household. This is an example that needs examination, because the assumption on the part of those who teach infant baptism is that this “household” must have included children, and they were baptized not for their own profession, but because of their mother’s. But we must remember that context is the determining factor in our interpretation of this word. The word translated “household” does not necessarily mean that children were present. In fact, the word includes all those who belong to the household, including the servants. In verse 14, we find that Lydia was from the city of Thyatira, which was a good distance from Philippi, where she was baptized. It seems unlikely that she would travel from Asia Minor to Macedonia for business with her children, if she had any (which we do not know because the Scripture does not tell us). It does seem likely, however, that a wealthy merchant like Lydia would travel with servants. Additionally, in verse 40, those gathered in the house of Lydia are called “the brethren,” indicating that they were considered to be members of the local church in Philippi. Furthermore, the golden rule of interpreting Scripture is that we interpret the more difficult passages by the clearer passages. If every other record of baptism in Acts explicitly teaches us that belief precedes baptism, then we cannot subvert that order based upon one unclear passage. Indeed, given that reality, the underlying assumption is that Lydia’s “household” (whether simply the servants who attended her, as Gill states, or inclusive of young children old enough to travel far distances) believed prior to their baptism. Therefore, this example does not provide evidence for the teaching of infant baptism, but the context does suggest the biblical position of believer’s baptism.
Baptism is a part of the local church’s worship. The Lord God takes his worship seriously, and has prescribed to us how we are to worship him. This includes baptism. If the Scriptures are our sole infallible rule for practice, for the way in which we worship God, then we ought to baptize according to what the Scriptures plainly and clearly reveal. Therefore, we ought only to baptize those who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, because the only records of baptisms in Scripture are of those who believe.
Conclusion
Again, these arguments are very simple. The Bible is very clear on its teaching concerning baptism. If we simply hold to what Scripture plainly and simply reveals, then there can be no dispute on this point. But once we begin to interpret Scripture in light of our tradition or theological framework, we will always miss the mark. So, in that regard, one application that we can make from this study is that we must beware of relying upon anything except the clear and plain teaching of the Word of God. May he give us grace to lean not to our own understand, but to humbly and steadfastly stand upon the truth as he has revealed it in the Scripture.
1 Roman Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1992), 1248 & 1250.
2 Westminster Confession of Faith, 28.4.
Leave a Reply