The Committee on Christian Education has recently published the booklet “Why Does the OPC Baptize Infants?” authored by the Rev. Larry Wilson. Pastor Wilson begins by saying, “It might surprise you to learn that even though we’re presbyterians, we’re also baptists. In other words, we do baptize. Our disagreement with our baptistic brethren isn’t over whether we should baptize; it’s over whom we should baptize. Why do we baptize the children of believers?”
He works through the answer to this question by following a five-step explanation:
1. The church of the Old Testament and the church of the New Testament are, in essence, the same church.
2. God regards the children of believers as members of this church.
3. In the Old Testament era, the children of believers, because they were church members, were given the covenant sign of circumcision.
4. In the New Testament era, God has taken the sign of circumcision and changed it to baptism.
5. Therefore, in the New Testament era, the children of believers, because they are church members, are to be given the sign of baptism.
Do you think that it is plausible to say that Presbyterians are baptist-plus?
Tweet
Jason Robertson is a husband and a father and a pastor. He is dedicated to leading and equipping his the Church with God’s word and biblical theology for life ministry, using a combination of pastoral, church planting and evangelism experience. He holds a Master of Divinity from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. He is experienced in church planting, evangelism, missions, and the training of pastors and Bible teachers.
Jason has been preaching the gospel since 1985, serving the first ten years of ministry as a Southern Baptist itinerant evangelist out of Milldale Baptist Church in Zachary, LA which ordained him in 1993. He has preached in hundreds of churches in over 30 States and 4 countries. He planted churches in Siberia, Russia in the summers of 1993 and 1994. He founded Murrieta Valley Church in California, which he planted in cooperation with the SBC NAMB in 2001. He also teaches ministry students at California Baptist University.
You can hear his sermons and read his manuscripts on sermonaudio.com. Just follow the link to "sermons" at the top of this page.
The infants and small children (those who are not saved yet) are visible church members not invisible church memeber
Sarah,
Is that an answer to the question?
It really does seem like a large part of the disagreement is that there is a difference in understanding of the church, both visible and invisible. From the answer given above I would have to conclude that it is believed that the invisible church is made up of believers but the visible/local church is made up of a mixed bag of regenerate and the unregenerate.
While Baptists can not speak to exhaustive knowledge of the belief of every member of the visible church (Don’t hold the majority of SBCers against me on this) we can attempt to the best of our ability to hold membership in the visible church to believers only. Thus infants and children would not be members because we can have no knowledge of their salvation.
I realize that this is not the only argument as there is a biblical argument that scripture speaks to baptism of believers only. For now it does seem that there needs to be agreement that those that baptize infants and children on the profession of their parents hold to a different view of the visible church than most Baptists would.
Tony,
You are right.
The paedo view of the church is that it is JUST LIKE the OT church, mixed with believers and unbelievers.
And they believe that circumcision and baptism are THE SAME. Therefore they are given to both the elect and unelect because you give them to all the children of believers.
THEN, they say, “You baptist can’t hold a we only baptize those who are regenerate because it is impossible to know who is regenerate.” OH yeah??? Then on what basis do you know which parents are believers so that you know which infants to baptize??????
You guys are missing the whole point of “visible/invisible”. Do allow your children into your churches? Do you allow them to participate in worshipping God? Do not consider them apart of your family who is separate from the things of this world? You can’t say that your children are not apart of your visible church and still Sunday after Sunday bring them to church and teach them the things of God. The fact that they are allowed into God’s presence in your church service is no small matter to God. They are holy if at least one parent is. What is your definition for visible member?
Missing the point?
The point is that the visible church is the invisible church without sanctification! And if anyone is found not to be in the invisible church then they are taken off the role of the visible church.
Reformed baptist have a much higher view of the visible church than does paedobaptism, if what Sarah says is true.
Sarah there is a HUGE difference between having children [or adults] faithfully attend your church, being thus evangelized, than to just go ahead and baptize them because who knows they may be elect and don’t know it yet.
Has God changed? Can just anyone enter His presence and worship because they want to? Is He not as holy as He once was? Is there not commands in His Word which teaches us who may come into His presence to worship? Jason, God is still just as holy as He ever has been. As adults, who are believers, we are allowed into His presence through what Christ did on the cross. Our children are called holy and there is a command to teach them all His ways and therefore they too are allowed into His presence via the visible church….only because He has commanded it. So we actually have a higher view of church membership….we follow the instructions given to us in Scripture. If you want to make these Scripture mean something else, then you have no Scripture which allows you to bring your unsaved children into His presence for worship. You still did not define “visible church”.
Do we let unholy people attend our church? Yes. Guilty as charged. And may the gospel penetrate the darkness of their minds!
Jason,
I’m not taking about the hearing of the Gospel…surely you know this. Do you teach a heathen couple how to pray to God? Do you teach them how to sing praises to God? I hope you don’t for they have no right to come before God’s throne. This is Scriptural. We only have the right to come before His throne because of Christ. Our children have those rights because He has deemed them holy.
God says that children of at least one believing parent are holy. From what are they separate (holy)? From the things of this world. What are they separate unto? The things of God. You can’t be separate from something (the world) without being separated unto something (things of God) else. So you and your children don’t talk like the world. You don’t dress sexy like the world. You don’t watch the filth on tv/movies like the world or engage in ungodly activities like the world. These things are all physical things that separate you and your children from the world…this is what makes up the visible church. Those adults who are able to do this, who are able to love Christ instead of the things of this world, do so through His power of sanctification or circumcision of the heart….this is being apart of the invisible church. As believing parents, they teach their children correct physical behavior. So the children emulate what the parents do, but they do it as an outward work or learning process, whereas, their parents do it because of the sanctification process. These things make up the visible and invisible church. The adults are apart of the visible and invisible church and their children are apart of the visible church.
In the OT, God did not allow the uncircumcised to come into His presence for worship and He doesn’t allow those who are not holy to come into His presence for worship in the New Covenant era. You can have unbelievers who come to your services who are to hear the Gospel and learn, but they are not allowed to enter His presence in prayer/praise worship. Do they have to leave the service during this time? No. They can physically be there, but they are not to be taught and encouraged to praise and pray to God until they are saved. The hearing of the Gospel is for all people. Praise and worship is for His people which includes their children.
Yes, Sarah, we do those things, but the unregenerate are objects of evangelism, not members of the church. They cannot be deacons or elders. They cannot serve on committees or participate in the business of the church – and this applies equally to regenerate persons who attend regularly but are not members. This has nothing to do with engaging in the activity of worship or teaching people to behave in a godly manner, but the rights, privleges, and duties that are to be discharged within the local church.
They are also to be barred from the Lord’s Table – and this is true even in Paedo churches, but herein is a massive inconsistency, Dear Sister, for, if circumcision answers to baptism for children, why does not the Passover answer to the Lord’s Supper – for unregenerate children too? The Dutch Reformed are more consistent on this than the Presbyterians.
The answer from Presbys typically involves the Passover being an artifact from the Mosaic Covenant, but that doesn’t help, for in that event you are saying that the recipients of circumcision as baptism is a matter of continuity while participants in the Passover as the Lord’s Supper is a matter of discontinuity.
God says that children of at least one believing parent are holy.
Where is there a Scripture to support this?
Surely, to answer the specific question, one would hope that even in paedobaptist churches, baptism of adults was more common than infants, because it would point to evangelistic activity which was genuinely reaching the unchurched? One of the side-benefits of baptising infants is that you get a neat little book-keeping device to know whether the church is actually being evangelistic, or whether it’s just church kids getting baptised.
Sarah,
You may need to read Acts 10:1-4 and rethink your understanding of how many people come to God.
gene,
I wasn’t talking about evangelism I was talking about types of membership. Infants and small children are covenantal children of the visible church who are taught not only God’s Word but also how to pray and worship our God. Heathens are ONLY taught the Gospel. Also, our church ALWAYS includes the Gospel of Jesus Christ within each teaching. So the “evangelism” you feel is only for the heathen is actually for all God’s children. We are to be reminded of what He did and how it affects every part of our lives.
“for, if circumcision answers to baptism for children, why does not the Passover answer to the Lord’s Supper – for unregenerate children too?” Because Christ SPECIFICALLY bars them from the Lord’s Supper but doesn’t bar them from baptism, but instead brings them into baptism when He mentions WHOLE households being baptized.
“God says that children of at least one believing parent are holy.
Where is there a Scripture to support this?” 1Cor 7:14
Jason,
what are you talking about? Your statement doesn’t even start to address the definition of visible/invisible members. It is addressing how many people were saved.
Jason,
I went and read your Scripture and apparently you were not talking of “numbers”…my mistake. However, I still don’t see how this is addressing the issue at hand. I’m tired right now so I’ll come back tomorrow and see if it makes more sense.
In answer to your original question, “No.”
Wilson is clearly taking “baptist” to mean “one who baptizes,” not referring to your narrow, denominational title.
As I have said several times already, Independents (as well as Baptists) have historically held to regenerate church membership, while Presbyterians have held to a “mixed multitude;” that because the condition for church membership is an external, credible profession of faith, and not regeneracy, there may be unregenerate individuals in the membership of the church. See Bannerman’s Church of Christ, Vol. 1, pp. 68-80.
All Reformed churches have always opposed paedocommunion, the Dutch Reformed included — unless you are counting the Christian Reformed, who have already been disfellowshipped from NAPARC for their admission of women to the pastorate and eldership.
The New Testament injunction to “bring up” our children “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” — where do you think we get that? Is that a new command? Upon what is this grounded? It is not a coincidence that Genesis 18, where we read, “he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him” (verse 19), follows upon Genesis 17, and the placing of Abraham’s children in the covenant. If you obey the New Testament, and teach your children to honor and obey God, you are recognizing this covenant relationship wherein your children were born.