Why I Am A Baptist Christian
By Brother Bret Lovitz, Pastor/Elder of
Grace Fellowship, Mountain Home, ID.
Before I get into the reasons of why I am Baptistic, first let me say that I have a great love and respect for many of my brothers and sisters in Christ that believe in Infant Baptism but that it is does not contribute to the salvation of that child. I also welcome them to worship and serve the Lord with us because of our common belief and bond of the doctrines of sovereign grace and the sufficiency of the word of God as His means to save His people and grow them in Christ, if they do not have a sovereign grace Infant Baptist Church to attend and they can tolerate our Believer's Baptism 'only' position.
Ever since the Lord was pleased to save me and I have been in church, I have been Baptistic. Now while a Presbyerian friend or two has pointed out that Infant Baptists (paedobaptists) are Baptists too, in the strictest sense of the word "Baptist," for the sake of this short article, a Baptist[ic] Christian is one who believes that only believers should be baptized. It is not my intention to get into the mode of baptism even though I believe the word of God teaches that it is by immersion.
In the middle of 2003, a brother in Christ on a Christian Discussion Board asked the Baptist Pastors that participate on there, to give 10 reasons why we believe that Infant Baptism is wrong. As I studied and prepared for that response, it convinced, grounded, and settled me even further that Believer's Baptism is biblical, and Infant Baptism is not.
It is also not my intention to go into a detailed study of this doctrine, but rather just a brief summary of the subject that I hope will encourage the readers to study it further if necessary. Again, water baptism is not a salvific doctrine. And many of us Believers Baptists and Infant Baptists consider those who believe water baptism saves or helps save, to be heretical and outside the body of Christ and biblical, historical Christianity. So here are some reasons why I am a Baptist and believe and teach believers baptism only...
1. References to Water Baptism in the word of God are for believers (Acts 2:38; 8:13; 35-38; 9:1-18; 10:44-48; 16:14-15; 30-34; 18:8.)
2. There is no mention in the word of God of infants or young children being baptized.
3. In the references to "household baptisms" in the book of Acts, nothing is said about ages. One cannot say there were infants anymore than I could say they were teenagers (thank you Sonny)(Acts 16:14-15; 30-34; 18:8).
4. Two of three references to "household baptism" directly say that they believed (Acts 16:30-34; 18:8).
5. There was a perfect opportunity at the Council of Jerusalem to bring up that they should have been baptizing infants instead of circumcising, but they didn't(Acts 15).
6. There were opportunities for the Apostle Paul to bring up the same thing in his letter to the Galatians.
7. Water Baptism is an outward profession of faith identifying with the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ Who paid the penalty of the sins of His people, which infants cannot do.
8. Those that adhere to covenant theology and infant baptism believe that infant baptism is a new administration of circumcision. They cannot show where in the word of God circumcision for males was changed to infant baptism of males and females.
9. No where in the New Covenant, not even one place, even as the church was getting older, is the question asked if a new believer had already been baptized as an infant.
10. According to 1Cor. 7:14 children are part of the so-called "covenant family" because they are "set apart" by at least one believing parent without the need of infant baptism.
By Brother Bret Lovitz, Pastor/Elder of
Grace Fellowship, Mountain Home, ID.
Before I get into the reasons of why I am Baptistic, first let me say that I have a great love and respect for many of my brothers and sisters in Christ that believe in Infant Baptism but that it is does not contribute to the salvation of that child. I also welcome them to worship and serve the Lord with us because of our common belief and bond of the doctrines of sovereign grace and the sufficiency of the word of God as His means to save His people and grow them in Christ, if they do not have a sovereign grace Infant Baptist Church to attend and they can tolerate our Believer's Baptism 'only' position.
Ever since the Lord was pleased to save me and I have been in church, I have been Baptistic. Now while a Presbyerian friend or two has pointed out that Infant Baptists (paedobaptists) are Baptists too, in the strictest sense of the word "Baptist," for the sake of this short article, a Baptist[ic] Christian is one who believes that only believers should be baptized. It is not my intention to get into the mode of baptism even though I believe the word of God teaches that it is by immersion.
In the middle of 2003, a brother in Christ on a Christian Discussion Board asked the Baptist Pastors that participate on there, to give 10 reasons why we believe that Infant Baptism is wrong. As I studied and prepared for that response, it convinced, grounded, and settled me even further that Believer's Baptism is biblical, and Infant Baptism is not.
It is also not my intention to go into a detailed study of this doctrine, but rather just a brief summary of the subject that I hope will encourage the readers to study it further if necessary. Again, water baptism is not a salvific doctrine. And many of us Believers Baptists and Infant Baptists consider those who believe water baptism saves or helps save, to be heretical and outside the body of Christ and biblical, historical Christianity. So here are some reasons why I am a Baptist and believe and teach believers baptism only...
1. References to Water Baptism in the word of God are for believers (Acts 2:38; 8:13; 35-38; 9:1-18; 10:44-48; 16:14-15; 30-34; 18:8.)
2. There is no mention in the word of God of infants or young children being baptized.
3. In the references to "household baptisms" in the book of Acts, nothing is said about ages. One cannot say there were infants anymore than I could say they were teenagers (thank you Sonny)(Acts 16:14-15; 30-34; 18:8).
4. Two of three references to "household baptism" directly say that they believed (Acts 16:30-34; 18:8).
5. There was a perfect opportunity at the Council of Jerusalem to bring up that they should have been baptizing infants instead of circumcising, but they didn't(Acts 15).
6. There were opportunities for the Apostle Paul to bring up the same thing in his letter to the Galatians.
7. Water Baptism is an outward profession of faith identifying with the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ Who paid the penalty of the sins of His people, which infants cannot do.
8. Those that adhere to covenant theology and infant baptism believe that infant baptism is a new administration of circumcision. They cannot show where in the word of God circumcision for males was changed to infant baptism of males and females.
9. No where in the New Covenant, not even one place, even as the church was getting older, is the question asked if a new believer had already been baptized as an infant.
10. According to 1Cor. 7:14 children are part of the so-called "covenant family" because they are "set apart" by at least one believing parent without the need of infant baptism.
Comments
Canons of Dordt