In response to Nathan’s request.

I am open to different interpretations of meaning and various understandings of the spiritual state of an infant, while remaining convinced in practice. Ok, that was nebulous. Basically; I think it’s futile to get bogged down in discussion on how one can know if a child has faith; the Bible simply does not address it. From the perspective of baptism, I don’t even like to refer to the doctrine as that of infant baptism. Rather, family baptism seems to be more scriptural.

To begin, perhaps it is good to come to an understanding on faith. Now Hebrews 11:1 says that faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. If we read the long list of the patriarchs and prophets who had faith in the old testament they were all in things that pertained to an unseen promise. They had to rely on God with no other support. None do this better than children. They believe what they are taught without question, and haven’t the slightest problem with relying on God for forgiveness and the gift of eternal life. For this reason Jesus said that to such as those belongs the kingdom of heaven. People will often say to me “but an infant can’t believe!”

I couldn’t disagree more. This is at the root of most major theological differences that I have with Baptist theology. Faith is, of course, believing. But belief is assumed to come about by rational conviction. In other words one must have mature adult comprehension in order to be able to ‘truly’ believe. Children accept what they are taught in Sunday school, but it is held to be doubtful that they truly have faith, because in the western mindset belief is measured according to an adult’s capacity to understand.

From my reading of scripture I find this contrary to the means by which God works. Faith is given by grace “and this not of ourselves; it is a gift of God.” If we come back to the realization that the names listed in the Hebrews 11 were not people who were explained the plan of salvation and understood that it must be the only way. No, they were simply given a promise, and depended on it. And this not of themselves, it was a gift of God. So mental capacity really cannot be a prerequisite to faith; otherwise we have subtly put salvation back in the hands of the individual. Instead of salvation by works, we’ve redefined ‘belief’ and get a salvation by adult comprehension–just another human effort. Granted; for adults God uses the mind he gave them and conforms it to his will when he gives faith, but this is the result of the gift of faith, not the cause.

But back to dependence. Faith is simply total dependence on God for spiritual provision. Adam sinned when he tried to acquire his own means of ‘spiritual’ food instead of completely depending on God for it. If this dependence is the essence of faith, then no one can do it better than an infant! Ever see one nurse? This is their nature, and it is completely compatible with a faith that is given by God according to his will.

Now to switch gears, what is God’s means of delivering this saving faith. Look through scripture; it is always through physical act. Faith comes by hearing the word. Abraham entered into a covenant with God (which, like all OT covenants, foreshadowed and pictured the New Covenant that would come in Christ himself) by walking between the two halves of a slaughtered sheep. This was symbolic of being united with the death of The Lamb who was to come. Or even earlier, Adam and Eve were clothed with the skins of a slaughtered animal; a picture of the death of The Lamb who covers sin. Also with Abraham is the introduction of circumcision, symbolic of the cutting off of sin from the heart. With the Hebrews in Egypt salvation was brought by slaughtering a lamb and putting the blood on the door posts. When the children of Israel were dying of snake bites, they had to look at a physical bronze snake to be healed; symbolic of death being hung on the cross, for they were dying as a result of their sin. To provide the people with water Moses is told to strike the rock and also to speak it. In the sacrificial system the Israelites were to atone for their sin by sacrificing animals. The list goes on. But in every one of these cases, whether it is entrance into the covenant or continued salvation from sin; they are required to do something to receive the benefits. This is not salvation by man’s works, for they were commanded by God to do them. They were simply depending on his promise by obeying.

News flash: the whole family was always included in the saving covenants!!! Not only were the children allowed to partake, but the parents were required to include the children. In fact, God was going to kill Moses for not circumcising his son. The question for Hebrew children was never “Do you want into the covenant?” They had already been brought into it; the only question could be “Do you want to stay in it?”

Yes, yes, we all know that’s the way it was back then, but that was the Old Testament, things are different under the New. Well let’s look at that.

Every covenant and the rituals they entail are pictures of the work of Christ. We have already looked at this, and it hardly needs to be argued. Clearly ever since God promised to Eve that her offspring would crush the head of Satan every time God establishes and nourishes a relationship with his people it is only on the basis of Jesus sacrifice. So all that he gave his people to do in order to be saved in the OT was a picture of Jesus’ sacrifice.

So although the forms change, God’s method, or his manner, of communicating salvation to his people remain the same. If all the signs and symbols that point to Christ, and all the covenants that nurtured a relationship with God were applied to the entire family, than how much more is the reality of those things to be applied to children in the New Covenant!

There can be no clearer unfolding of sin, salvation through Jesus’ death and life through his ressurection than that of the passover. Egypt is the slavery to sin, the plagues are the consequences of sin, the slaughtered lambs are the sacrifice of Christ, the blood on the door posts of the house is the covering of Christ’s blood of the household of faith, the crossing of the Red Sea is baptism, the wandering in the wilderness is the hardship of maturation in Christ as a church, the water from the rock and manna in the wilderness are the Lord’s supper (I Corinthians 10). Clearly this is a journey that God intends for the entire family. When he gives faith to the parents he expects them to bring the children into that same faith and raise them in it.

As for God’s particular means, he has clearly laid them out. When speaking to adults on the day of Pentecost Peter says “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” First, taking this statement literally, forgiveness of sins comes by repenting and being baptized. This is not salvation by works. This is salvation by faith as it has been in every covenant (Romans 4). Is repentence any less an action than baptism. But God gives that forgiveness in a way that we can know through physical obedience to his command in faith that we have received it–just as he always has. This place is baptism. The idea of baptism is that of being united with Christ’s death so that we may share in his ressurection (Romans 6).

Certainly this is spiritual baptism. But when we consider Christ’s command to make disciples….”baptizing and teaching” we must conclude that the spiritual baptism into Christ, the one that unites us with him, is one and the same as the physical baptism that Christ ordains as a part of making disciples. Again, this is not salvation by works, but salvation by faith in God’s promise that he gives to us in Baptism through the mouth of Peter both in Acts 2 and in I Peter 3:21. This is not a bizarre and radical idea that God uses an actual ritual to meet us and give us salvation because of obedience in faith; it is how he has always worked! The faith is his gift, the act is his command, and the obedience is by the work of his spirit. In no way is it a work of man. Being baptized is passive! It’s what God does to me, not what I do for God or myself.

Notice that in every case it is by his Word that this salvation is given. The Word of command and the Word of promise.

For the Jew now, there is no question concerning children. This covenant is the fulfillment of all that was promised, prophesied and given in the old covenant; of course children are included, it’s for the whole family! But we need not make this assumption, for Peter reaffirms that this is still God’s plan : “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And indeed throughout the new testament (the jailer, the Phillipian jailer and the house of Lydia, both in Acts 16) we see families being baptized.

So for me the question is not “why should we think infants can be saved and baptized?” But rather “When did God change his mind about the family??”

It probably boils down to two three main differences in definition:

1) Faith; acquired by rational understanding, or gift of God to whomever he wills, causing their soul to depend on him.

2) Baptism; testimony and act of man, or command, gift, and work of God.

3) Salvation; by faith alone, period. Or by faith alone through the physical means that he gives with a promise.