Reformed View of Baptism?

Resurgam

New Member
Sep 23, 2015
1
0
✟7,611.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What is it? (I'm sure this has been asked a thousand times...please bear with me)

Quick Background: I have been a Baptist for most of my life but went to Presbyterian school so I've always had an affinity for Presbyterian Churches. Now my wife and I may visit a PCA church when we move to another city.

I never thought much about it because the difference between baptism by immersion vs. sprinkling of water is not a big issue for me (though Scripture is pretty clear it was by immersion in the NT and early church, but that's neither here nor there).

I never thought this would be a qualm for me in changing churches but the doctrine of Baptism has now become a stumbling block for me. Basically in Baptist circles, baptism is a visible act by a person who has believed in the Lord Jesus and confessed her sins. Essentially, it is a public display of identification with Christ through his death and resurrection.

It seems to me that (infant) baptism in Presbyterian circles is that it is essentially a promise (covenant) to try to raise a child in a Christian home. This would be equivalent to Baptists having baby dedications.

Is this a flawed understanding of Reformed theology?

It seems that the baptism of John in the NT is one of repentance and Jesus commands us to baptize those confessing their sins (see Matt 3:6). It seems this image invokes the Exodus leaving Egypt and pictures a renewal of that covenant in the NT.

I understand election in that we are not freely choosing God but that the Spirit is moving us to repentance and faith in Christ. I also understand those baptized by John did not know a thing about Jesus Christ, but they were still conscious of their sin, unlike the Pharisees and Sadducees whom John refused to baptize.

In short, how does Reformed theology handle the doctrine of baptism? And do Presbyterians distinguish between infant and adult baptism? Does an adult who was baptized as an infant, who then is clearly not a believer until late in life, need to be re-baptized? What about infants that are baptized but live and die as an unbeliever? What does baptism for them mean?

Thank you for your time and help, I really appreciate it!
 

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,608.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
My quick summary: believer's baptism is a sign of our acceptance of Christ; infant baptism is a sign of Christ's acceptance of us. In Reformed theology, God's call is primary. In some other theology, the human response to God is primary. Hence the difference in baptismal practice. I don't know how to explain Reformed Baptists. It always seemed odd to me.

There are also practical differences. I think children are full members of the Church. Jesus used them as models of faith.

No, we don't rebaptize. I would say that God's claim on us is there from the beginning. We may have faith, fall away and come back. But Jesus' concept of God as father, and the theology of justification, says that God's commitment to and acceptance of us is permanent. It just may take a while for it to be reflected in our life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JCFantasy23
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,251
✟48,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
The baptist view is that baptism is primarily about the individual's relationship with God. God has saved that individual and that individual has responded to God. Now they are being baptized and the ceremony will be a very important experience for that individual.

The covenantal view is that baptism is a sign of the covenant. It is a public ceremony that is for the whole church. Adult converts should be baptized in the presence of the church. When they are, everyone is reminded of the covenant and what Christ has done for us. Our own baptisms are remembered and our baptismal vows are strengthened. Whether or not the adult being baptized is a true believer is not the most relevant issue. Likewise, when the children of believers are baptized all are reminded of the covenant. So baptism does not say: "this individual is surely a believer". Baptism says: "this is what Christ has done for the church. All who belong to him share in it."

This is not to say that the covenantal view of baptism does not have an individual dimension. It does. Otherwise the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch wouldn't make much sense. Baptism is a profound experience (a sign and seal) for believers. When an adult convert is baptized it is a seal of their relationship with Jesus Christ. But baptism also has a corporate dimension. That's why it's a public ceremony. Witnessing anyone's baptism reminds every baptized person of the covenant. This corporate dimension is emphasized more in the baptism of infants.
 
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Site Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
It seems to me that (infant) baptism in Presbyterian circles is that it is essentially a promise (covenant) to try to raise a child in a Christian home. This would be equivalent to Baptists having baby dedications.

Functionally, it's kind of like that, but not exactly. . .

I was in a non-denominational church (Baptist with a cool website) church for years and then by the invitation of some friends, I attended a PCA church in NYC. I started attended weekly right away. There was a little getting used to the minimal liturgy, but now I'm lost without it. The Presbyterians (the conservative ones) place a high priority on scripture, preaching and teaching. My wife and I wonder how we ever functioned in the churches we had been to in the past.

You don't have to be on board with infant baptism to attend or even become a member. I wasn't, but I came around after some time.

Pop in and then have an informal meeting with the pastor.
 
Upvote 0