What is the significance of infant baptism?

[BABerean2]

We certainly do not need to 'worry' about the infants of believers, only ensure that they may not be stiff necked and obstinate, and so depart from the covenant they are currently being brought up in. God will present Himself to them when He knows they are ready for Him.

Do you mean to tell me it took God 40 years to wear down your defences and finally get you to pray the sinners prayer? My goodness God is remarkably patient.

You were not lost as far as Jesus was concerned, just 'going your own way' and suffering the consequences. Isa.53:6. Ps.119:176. Jer.12:3.

Tell me, how did God "Try your heart", how was it finally that you were brought to the place where you finally honoured the covenant God had with your parent(s) and you, from conception? 2 Kings.13:23.

We will never know how many have died and gone to hell for following the doctrine you are promoting.

I came to faith in the way found in the verse below.

Eph 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

My salvation rests on the "good standing" of Jesus Christ, instead of that of my grandfather, or grandmother.

.

 

[ExTiff]

Still are fallen in their natures though, as all have sinned in Adam!

Acts 10:15. 1 Cor.7:14.

 

[ExTiff]

We will never know how many have died and gone to hell for following the doctrine you are promoting.

I came to faith in the way found in the verse below.

Eph 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

My salvation rests on the "good standing" of Jesus Christ, instead of that of my grandfather, or grandmother.

.

It took God 40 years to even get you to cooperate with Him, you naughty boy.
From 'Holy' to 40 years of reprobation, and stiff necked rebellion, until God finally led you to a Num.22:26 experience and you finally got the message. Let's face it some of us were hard cases, such has always been the way with the rebellious. Deut.9:24.

So you finally listened and heard 'The message of Reconciliaton' and 'came to your senses'. Luke 15:17.

 

[BABerean2]

It took God 40 years to even get you to cooperate with Him, you naughty boy.
From 'Holy' to 40 years of reprobation, and stiff necked rebellion, until God finally led you to a Num.22:26 experience and you finally got the message. Let's face it some of us were hard cases, such has always been the way with the rebellious. Deut.9:24.

I am sure that you are much "Holier" than me, and have always been so, since you were baptized into the covenant as an infant...

It is probably due to your grandfather being much "Holier" than my grandfather...

.

 

[ExTiff]

The truth is often ignored and even suppressed by those who do not wish to hear it.

 

[ExTiff]

I am sure that you are much "Holier" than me, and have always been so, since you were baptized into the covenant as an infant...

It is probably due to your grandfather being much "Holier" than my grandfather...

.

If one or both of your parents / grandparents, were believing God's Promise of Salvation, then so were you.

Not holier than thou: Quite the contrary. I assure you. I might not be quite the chief of sinners that Paul considered himself to be, 1 Tim.1:15, but I rank quite highly and put up quite a fight against my Lord, until He pulled me like a brand from the burning. Amos 4:11-12

By the way were did my previous posts go? Have I spoken too much truth in love?
.

 

[ExTiff]

Oh my appologies, the posts are still there, I made a mistake and jumped back two pages.

God has been very gracious to me, and it had nothing to do with 'holiness' from birth. God is very gracious, more gracious than most of us appreciate.

 

[Major1]

Quite so! And Jesus was never a 'Christian'. But we are, and have God to thank for that. It is none of our own doing.

"Physical born"? No one is physically 'born' into any covenant, even the New one, surely. The infants of believers are 'spiritually' in the covenant and members of the visible church only, not yet members of the invisible church unless they die before taking on their covenant obligations for themselves. Otherwise they are under their parent's authority, and their parents are under God's Authority.

The infants of unbelievers have no covenant obligation to God, they are outside the covenant promises, they are not set apart necessarily for God's service, until they respond to the gospel and 'believe'. They are still under the Law if their lineage goes back to Israel and Abraham, and a law unto themselves if their parentage traces back merely to Adam.
.

It is an argument from silence that infants were included in "Family Salvation". Moreover, in Acts 16:30-33 Luke points that the Word of God was spoken to all those who were baptized, thus suggesting that not infants, but those who could hear the Word, were baptized.

Colossians 2:11-12...……..
" and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; 12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which [i.e., baptism] you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead."

Thus baptism is an expression of faith, and the raising with Christ that happens in baptism happens by virtue of baptism's being an expression of faith - which infants cannot perform.

But what about the sign of the covenant made with the children of Israelites in the Old Covenant?

Genesis 17:7-13...………….
"And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you. 8 And I will give to you and to your descendants after you, the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God." 9 God said further to Abraham, "Now as for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations. 10 This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised."

Heidelberg Catechism:

[Infants of Christian parents] belong to the covenant and people of God . . . they also are to be baptized as a sign of the covenant, to be ingrafted into the Christian church and distinguished from the children of unbelievers, as was done in the Old Testament by circumcision, in place of which in the New Testament baptism is appointed.

Westminster Directory for the Public Worship of God

The seed and posterity of the faithful born within the church have by their birth an interest in the covenant and right to the seal of it and to the outward privileges of the church under the gospel, no less than the children of Abraham in the time of the Old Testament . . .

Why is baptism not administered to the children of Christian parents in the New Covenant as circumcision was administered to the children of Jewish parents in the former covenant?

5. Because the New Covenant members are not defined by physical descent, as the old covenant members were, but by God's writing his law on their heart and calling them to himself and bringing them to repentance and faith.

In accord with this narrowing of the covenant people to those who are truly born of God, the new sign of the covenant is meant to signify that a person is indeed part of that new born covenant community, which is evident by faith.

In the same way that a change in the sign came in to allow both men and women to participate in the sign (baptism instead of circumcision), thus making it clearer than before that women and men are equal heirs of salvation (1 Peter 3:7), so also a change in the recipients of the sign came in to make it clearer that under the New Covenant the people of God are not determined at all by physical descent, but by spiritual transformation, evidenced in faith.

John the Baptist called for baptism for those already having the sign of the covenant, showing that a new meaning was being given to the sign - no longer pointing to physical descent from Abraham, but rather spiritual descent through faith and repentance.
Infant Baptism and the New Covenant Community

 

[Major1]

My Oh my. We do not need to 'worry' about unbelievers, God does all the worrying necessary and He can actually do something about it, we can't, because it is all of God. 2 Cor.5:18. We just need make the message of reconciliation known to them and leave it to them and to God what they do about it. We certainly do not need to 'worry' about the infants of believers, only ensure that they may not be stiff necked and obstinate, and so depart from the covenant they are currently being brought up in. God will present Himself to them when He knows they are ready for Him.

Do you mean to tell me it took God 40 years to wear down your defences and finally get you to pray the sinners prayer? My goodness God is remarkably patient.

You were not lost as far as Jesus was concerned, just 'going your own way' and suffering the consequences. Isa.53:6. Ps.119:176. Jer.12:3.

Tell me, how did God "Try your heart", how was it finally that you were brought to the place where you finally honoured the covenant God had with your parent(s) and you, from conception? 2 Kings.13:23.

"the wrath of thy threat to sinners is irresistible;
yet immeasurable and unsearchable is thy promised mercy,
for thou art the Lord Most High,
of great compassion, long-suffering, and very merciful,"

Were either of your parents 'faithful believers'? Was it perhaps a Grandmother or Grandfather who was "in good standing in the faith". 1 Tim.3:13. Perhaps you will have to wait until "you know as you are known" before you find out your spiritual lineage. One thing is for certain, it will trace right back through Jesus Christ, to Abraham, the father of us all.
.

The Bible NO WHERE states that we are saved because our parents are saved. There is not even a suggestion of such a thing. The Bible does not promise household salvation.

But that does not mean that a godly father or mother does not have a profound spiritual influence on the children in that family because they do!!!!!!
The head of a household sets the course for the family in many ways, including spiritually.

We should all earnestly hope, pray, and work for the salvation of our families. I know that many in my family right now are not saved and if they died today they would go to hell. That is not because of a lack of knowledge about the gospel or because there were no Christians in our family but instead it is because they do not want to give up their sin.

There are many times when the God of Abraham also becomes the God of Sarah, and then of Isaac, and then of Jacob.

As Charles Spurgeon said...….
“Though grace does not run in the blood, and regeneration is not of blood nor of birth, yet doth it very frequently . . . happen that God, by means of one of a household, draws the rest to himself. He calls an individual, and then uses him to be a sort of spiritual decoy to bring the rest of the family into the gospel net.”

The fact that 1 Corth. 7:14 is not speaking of household salvation is clearly seen in the question Paul asks in 1 Corth. 7:16………….
“How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?”

If household salvation were possible, then the wife would already be saved (on the basis of the husband’s salvation); Paul would not need to refer to a future time of salvation for her.

THINK!

 

[Major1]

Oh my appologies, the posts are still there, I made a mistake and jumped back two pages.

God has been very gracious to me, and it had nothing to do with 'holiness' from birth. God is very gracious, more gracious than most of us appreciate.

Agreed 100%!

 

[Major1]

I am sure that you are much "Holier" than me, and have always been so, since you were baptized into the covenant as an infant...

It is probably due to your grandfather being much "Holier" than my grandfather...

.

Now that is funny!!!!!!!! I only wish that I had thought of it first!

 

[Major1]

The truth is often ignored and even suppressed by those who do not wish to hear it.

I AGREE with that 110%!!!!

 

[Major1]

If one or both of your parents / grandparents, were believing God's Promise of Salvation, then so were you.

Not holier than thou: Quite the contrary. I assure you. I might not be quite the chief of sinners that Paul considered himself to be, 1 Tim.1:15, but I rank quite highly and put up quite a fight against my Lord, until He pulled me like a brand from the burning. Amos 4:11-12

By the way were did my previous posts go? Have I spoken too much truth in love?
.

Do you actually believe that???

You said...…….

"If one or both of your parents / grandparents, were believing God's Promise of Salvation, then so were you."

All theses years of study believing that Jesus was the way the truth and the life and now I am told that if my parents were saved then I would be saved.

Then logically that means if my parents were lost and atheists then I would be as well.

Then if that is the case, can you explain how people of lost parents get saved?


​

 

[Major1]

It would seem from this statement of yours that you wrongly assume that infant baptism, "is based upon the parents faith and position". It is not, because that would not accord with scripture. No one is 'saved' by another's faith. In fact no one is 'saved' by faith. In fact every one is saved by God's Grace. Rom.3:21-26. Were God's Grace not freely available to all there would be nothing whatever in which to have 'faith'.

Infants are baptised only on the understanding that the parent(s) have faith in God's Grace, but the grounds for baptism are the promises of God in scripture, to the children of believing parents. If you choose not to believe those promises, that is your affair. We chose to believe them. If you are ignorant of those promises of God in scripture, it is because you never bothered to read the references given in my previous post.



I understand and believe God's promises to both believers and their 'seed'. I copied and pasted an argument citing the scriptures that the Biblical Doctrine is actually based upon. Your inability to accept the Doctrine unfortunately results from your misuse of scripture. (The unwarranted assumption that Doctrine must be based only upon scriptural examples or commands.) If this illogical rule were consistently applied then no woman would be permitted to receive Communion. The Bible does not give one single example or command of any woman receiving communion anywhere.

I have no desire to argue this with anyone and you are welcome to accept your faith denominational teachings but the concept of adult only baptism, (and therefore exclusion of 'little ones' of covenanted parents Matt.19:14.) is totally foreign to the Holy Scriptures. This practice stems from the erroneous teaching of “Baptism requiring human intellect.”

Not all 'little children'. Eph.2:12.

The children Jesus used as an example were not gentile children. Eph.2:12. They were Jewish children, whose parents were covenant bound to God. Ezek.16:20-21. Covenant children belong to God, they are His children from the get go. Covenant parents have covenant children, that is why they are 'Holy' 1 Cor.7:14. If the children of just one believing parent, (even if it is the mother), are 'Holy' but others with unbelieving parents are therefore not 'holy', how does your understanding of scripture explain that?

Upon what scripture do you base the supposition that ALL infants are born 'Holy'? Rom.6:23? Are you trying to tell us that babies from conception are exempt from death, until they actually sin? Everyone is guilty in Adam, and are therefore born with a corrupt nature. Job.14:4; Jer.17:9; Isa.6:5; Rom. 8:5-8; Eph.4:17-19. Ps.51:5.

Not that baptism of infants is carried out specifically to remove the inherited sin of Adam. As I explained previously that is not the premise upon which the children of believers are baptised. It is the promises of God to their believing parents which permit it.



No it's not, it is because the letters were written at a time most people joining the church were adults. Adults which often had children, who were baptised along with their parents and their slaves.



I agree only with #3. Infants have no personal sin of which God requires them to repent.



Only in the case of adults, infants are not baptised on the ground of any assumed 'faith' their baptism is on the grounds of God's promise that they will in due course, if they keep covenant with Him, receive 'saving faith' as their inheritance, freely gifted to them as promised to their parents in Holy Scripture. The only thing which might prevent faith following baptism for them , would be ignorance of God's covenant with them, resulting in neglect of their salvation and subsequent rebellion. That is why it is important that they be brought up in the fear and nurture of The Lord, learn his commandments, know His Son Jesus Christ, repent of their sins, believe in the great salvation they have received from God from birth and continue to keep Gods covenant by faithfully serving Christ according to the principles of His Kingdom on Earth, as also in Heaven. (If only this happened with all baptised infants).



Hence all the unnecessary anxiety among 'Baptists', whose children (they say) are no longer heirs to the promises, indeed they are not in the covenant since, (they say), it no longer exists; they are no longer in the Church, which cannot embrace them because of their unconscious state; the Church becomes a society of adults to which their children are only admitted as proselytes at the time when each on their own volition believes and is converted and sanctified. Until then they have a dangerous and imaginary liberty which they are always in danger of abusing, and an inevitable slide into sinfulness which is hoped by the parents, (and the Church presumably), will respond to the rebuke of God, as on all who have sinned.

This is in fact a profoundly unscriptural theology. Far less scripture based than infant baptism under covenant theology.

Infants of believers are actually a supreme example of salvation by 'faith alone' and not 'works, that any can boast of'.

In adults there must be a confession of faith and repentance of past sins, followed by at least a desire for baptism if they have not already undergone that ritual.

This leaves room for a false view of how salvation is obtained. It is tempting for such believing adults to attribute salvation to (a) their faith, (b) their repentance, (c) their determination to live according to God's law, or any combination of or all three. None of these reasons provide salvation. It is God's Grace that guarantees our salvation, (the atoning sacrifice of God in Christ), nothing else can secure it. The aforementioned 'a,b,c' only allows the transmission of God's Grace by the removal of the blockage from our end of the relationship. The free gift was always there for the receiving "while we were yet still sinners". Rom.5:8.

Infants receive baptism solely on the grounds of God's grace, in that God has promised those who will trust God's Word, that their children will be 'saved', under the terms of the same covenant God has made with the parents by their faith in God's Grace, through their repentance and their determination to allow God's spirit to Sanctify them.

Infants are incapable of ratifying and confirming their own covenant relationship with God. They therefore cannot have false views 'a,b or c'. They have a purer relationship with God than even a 'believing' adult is capable of. They are utterly dependent upon God's Grace, incapable of faith or works of the law and have as yet nothing for which personal repentance is required by God.

This indeed is perfect 'salvation' which cannot be enhanced, but only neglected, if they are careless enough to allow it to fall into abeyance or actually reject it.

All being well they will voluntarily come to God at the time of God's choosing and freely take upon themselves the full responsibility of keeping God's covenant, which is faithful service to our Lord Jesus Christ.

Meanwhile they belong to God, God has claimed them for Himself, to give to Christ. John.6:37.
.

I hate to say this but once again you are in error. I don't say that but the Bible does.

John 3:16 - Whoever believes on Jesus should have eternal life.
Romans 1:16 - The gospel is God's power to save all who believe.
Romans 5:1,2 - By faith we are justified and have access to grace.
Ephesians 2:8 - By grace are you saved through faith.

(See also Acts 16:31; 10:43; 15:9; 13:39; John 8:24; 3:36; 5:24; 6:40; 20:30,31; Romans 3:22-28; 4:3,16; etc.)

It is easy to conclude that faith is essential to salvation, and without faith no man can be saved.

Salvation is all about FAITH! Faith is the instrument by which we come to God.

GRACE is His love in action and it can only be validate by FAITH.

The doctrine of salvation by faith only or faith alone teaches that a sinner receives forgiveness simply by belief in Jesus without obedience or works of any kind.

In particular, water baptism is not a necessary condition to conversion or forgiveness of sin.

 

[BABerean2]

Covenant parents have covenant children, that is why they are 'Holy' 1 Cor.7:14. If the children of just one believing parent, (even if it is the mother), are 'Holy' but others with unbelieving parents are therefore not 'holy', how does your understanding of scripture explain that?

In verse 16 of the passage below Paul reveals that the spouse and children of believers may come to faith because of they will hear the Gospel from the believer.

1Co 7:6 But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment.
1Co 7:7 For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.
1Co 7:8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am;
1Co 7:9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
1Co 7:10 Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband.
1Co 7:11 But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife.
1Co 7:12 But to the rest I, not the Lord, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her.
1Co 7:13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him.
1Co 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.
1Co 7:15 But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace.
1Co 7:16 For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?

All false doctrines are revealed not by the scripture quoted by its proponents, but rather by the scripture they must ignore to make it work.

Ripping verse 14 above out of its context is an excellent example.

.

 

[Major1]

The children of believers are born 'Holy'. Unfortunately they are also born human, which means that they will inevitably become sinners, and break covenant, and need to be disciplined and corrected by God, as He lovingly intends to train them up in the way that they should go, Prov.22:6. until they either depart from Him or find Him. 1 Cor.11:32. Accept God's presence, or dwell in outer darkness, that's their choice, but not God's intention for them.

Psalm 51:5
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Psalm 58:3
The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies.

Ecclesiastes 7:20
Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.

Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—

Romans 3:23
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

 

[straykat]

The most important thing is a pledge from the parents. Not the child him/herself. To raise them up in the church.. to make their passing from death to life practically seamless. To do everything they can to renounce the ways of death and the world, by practically letting the child "die to the world" at birth and being raised into Christ at an early age.

Some may say that this isn't even necessary and it's good enough to just raise a child in a Christian manner. That's laudable, but why revolt so much at the extra commitment of baptism? Aren't there better things to be angry about? Kids could not be raised Christian at all.. or even their own gender.. or maybe they're just raised with a TV to watch all day. I think baptism is the least of things anyone needs to fight about, in terms of parenting strategies.

 

[Major1]

We don't 'get saved', we are 'being saved. We do well to remember that.
.

I can not agree with that as the Bible does not confirm your comment.

The Bible tells us that only by the mercy of God is anyone saved; there is NOTHING we can do to earn salvation .

Not membership in churches, not membership in ANY denomination, not being Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, Hindu, Confuscian, not baptism, not sprinkling, not being good, not refraining from sin. The ONLY thing that saves us is the Grace of God through faith in the Only Begotten Son of God and His finished work on the cross. He saved us, regenerated us, renewed us.

Romans 5:19...…….
"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. "

Remember this principle – the 1st man brought sin by disobedience, the 2nd man (Jesus) brought righteousness by obedience. God rejected the 1st man, Adam, accepted the 2nd man, Jesus according to Romans 5:12. God rejected Saul, accepted David. God rejected Esau, accepted Jacob. God rejects our person. The second man, Jesus, is God's way.

John 14:6 ......….
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

We Obtain or GET saved when we believe, accept Christ and repent of our sins.

THEN and only then does the Sanctification process begin but it is not about BEING saved as we are saved the minute we accept Christ my dear friend.

 

[ExTiff]

It is an argument from silence that infants were included in "Family Salvation". Moreover, in Acts 16:30-33 Luke points that the Word of God was spoken to all those who were baptized, thus suggesting that not infants, but those who could hear the Word, were baptized.

I have already dealt with this issue. The basis and theological foundation for infant baptism does not depend upon appeals to New Testament scripture. New Testament scripture deals mostly with the establishing of the New Testament church, which initially was composed mostly of Jewish adults in need of instruction in righteousness and later joined by Gentiles who had little understanding of Old Testament salvation history. Much of what we have concerning baptism in the New Testament is aimed at either explaining its sacramental significance to Gentiles, or justifying its 'faith'/'grace' foundation as opposed to the previous erroneous Pharisaical notions of carnal election. Matt.3:9; Luke 3:8.

It seems to me, I may have understood you wrongly though, that your main objection to the baptism of infants seems to be that you assert strongly that The Eternal Covenant with Abraham and Isaac was an exclusively 'Carnal' one, and thus it cannot form the legal basis for the 'Spiritual' sacrament of baptism as we find it under the terms of The New Covenant.

And yet we find St Paul appealing to the Abrahamic covenant and drawing parallels with the eternal covenant made by God with Abraham and his offspring Isaac to illustrate the spiritual nature of our New Covenant relationship with Christ and the basis upon which our salvation as believers is guaranteed. How can this be, if as you believe the Abrahamic covenant was 'carnal'.

Your mistake is in thinking that Paul is arguing against the eternal covenant, (which you say was carnal), and he is now promoting a completely 'New', hitherto unheard of covenant, which is 'spiritual' and therefore only applies to those who can understand and have faith. Thus you reason, infants, being unable to understand and therefore being unable to believe, are disqualified from the possibility of God making covenant with them.

I deliberately parsed the last sentence of the paragraph above in the way I did in order to underline the fact that even adult 'believers' do not make a covenant with God in baptism. It is exclusively God who makes covenants, not us. God did not consult Isaac nor ask or require Isaac's permission or cooperation when God made covenant with him. Gen.17:19.

Further more, the eternal covenant made with Abraham, which Paul claims is the covenant foreshadowing The New Covenant, cannot be a 'carnal' covenant. Isaac, the first infant to be included in The Everlasting Covenant, was not even conceived at the time the covenant with him was announced by God. There was no possibility of a 'carnal' sacrament concerning Isaac, circumcision did not cause him to be covenant bound it only made it effectual, because God demanded it as a sign and seal of the authenticity of the spiritual covenant God had made with him. It is obvious that Isaac did not physically exist when God made His covenant with him. What may seem impossible to us, is possible for God. Gen.18:9-15.

Further more: God clearly states in OT scripture that the Abrahamic covenant and also the Old covenant Moses added to the everlasting one with Abraham, is a spiritual one, involving 'circumcision of the heart', not merely a physical mutilation. The physical mutilation is merely sacramentally representative of the 'spiritual effects' of a true conversion and regeneration from God. Jer.4:4; Deut.10:16; and most importantly Deut.30:6.

Colossians 2:11-12...……..
" and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; 12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which [i.e., baptism] you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead."

Thus baptism is an expression of faith, and the raising with Christ that happens in baptism happens by virtue of baptism's being an expression of faith - which infants cannot perform.

All of which is fully in agreement with the text you have quoted, apart from your unwarranted assumption that "having been buried with Him in baptism", "and raised in faith", must be the only valid administration of the sacrament acceptable to Paul. But Paul is obviously addressing cognitive adults. There would be no reason for him to have included instruction for the baptism of the infants of believers, the problem he was addressing pertained to the 'believing adults', themselves. And I wish you'd stop banging on about infants being too thick to be saved. So are many adults. (-: Infants are not baptised on the supposition that they understand anything more than how to find a mother's teat.

Back to circumcision, which we are agreed has been replaced by baptism under the terms of The New Covenant or Covenant of Grace. Circumcision was given to Abraham (and not to Moses!) as a sign and seal of the justification which he obtained through faith by believing the promises of the covenant of grace, and thus as a sign of the cleansing away of sins in the same way as is expressed by baptism today. The significance of the covenant of grace was spiritual. The promise made to Abraham is spiritual and the Apostle Paul calls it 'the gospel'. Gal.3:8. The significance of the rite of circmcision was thus spiritual also, not only because the sign was in harmony with the promise, (of which it is precisely the sign and seal), but because of the spiritual meaning attributed to circumcision as representing at the same time the promise of God to circumcise the heart of the people and of their children. :

"And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live." Deut.30:6.

The Law and the prophets , and not only the Apostle Paul, proclaim that it is not sufficient (nor ever has been), to be distinguished externally by the circumcision of the flesh, if the circumcision of the heart is lacking. From this it follows that uncircumcised lips are impure lips, and that an uncircumcised heart is a heart stained with sin. It is not by chance that the terms circumcise and circumcision are employed to express yielding of the heart, obedience to God, conversion and faith. Those who are circumcised outwardly but unconverted in their heart are called the "false circumcision" since it is only believers who participate in the true circumcision, which is according to the Spirit. Phil.3:2-3; Rom.2:28-29.

Deut.30:6. This promise, you will I hope notice, does not refer to Jesus Christ as THE seed, because if it did that would imply that Jesus Christ, (THE seed, the Messiah, God has promised to His People, in fulfillment of The Covenant, was in need of 'spiritual heart surgery' by God. Whereas we all presumably admit He, Christ, The Messiah of God, was without sin, previous to and from conception to ascension and beyond into eternity.

Finally: the New Testament declares that "Christ was the minister of the circumcision for the sake of the truth of God, in order to confirm the promises made to our fathers". Rom.15:8. If in spite of the texts you insist that the true circumcision - that is to say, circumcision as it was settled in the mind of God, and not as it has been deformed by the legalist conceptions of certain Judaizers - is a carnal institution, then by your insistence, Christ was the minister of a carnal institution. If however, it is impossible to attribute to Christ a carnal ministry, then it follows, (as night follows day), that the true circumcision is spiritual.

But judging from our conversation thus far I doubt you find even these scriptures convincing, thus: Matt.13:15; Acts 28:27; Heb.5:11, presumably because some come from The Old Testament, and that's all been abolished, as far as you 'baptists' are concerned.
.

 

[ExTiff]

I can not agree with that as the Bible does not confirm your comment.

The Bible tells us that only by the mercy of God is anyone saved; there is NOTHING we can do to earn salvation . .

You seem to have a knack for misinterpretation of everything I say. I said nothing about 'earning salvation'. What is going on in your mind?

I said: "We don't get saved, we are being saved". 1 Cor.1:18; 1 Cor.15:2; 2 Cor.2:15;

Salvation is not a 'done deal' by us, and we can then do as we like after we have 'got ourselves saved'. We are merely justified by faith. Sanctification is also essential to salvation. Heb.12:14.

Being knee-jerkingly confrontational can often blind us to what is actually being said. It is exactly that attitude that caused the effect spoken of here: Matt.13:15; Acts.28:27; Heb.5:11.
.