The Wittenberg Trail

Lutheran responses to objections against Infant Baptism

Greetings in Christ! Below is a brief article I wrote in which I respond to 7 common objections against Infant Baptism. Let me know what you think -- Pastor Tom Eckstein

**************************************************************************************************************

Should we baptize infants?

Some of you may have Christian friends in other denominations (e.g., “Baptist” or “Assembly of God”) who ask you why Lutherans baptize infants. They want to know what our reasons are for this practice. They think we are in error. How would you answer them? Below are seven common objections to infant Baptism, and I will give a very brief response to each objection. However, before I respond to each of these objections it would be helpful to briefly summarize what Lutheran’s DO and DO NOT believe regarding Baptism and Infant Baptism.

First we must understand what Lutherans DO NOT believe about Baptism and Infant Baptism. We do NOT believe that all infants who have not been baptized are going to hell! Some wrongly think Lutherans teach this. Even though Baptism is one important way that God brings Christ and His gifts to infants, Baptism is not the only way that God does this. God also uses His spoken Word to bring infants to faith in Christ. (In response to one of the objections to Infant Baptism below I will discuss what Scripture teaches about infant faith.)

In addition, Lutherans do NOT believe that Baptism is a magical work of humans that guarantees salvation even if a person later rejects Christ and lives as an unbeliever. Sadly, some who were baptized as infants were not nurtured by God’s Word over the years and in certain cases they eventually lost their faith in Christ. (In response to one of the objections to Infant Baptism below I will explain how those who are baptized also must have their faith in Christ nurtured by God’s Word throughout life.)

Now that we know what Lutherans do NOT believe about Baptism and Infant Baptism, I would like to carefully explain what Lutherans DO believe Baptism actually is. Simply put, some Christians view Baptism as only an outward symbol of an adult’s conscious decision to trust in Jesus. However, Lutherans do not have this understanding of Baptism because in no place does Scripture ever speak of Baptism in this way! Instead, Scripture always defines Baptism as something much more than a mere symbol. According to Scripture, Baptism is the work of God through which He gives us various gifts!

God uses Baptism to put His Name on us (see Matthew 28:19). God uses Baptism to give us “new birth,” that is, faith in Christ (see John 3:5 and Titus 3:5). God uses Baptism to give us forgiveness of sins and the Holy Spirit (see Acts 2:28 and 22:16; Ephesians 5:26). God uses Baptism to connect us to the death and resurrection of Jesus (see Romans 6:3-4 and Colossians 2:11-12). God uses Baptism to clothe us with Christ (see Galatians 3:27). God uses Baptism to save us by the power of Jesus’ death and resurrection (see 1st Peter 3:18 & 21).

Now that we understand what Lutherans DO and DO NOT believe about Baptism and Infant Baptism, I will give a brief response to the 7 most common objections to Infant Baptism.

The first objection is: “But we’re saved by Jesus, not by our work of Baptism!” This objection wrongly thinks that Baptism is a human work. If that were the case, then Baptism could not save us. However, Scripture teaches that Baptism DOES save us (see 1st Peter 3:21) because Baptism is GOD’S WORK! In addition, this objection fails to understand that Baptism is one of the means God uses to give us the salvation of Christ. In other words, Jesus ACCOMPLISHED our salvation by His life, death and resurrection for us. However, this salvation is GIVEN and DELIVERED to us through God’s “means of grace” – and one such “means of grace” is Holy Baptism! (See Acts 2:38-39 and Titus 3:5)

The second objection is: “But infants are not sinners! Therefore, Baptism is not for infants because Baptism is for those who have consciously sinned.” On the contrary, Scripture clearly teaches that we are sinners from the time of our conception (see Psalm 51:5) because we inherit a sinful nature from Adam (see Romans 5:12). The fact that infants die is God’s sign that they are sinners (see 1st Corinthians 15:22). We sin BECAUSE we are sinners, and we have this condition even as infants and little children (see Genesis 8:21 and John 3:6). Also, Romans 3:23 clearly shows that ALL have sinned and need the salvation that Jesus gives.

The third objection is: “But infants can’t have faith!” First, Scripture clearly teaches that infants and children CAN have faith. In Psalm 8:2 we see that infants can give praise to God. In Psalm 22:9 we see that David trusted in the Lord when he was a breast-feeding infant. In Matthew 18:6 Jesus teaches that “little ones” can believe in Him. Jesus is speaking about the “child” mentioned in Matthew 18:2. The Greek word for child is “paidion” which can also refer to infants. For example, the plural form of “paidion” is used in Matthew 2:16 for the children who were 2 years old and younger. Also, in Luke 18:15-17 we see that Jesus uses babies as examples of sincere faith. The Greek word for babies is “brephos” which means infant. In addition, John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb (Luke 1:15 & 39-45). The fact is that Jesus holds up infants as ultimate examples of faith (Matthew 18:5-6 and Luke 18:16-17). Second, Scripture clearly teaches that faith is MORE than a conscious knowledge of facts about God. Faith is trust in God that flows from a heart made new by the Holy Spirit. If faith is ONLY a conscious awareness of God’s Word, then does one lose his or her faith when asleep or in a coma? What about those with mental disabilities? Third, those who say “Infants can’t have faith!” must either 1) say that infants who die are damned or 2) say that faith in Christ is not necessary for salvation.

The fourth objection is: “Jesus was baptized as an adult!” If one takes this assertion to its logical end, then you must say: “Jesus wasn’t baptized until he was about 30, so no one should be baptized BEFORE that age! In addition, Jesus was baptized in the Jordan, and so all baptisms must take place in the Jordan or they are not valid. In fact, Jesus was a man and so women should not be baptized!” This is ridiculous, of course! One must note that Jesus was baptized for reasons completely different than why we are baptized. First, Jesus was sinless and so He did not need the forgiveness delivered in Baptism. Second, Jesus’ Baptism was God’s way of showing that Baptism saves us because Jesus has made Himself part of it. In other words, Jesus was not baptized to give us an example to follow (salvation by works!). Instead, He was baptized to show us the source and power behind the salvation given in Baptism. This becomes obvious when God uses Jesus’ Baptism as a public witness to show us that Jesus is His Son, our Savior!

The fifth objection is: “The Bible never says that we should baptize infants!” First of all, the entire Old Testament assumes that infants were always part of the salvation acts of God. For example, God gave Abraham the ritual of circumcision as an outward sign that the Savior would come from his family line (see Genesis 12:1-3 and Galatians 3:6-9). The sign of circumcision was given to infant boys when they were only 8 days old! In Colossians 2:11-13 the Apostle Paul shows that circumcision has been replaced with Baptism through which Christ Himself works to give spiritual life to those who are dead in sin. The Jews who became Christians would have assumed that Baptism was for infants because infants had also received the Old Testament ritual of circumcision. In addition, the infants and children of Israel participated in many of the Old Testament rituals (the Passover, the Sabbath, the Day of Atonement, etc.). The infants and children of Israel were included in the high priest’s blessing which God used to put His Name on His people (see Numbers 6:22-27; also Matthew 28:19). The infants and children of Israel took part in the crossing of the Red Sea which was a picture of the New Testament gift of Baptism (see 1st Corinthians 10:1-4).

Secondly, Jesus says that we should MAKE disciples by baptizing them. He says to do this for ALL nations, and he gives no exceptions as to age. Then in Acts chapter 2:38-39 Peter tells the crowd who had been convicted by his preaching: “Repent and be baptized EVERY ONE of you in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of your sin and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you AND YOUR CHILDREN.” Simply put, the bible assumes (especially based on the practice of the Old Testament!) that infants will be baptized, and Matthew 28:19 and Acts 2:38-39 confirm this. Therefore, the burden of proof is not on Lutherans to find yet ANOTHER text that says infants should be baptized. Instead, the burden of proof is on those who deny infant baptism. They must find just 1 passage that says infants should NOT be baptized. However, there is no such passage! The reason there is no such passage is that Scripture assumes that infants will be baptized!

The sixth objection is: “Adults were taught first and then were baptized later. So we should wait for infants to grow up so we can teach them before we baptize them.” This objection fails to distinguish the difference between infants and adults. Scripture clearly teaches that humans are conceived in sin. However, unbelieving infants have one advantage over unbelieving adults. Infants do not yet have a rebellious reason! Scripture teaches that we are conceived in sin and if we grow up as unbelievers we develop a conscious reason that is hostile to the Gospel. So, unlike infants who are in a position to receive the Gospel, adults need to have their reason humbled through the preaching of God’s Word. Adults must become like “little children” or “spiritual infants” before they can receive Holy Baptism. I use the following analogy: Unbelieving infants are like a plowed field. They do not have the “seed of life” but they are in a position to receive it. In contrast, unbelieving older children and adults are like a field with hard soil (covered by weeds and rocks) that needs to be broken up and cleared out before it can receive the “seed of life.” This explains why infants are baptized and then taught, whereas older children and adults are taught and then Baptized.

Finally, the seventh objection is this: “Joe Lutheran was baptized as an infant. But now as an adult he never attends church and he lives a life of unrepentant sin!” The Bible teaches that our faith must be nurtured by God’s Word, or it will die! Sadly, some who were baptized as infants are now living as unbelievers because their faith was not nurtured by hearing and reading God’s Word. Such people should be called back to faith in Christ by the preaching of God’s Word! However, the fact that some fall away after Baptism does NOT mean we should stop baptizing infants! For example, some adults are brought to faith in Christ through the preaching of God’s Word, but then later fall away from the Faith. Does this mean we should never preach God’s Word to adults because some later fall away? Of course not! In the same way, we still baptize infants even though, sadly, some later fall away from the Faith.

I hope this helps you understand why we Lutherans baptize infants. For a much more thorough study of this issue, read the book Baptized into God’s Family (The Doctrine of Infant Baptism for Today) by Dr. A. Andrew Das.

******************************************************

This study was written by Pastor Tom Eckstein (Concordia Lutheran, Jamestown, ND)

Views: 1596

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Thank you, sir, for posting this to the community.
Greetings in Christ! Below is a brief article I wrote in which I respond to 7 common objections against Infant Baptism. Let me know what you think -- Pastor Tom Eckstein

Pastor Eckstein,
I thought you explained this very well. Proper responses, backed with Holy Scripture, always helpful.
Thank you.
Thank you, Pastor. This seems like it covers everything. But then, for those that disagree, they may come up with other arguments. The past few days I have been following a friend's blog and the comments posted included just about everything you've mentioned here.

As I was pondering this, Jesus words that no one could come to the Father but by Jesus came to my mind in a way I had never thought of before. I think it could be used to explain to those who think that infants are not sinners. For, if babies die without faith in Jesus as their Lord and Savior, then there must be a way to Heaven without Christ. And if what Jesus says about Himself is True, than no matter how hard we try to reason that this teaching is too hard, it comes down to taking Jesus at His word or not.

Another thought: making the distinction between faith as something you have because 1) you worked to bring it about or 2) it was a free gift is an obstacle for a lot of people.

Last thought: how do any of us know what's going on in another's heart? Even/especially in an infant's? Just speaking as a mother, the one who ought to know her baby better than anyone! How many times I misinterpreted their cries. I thought they wanted to be fed, when apparently they needed a diaper change! For a whole week, I got irritated with fussiness and then realized they had a new tooth! These are silly examples, but no human knows the heart of any other human. For a long time, doctors told us that babies do not feel pain. Now we know that they do. Who are we to say that because they are infants God cannot do what He Himself promises He will do?
Tom:

Thank you for this helpful post. I especially appreciate your illustration about the unbaptized infant being like a plowed field and just ready to receive the seed of the Gospel in Baptism. That is very helpful. I may use this whole writing of yours with my people, if that's ok.

One other Biblical text I've used (and I may be the only one) is Isa. 12:3, "Therefore with joy shall you draw water from the wells of salvation." 1 Pet. 3 says that Baptism saves, and thus it is a well of salvation. In a hot desert, a thirsty man who has no well will die of thirst. That's like an unbaptized, unfaithful man. A thirsty man in the desert with a well, but who doesn't draw water from the well, will also die. That's like a baptized, unfaithful man. He could be satisfied with the living water of the Gospel, but he rejects it to his spiritual death. A thirsty man in the desert with a well, who drinks from it will live. That is the Baptized, faithful man. He listens to the Word which constantly draws out the Gospel, and thus his thirst is satisfied. I guess you could look at a man who has a glass of water now but no well as a man who believes, but is not baptized. Anyway, that analogy has gotten me far.

In Christ,
Rev. Robert Mayes
Fullerton, NE
Tom,

As always, right on point and very helpful.

Thanks,
Don Kirchner
Excellent! I have a friend you not only does not believe in Infant Baptism, but does not believe in water Baptism. He argues that our Baptism occures at the instant we believe in Jesus as our Savior. A"water" Baptism is simply our way of witnessing to others of our relationship with the Savior and is totally unnecessary.
Kathleen - Ask your friend why Jesus says specifically in Jn. 3:5 that people not only need to be born of the Spirit, but also of water.

In Christ,
Rev. Robert Mayes
Fullerton, NE

Kathleen F. Butel said:
Excellent! I have a friend you not only does not believe in Infant Baptism, but does not believe in water Baptism. He argues that our Baptism occures at the instant we believe in Jesus as our Savior. A"water" Baptism is simply our way of witnessing to others of our relationship with the Savior and is totally unnecessary.
"Such people should be called back to faith in Christ by the preaching of God’s Word!"

I'd like to see a little something about repentance in here.
Or maybe that's the ex--mutt-evangelical part of me talking, I don't know. You might open an "infants lack the reason to repent" can of worms if you include it.

This is a great introduction. For simple-explorers, Kelly's book is wonderful too. The format is different than the Das book.
Yes. By "called back to faith in Christ" I assumed repentance is part of the "call." As for infants "repenting," if it's possible for infants to have faith without being conscious of it, is it not also possible for infants to have the gift of repentance without being conscious of it? Something to ponder!

Jen said:
"Such people should be called back to faith in Christ by the preaching of God’s Word!"

I'd like to see a little something about repentance in here.
Or maybe that's the ex--mutt-evangelical part of me talking, I don't know. You might open an "infants lack the reason to repent" can of worms if you include it.

This is a great introduction. For simple-explorers, Kelly's book is wonderful too. The format is different than the Das book.
I tried this approach. My friend "knows" that the water refered to is the water of our physicial birth. Jesus is saying we must be physically born by water, and then spiritually born by the Spirit. He says the water of baptism only gets you wet.It is the spiritual baptism that saves one. I've said, "then why did the Ethiopian go with Phillp down to the water. Obviously he had already been physically born, and He had excepted Christ as his Savior, and yet they went down to the water to be baptised. There was no one else around to witness this " only a symbel" of the Ethiopian's faith- yet he was led by the Holy Spirt to Water baptism." He claims that Jesus Baptism is Fire-totally spiritual and quotes Jesus saying so. He does not understand the concept of "a means of Grace". He thinks it is silly to think that God uses water, bread or wine to come to and into us. But, He keeps asking the question. He is searching scripture. He has read the book of Concord. He really wants to dialog. He knows he is growing in his faith and readilly admits he does not know it all. Still, he is offended by the water-He comes from a Mormon back ground and worships at at LCMS congragation. He definitely loves the Lord.
Pastor Tom Eckstein said:
Yes. By "called back to faith in Christ" I assumed repentance is part of the "call." As for infants "repenting," if it's possible for infants to have faith without being conscious of it, is it not also possible for infants to have the gift of repentance without being conscious of it? Something to ponder!

But it won't be obvious to non-Lutherans that you mean "repentance". It's a buzzword that they'll be looking for, I assume.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

 

 

Looking for a Liturgical Church near you?

 

 

Help us maintain the Trail on the web:

 
Add an item to the
Lutheran Calendar

© 2013   Created by Norm Fisher.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue to the WT Admin  |  Terms of Service