As our church thinks about baptism this week, I chose not to use the sermon to directly share my concerns (at least not in a comprehensive way) about infant (paedo) vs. believer's (credo) baptism. The sermon this week will show various reasons as to why only believer's baptism is consistent with the new covenant and teaching of Scripture. As an aside to that, it may be helpful to also show in this blog why I am not convinced I see any evidence of infant baptism in the New Testament.
Often, advocates for infant baptism will point to the statements in Scripture that say that whole "households" (Greek word oikos) were baptized. It may help to look at some of these statements carefully.
Cornelius - Acts 10.
Acts 10:44-48 While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. 45 And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, 47 "Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.
Peter came and preached to Cornelius and his household. In Acts 10:2, Luke tells us that Cornelius was a devout man who feared God with all his household. The household (probably included family members and even servants) feared God. While an infant might be a part of a household, it would be difficult to suggest that the infant feared God. In vs. 44-48 we are told that as a response to the gospel preaching of Peter, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. This indicates there were believers who received the Holy Spirit in the hearing and believing of the word. I do not believe Luke would have us believe that the word fell on those who would find it incomprehensible. The household who then heard the word were then commanded to be baptized.
Further in Acts 11:14, Peter recounting this event said that Cornelius sent for him (via the prompt of an angel) to come and declare to you a message by which you will all be saved, you and your household. The people who were baptized were people who heard a message of the gospel and were saved.
The Philippian Jailer: Acts 16.
Acts 16:30-33 Then he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31 And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household." 32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family.
The Philippian jailer and all his house first heard the word of the Lord and were saved. The important word to notice is that they were saved. While advocates for infant baptism believe that infants are "in the covenant and under promises of God," they will not declare them to be saved (at least not those who are responsible with the gospel). The household of the jailer were first saved and then baptized at once.
(you may notice I skipped Lydia from the beginning of Acts 16 - Keep reading).
Crispus: Acts 18
Acts 18:8 Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord, together with his entire household. And many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.
This is again straight forward. Crispus and his entire household (every person in it), believed. This report caused also many of the Corinthians to hear Paul and they also believed. They were baptized. So far, we have only heard of believers being baptized.
Stephanas: 1 Corinthians 1 and 16
1Co 1:16-17 (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
1Co 16:15 Now I urge you, brothers--you know that the household of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints.
Paul first makes the point in chapter 1, that though he baptized Stephanas, his priority was not baptism but the preaching of the gospel. Paul makes a good point that he does not baptize for any other reason that someone has responded to the preaching of the gospel which is his priority ministry.
In Chapter 16, Paul talks about Stephanas' household as being the first converts in the region of Achaia. The baptized household of Stephanas were baptized because they were the first converts.
Lydia: Acts 16
Acts 16:14-15 One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. 15 And after she was baptized, and her household as well, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay." And she prevailed upon us.
In every other instance apart from this one about Lydia, the "oikos" (household) texts show that believers were baptized after hearing and responding to the gospel preached. This text is less clear in the way that it clearly shows Lydia responding to the gospel and being baptized, but then makes a simple statement that her household as well. So far this is one example among five where there is not an explicit statement about the gospel being preached to the household for them to believe and be baptized. There is also no clarity for infant baptism. What do we do in this case?
Let me quote from the Westminster Confession of Faith 1.9. Speaking about the interpretation of Scripture, the confession states, " The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture, is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it may be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly."
The Westminster Confession is normally held by those who would agree with an infant baptism. This confession says to consider that which is less clear by that which can be searched in other places that speak more clearly. If we apply this standard to Lydia, we have four clear texts out of five that help us to understand that nobody in Lydia's household would have been baptized without responding to the gospel in faith.
There is nowhere else in the New Testament Scriptures where we can find any evidence of a baby/infant being baptized. On the contrary, the texts above are terrific examples of believer's baptism with the text about Lydia being understood by the clear nature of the others. It seems to me that the example of baptism in the New Testament is clearly evidence of believer's baptism is the one baptism of the church.