Rev. Ronald
Hanko
Rev. Hanko is a minister in the
Protestant Reformed Churches in America and has authored a number of books,
including (among others) the following: Doctrine According to
Godliness: A Primer on Reformed Doctrine (2004), The Coming of Zion’s
Redeemer: Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi (2015).
He was also the joint author of Saved by Grace: A Study of
the Five Points of Calvinism (1995) and its
accompanying study guide (all of which can be purchased at http://www.cprc.co.uk and http://www.rfpa.org).
*
*
*
*
* *
[Previous section: “Baptism
and Regeneration”]
“And although our young children do not understand these things, we may not
therefore exclude them from baptism, for as they are without their knowledge,
partakers of the condemnation in Adam, so are they again received into grace in
Christ.”[1]
This passage from the Form for the Administration of Baptism, used in Reformed
churches, very nicely sums up what we wish to show here—that is, that infant
baptism is part and parcel of the doctrine of sovereign grace, and that a
denial of infant baptism is really a denial of sovereign, irresistible, and efficacious
grace.
The argument of the Form for the Administration
of Baptism is founded on the truth that infants can be and are saved by God:
But thou art he that took me out
of the womb: thou didst make me hope
when I was upon my mother’s breasts.
I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my
mother’s belly (Ps. 22:9-10).
For thou hast possessed my
reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb (Ps. 139:13).
Before I formed thee in the
belly I knew thee; and before thou camest
forth out of the womb I sanctified
thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations (Jer. 1:5).
And they shall teach no more
every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they
shall all know me, from the least
of them unto the greatest of them,
saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their
sin no more (Jer. 31:34).
For he shall be great in the
sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even
from his mother's womb (Luke 1:15).
And they brought young
children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those
that brought them. But when Jesus saw
it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children
to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not
receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. And he
took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them (Mark
10:13-16).
If they can be saved, they can also
receive baptism as the sign of
salvation. To say that they cannot have
the sign when they can have the
salvation to which the sign points is inconsistent, to say the least.
A Baptist will argue, however, that a person
must “give evidence of having salvation” before he can receive the sign. He will insist, therefore, that faith must
precede water baptism, and water baptism ought to be administered only to
believers. The bedrock of Baptist
teaching, then, is the idea that faith must precede water baptism.
This teaching is based on a misinterpretation
of Mark 16:15-16. These verses, however,
do not say that faith must precede baptism—nor does any other Scripture passage. The argument that this is the order of the
passage is really no argument at all. It
is true that faith is mentioned before baptism in Mark 16:15-16. That
order is important, but that does not prove that the order is a temporal order, i.e., first faith, then
baptism. The passage does not say, “He that believeth and then is baptized shall be saved.” Baptists assume that it says “then,” but it
does not. The order in Mark 16:15-16, is
simply that of priority, i.e., that faith is more important than baptism—something we all believe. This we have already seen.
Following the Baptist line of reasoning, one
might just as easily prove from II Corinthians 1:6 that consolation comes
before salvation or from I Corinthians 1:30 that wisdom, righteous and
sanctification come before redemption because they also are mentioned
first. In fact, following the Baptist
line of reasoning, the order in Mark 16:15-16, is, first of all, faith, then
water baptism, then salvation—an
order that no Baptist could accept. All
Mark 16:15-16, proves, then, is that faith, baptism and salvation are very
closely related to each other.
The main point of the Form for the
Administration of Baptism, however, is that infants are saved “without their
knowledge.” In this way, the Form
connects infant baptism and sovereign grace.
That infants are saved without their knowledge
is self-evident. But this means that
there is no other way to save an infant than by sovereign grace. He cannot respond to the gospel, exercise
saving faith, make any decision, or do any works—and must, then, be saved
solely by the sovereign grace of God.
Infant salvation, therefore, is a powerful demonstration of salvation by
grace alone.
What is more, the salvation of infants
demonstrates what is true for everyone whom God saves. We must
all become like little children if we are to enter the kingdom of heaven; that
is, we must be saved in the same way that a little child is saved, without our
having done anything in order to be saved.
Many Baptists believe this. Holding to the doctrines of grace and
believing the sovereignty of God in salvation, they insist as we do, that God
is always first in the work of salvation.
Faith, therefore, is not something that precedes salvation, but
is itself part of the gift of salvation:
For by grace are ye saved
through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works,
lest any man should boast. For we are
his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before
ordained that we should walk in them (Eph. 2:8-10).
It is not something we produce in order to be
saved, but something that God gives us in saving us.
Yet the same Baptists who insist that faith
cannot precede salvation say that it must precede the sign of
salvation. How inconsistent! Ought not the sign correspond to the
reality? If it is not necessary to have
faith before God can begin to save us, then the sign ought to say so. In infant baptism it does!
The Baptist view really leads to the conclusion
that infants cannot be saved, though few Baptists actually draw that
conclusion. If infants cannot receive
the sign of salvation because they are unable to respond, then most certainly
they cannot receive the salvation that water baptism pictures! John Hooper points this out in an unpublished
paper:
Are we to take the view that
children cannot be saved until they reach years of discernment and understanding,
when they are old enough to make a conscious decision for themselves? If so, then we make a major concession to the
theology of free-will and conditional salvation. At its heart, it is Arminian thinking. It is a theology that has at its root
salvation by works, not by grace alone.
It is all very well for us to proclaim allegiance to the gospel of
sovereign grace in the realm of adult salvation, but if we do not follow it
through consistently into the realm of infant salvation too, our words are
hollow and our theology is half-baked.[2]
The truth is, of course, that no one is saved because he first believes the gospel. He is saved through believing, but not
after or because of believing. That
would make faith a work and be a denial of salvation by grace alone. When we believe, it is because God has already
begun His work of salvation in us. Yet
even those Baptists who believe in salvation by sovereign grace say that a
person’s receiving the sign of salvation does depend on his faith! He can receive salvation “without his
knowledge”—that is, before he is capable of responding, and while he is still
dead in sin—but cannot receive the sign of that salvation in the same way.
We do not deny, of course, that sometimes water
baptism follows faith. In the case of
adult converts, it is often so (but even then, it marks the fact that they
entered the kingdom as little children).
We are only saying that it need
not be so. The very idea that one must believe before receiving the
sign of salvation and of entrance into
salvation is implicitly Arminian—a denial of salvation by grace. This should be clear to anyone who
understands the doctrines of grace.
It is even clearer when we understand that
water baptism is only the sign of baptism. The real baptism is the washing away of sins
by the blood of Jesus Christ:
Know ye not, that so many of
us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? (Rom. 6:3).
Buried with him in baptism,
wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God,
who hath raised him from the dead (Col. 2:12).
Not by works of righteousness
which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of
regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost (Tit. 3:5).
The real baptism is not something that depends
on our believing response, or even follows our response, but is “without our
knowledge.” Indeed, it was principally
accomplished already at the cross, long before we were born:
But God commendeth his love
toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. (Rom. 5:8).
How fitting that the sign should match the
reality at this point.
Not only that, but we actually receive true
baptism—the washing away of our sins—as
soon as we are reborn into the family
of God. At that time, we are
still “infants” in understanding and obedience:
For when for the time ye
ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first
principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and
not of strong meat. For every one that
useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But
strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of
use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil (Heb. 5:12-14).
Is it so strange, then, that we should receive
the sign of baptism at the time of our first birth and when we are still
infants?
Baptism, as the sign of salvation, ought to
reflect the character of that salvation, especially its free and gracious
character. It does that in a very
wonderful and beautiful way when infants are baptized. In fact, it is our conviction that only the
teaching of infant baptism fits the doctrines of grace and the truth that
salvation is by grace alone without works.
What a beautiful picture of salvation by sovereign grace it is when a
tiny infant, not even aware of what is happening to him, receives the sign of
God’s grace and salvation through the blood of Jesus! Just as that infant receives salvation “without
his knowledge,” so also, he receives baptism as the sign of that salvation “without
his knowledge.”
All this is the reason why Mark 10:13-16 is
sometimes used a proof for infant baptism, even though it does not mention
baptism at all. The children who were
brought to Jesus were infants (in the parallel passage, Luke 18:15-17,
the Greek word for an infant or baby is used, something also suggested in Mark
by the fact that these children were “brought” to Jesus). And, without even the possibility of any kind
of believing response from them, Jesus grants them salvation; for what else is
it in being brought to Him, being received by Him, and blessed by Him, but to
be saved in Him? The argument,
therefore, is that, insofar as these infants received salvation from Him, the sign
of that same salvation should not be withheld from them. How could it be withheld?
The Belgic Confession of Faith uses this
same argument:
And indeed Christ shed his
blood no less for the washing of the children of the faithful, than for adult
persons; and therefore they ought to receive the sign and sacrament of that,
which Christ hath done for them. (Art. 34)
When an infant is baptized, therefore, it must
be on some other ground than his believing
response to the gospel promises. He
is incapable of such a response. He
must, in fact, be baptized simply on the ground of God’s promise to be the God
of His people and of their children:
And I will establish my
covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations
for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after
thee (Gen. 17:7).
For the promise is unto you, and
to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD
our God shall call (Acts 2:39).
Because of that promise of God, we may expect a
response from Him in later life, but neither His salvation nor His receiving
the sign of that salvation depends on his response.
This promise does not mean that every baptized
infant will be saved. Nor does some vain
hope for the salvation of all their
children cause believing parents to have their children baptized. The foundation for infant baptism is the promise of God made to believers that He
will be their God and the God of their children (Gen. 17:7, Acts 2:39). Believing parents, therefore, expect that God
will gather His elect from among their children and have their children baptized
in the sure hope that God, who promised, will also perform it.
But why should all our children be baptized, when
we know that not all will be saved? For
the same reason that we bring them all under the preaching of the gospel. Believing parents have all their children baptized because they understand that baptism is
a kind of visible gospel that will have the same twofold fruit among their
children that the preaching of the gospel has, according to God’s own purpose
in predestination. Baptism, like the
gospel, they believe, will be used by God for the salvation of those of their
children who are elect, and for the
condemnation of the rest.
Indeed, Baptists make a fundamental error at
this point by viewing baptism as a picture of what we do in salvation, that is,
of our repentance and faith—when, in fact, it is a picture not of what we
do, but of what God does. It
symbolizes, as we have seen, cleansing from sin (Ezek. 36:25), forgiveness of
sins (Acts 2:38), adoption into God’s family (Gal. 3:26-27), regeneration (John
3:5; Tit. 3:5), and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Ezek. 36:25-27).[3] Especially, however, it symbolizes washing in
Christ’s blood and Spirit which are the source of all these other blessings.
By making baptism symbolic of what we
do, Baptists make a serious mistake. The
focus, then, is moved from God to us, fostering carnal pride. Instead of showing that faith, repentance and
holiness are things which must follow upon God’s work, it leads to carnal
security by focusing on what we have already done, and thus tempting us to put
our trust in it, or encourage doubt, because what we have done may not be
enough. That is probably the reason why
many who have been baptized under this teaching return to be rebaptized time
and again. What they have done seems, in light of subsequent events, not to
have been enough.
It is not what we do, but Christ’s death and
resurrection. It is not our faith and repentance which save us, but union with
Christ.
Thus, infant baptism teaches us that salvation
does not depend on us, but on the sovereign grace of God, who grants salvation
to sinners in the same way that they came under condemnation in Adam, that is,
without their knowledge.
West sums it up this way:
Does baptism symbolize what
we do or what God does in us? If the
former choice, then the question about who are to be baptized is settled at
once. Baptism would then symbolize our
response to the Gospel. If we first act,
and then God reacts, then baptism would testify to what we perform for
ourselves. This translates into the
slightly altered humanistic phrase, “God baptizes those who help themselves”
instead of “God helps those who help themselves.” Baptism would represent our human might and
our human power instead of God’s Spirit Who baptizes us ...
However, if baptism symbolizes God’s work in us
so that we are impelled by God to come to God, then it is much easier to
understand why children who are too young to profess their faith in Christ
should be baptized. If Christ could make
even the stones to cry out, He is certainly able to make babies His disciples.[4]
[Next section: “Infant Baptism and the Promise of
God”]
==========
FOOTNOTES:
1. “Form for the Administration of Baptism,”
in The Psalter with Doctrinal standards,
Liturgy, Church Order and Added Chorale Section (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1998), p. 86.
2. John Hooper, Believers,
Their Children, and the Gospel of Sovereign Grace, 2nd edition
(2005, unpublished), p. 14.
3. Rodger M. Crooks, Salvation’s
Sign and Seal, p. 33.
4. Jim West, The Baptism of
Infants in the Old and New Covenants, p. 3.
No comments:
Post a Comment