Baptism in the Christian
Family
Jerrell Hein
The issue of when to baptize children of Christian
parents is a very divisive topic among Christians today. Those who hold to the
position that children cannot be biblically baptized until they are at least young
adults claim that it is a sin or at best meaningless to baptize younger
children including infants. This is considered so fundamental that some of the
primary proponents of this position, the Baptists and Anabaptists (literally
meaning “rebaptizers”), have their conviction on this subject written into
their name. On the other side, denominations like the Roman Catholic Church
have in times past used force to require parents to baptize their infants,
leaving no room for a choice of conscience by the parents.
In this document, I will attempt to briefly show that
household baptism is biblical and the historical practice of the Church. I will
leave a written defense of the Baptist position (I will use the term “Baptist”
in the rest of the document for those who hold this view even though not all
would call themselves Baptists.) to those who hold that conviction and can
describe it best.
The primary objection of Baptists to household baptism
is that a young child cannot intellectually comprehend and verbally express his
belief in the gospel and thus cannot fulfill the gospel call as described in
verses such as:
Mark 16:15-16 And He said to them, “Go into all the
world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized
will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.”
They say that since a child cannot believe, he cannot
be biblically baptized.
I believe there are three flaws in the reasoning
above. First, the Baptist argument asserts that children cannot believe and
thus cannot have a relationship with God as His child. Secondly, their argument
assumes that each person makes an individual decision regarding baptism and
that the fact that a child is part of a household with Christian parents is
irrelevant. Third, their position puts them in an indefensible position
regarding the salvation of their own children. I will address each of these
areas in the next three sections.
Jesus talks about children who believe in Him in
Matthew 18:
Matt. 18:2-6, 10-11 Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of
them, and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless
you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the
kingdom of heaven. Therefore
whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of
heaven. Whoever receives
one little child like this in My name receives Me. “Whoever causes one of these
little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone
were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea… “Take
heed that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that in
heaven their angels always see the face of My Father who is in heaven. For the
Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.
The Greek word used here for “little children” is
“paidion” which Strong’s defines as, “a childling of either sex, that is, an
infant or (by extension) a half-grown boy or girl.” Jesus says that these
little children can believe in Him. It was His disciples whom he rebuked who
thought spiritual realities such as the kingdom of heaven were reserved only
for adults. Jesus turned their thoughts upside down and told them that the
adults had the problem, not the children.
Jesus makes a similar statement in Matthew 19:
Matt. 19:13-14 Then little children were brought to Him that He might put His hands on them and pray, but the
disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, “Let the little
children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of
heaven.”
And in Luke 18:
Luke 18:16-17 But Jesus called them to Him and said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid
them; for of such is the kingdom of God. Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does
not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.”
So Jesus says that little children can believe and are
fit for the kingdom of heaven.
Also, in Matthew 21:
Matt. 21:15-16 But when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things
that He did, and the children crying out in the temple and saying, “Hosanna to
the Son of David!” they were indignant and said to Him, “Do You hear what these
are saying?” And Jesus said to
them, “Yes. Have you never read,
‘Out of the mouth of babes and nursing
infants
You
have perfected praise’? ”
Here Jesus quotes Psalm 8:2 which specifically lists
babes and nursing infants as those who offer perfect praise to God.
We also have an account of an unborn baby recognizing
a voice, expressing joy, and having the Spirit of God:
Luke 1:39-41 Now Mary arose in those days and went into the hill country with
haste, to a city of Judah, and entered the house of Zacharias and greeted
Elizabeth. And it happened, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the
babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
and the attribute of trust (faith) given to nursing babies:
Psa. 22:9 But
You are He who took Me out of the
womb;
You
made Me trust while on My mother’s
breasts.
So the Baptist position that children cannot believe
and are not fit for the kingdom of God contradicts Jesus’ statements. In His
statements, Jesus gives us a glimpse into spiritual realities that we cannot
see with our physical eyes and which must be accepted by faith as true. It is a
wonderful mystery that children can have a close relationship with God, and
Jesus reveals this to us by His own authority and first hand knowledge.
Is the
New Covenant a Household Covenant?
The Baptist position is that entrance into the New
Covenant is on a strictly individual basis. I will try to show below that this
individualistic pattern is contrary to the pattern of the major covenants of
the Old Testament and that there is significant evidence that the New Covenant
also follows the Old Testament pattern of household covenants.
1. Old Testament
Covenants were Household Covenants
a.
Covenant
with Noah
Starting
with the covenant with Noah, the Bible says that of all the men on earth only
Noah found favor with God:
Gen. 6:7-9 So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I
have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and
birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” But Noah found
grace in the eyes of the LORD. This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a
just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God.
So
God gave His covenant instructions directly to Noah,
Gen. 6:17-18,22; 7:1,5 And behold, I Myself am
bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in
which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall
die. But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall go into the
ark—you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you…Thus Noah did;
according to all that God commanded him, so he did… Then the LORD said to Noah,
“Come into the ark, you and all your household, because I have seen that you
are righteous before Me in this generation… And Noah did according to all that
the LORD commanded him.
And
God saved Noah and His household because of the righteous obedience of Noah,
Gen. 8:1,15-18 Then God remembered Noah, and every living
thing, and all the animals that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind
to pass over the earth, and the waters subsided… Then God spoke to Noah,
saying, “Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’
wives with you. Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is
with you: birds and cattle and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth,
so that they may abound on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the
earth.” So Noah went out, and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives
with him.
Although
Noah’s sons were grown and married and not young children, we see that the
fundamental nature of this covenant was that God saved Noah’s household because
of the faith of Noah. The connection between Noah’s covenant and the New
Covenant is made in 1 Peter 3:
1Pet. 3:18-22 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust,
that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive
by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who
formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the
days of Noah, while the ark was being
prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There
is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of
the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand
of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.
By Noah’s faith his household was saved through the floodwaters,
and this event was a type for the New Covenant where now salvation comes
through the waters of baptism.
b.
Covenant
with Abraham
When
God established His covenant with Abraham, He spoke directly to Abraham:
Gen. 17:1-2 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD
appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am Almighty God; walk before Me and be
blameless. And I will make My covenant between Me and you, and will
multiply you exceedingly.”
God
then gave Abraham instructions about the provisions and signs of the covenant.
Gen. 17:10-14 This is My covenant which you shall keep,
between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you
shall be circumcised; and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your
foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you. He
who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised, every male child in your
generations, he who is born in your house or bought with money from any
foreigner who is not your descendant. He who is born in your house and he
who is bought with your money must be circumcised, and My covenant shall be in
your flesh for an everlasting covenant. And the uncircumcised male child,
who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut
off from his people; he has broken My covenant.”
So
Abraham was given the instructions to follow, but his children were also
included in the covenant and given the sign of the covenant even though they
were only eight days old and incapable of intellectually understanding the
provisions and signs of the covenant. If God had wished to make His covenant
with each adult individually, then He could have commanded that after a child
grew and decided for himself he wanted to be in the covenant, he should be
circumcised as the sign of entering into the covenant. But God's method was to
include faithful Abraham's household in the covenant from the beginning. Later,
as the children grew, God would test them to see if they would be obedient to
remain in covenant with Him.
In
the New Testament, we are shown the connection between the covenant with
Abraham and the New Covenant - that those Gentiles who enter into the New
Covenant with God are not starting something new, but are being grafted in as a
wild branch into the olive tree that has as its root the promises made to
Abraham:
Rom. 11:1,13-18 I say then, has
God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the
seed of Abraham, of the tribe of
Benjamin… For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the
Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of
them. For if their being cast away is
the reconciling of the world, what will
their acceptance be but life from the
dead? For if the firstfruit is holy,
the lump is also holy; and if the root is
holy, so are the branches. And if
some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were
grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness
of the olive tree, do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the
root, but the root supports you.
c.
Covenant
with Moses
God
continued the practice of circumcision through the Mosaic covenant, but added
the sacrifice of the Passover lamb as a practice of His covenant made through
Moses:
Ex. 12:3,7,12-13 Speak to all the congregation of Israel, saying:
“On the tenth of this month every man shall take for himself a lamb, according
to the house of his father, a lamb for a household… And they shall take some of
the blood and put it on the two doorposts and on the lintel of the houses where
they eat it… “For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and will
strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against
all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD. Now the
blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you are. And when I see the
blood, I will pass over you; and the plague shall not be on you to destroy you
when I strike the land of Egypt.
The
blood of the lamb only was effective if the head of the household had faith in
God and obeyed the provisions of the covenant. If he did, then not only he but
also his entire household was passed over and saved from death, including the
children. The Passover lamb, of course, was the type of the Passover Lamb that
saves us in the New Covenant in Christ's blood.
Again,
in the New Testament we are told that the Exodus of the Hebrews and the
covenant through Moses are connected to baptism and the New Covenant:
1Cor. 10:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our
fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized
into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food, and
all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that
followed them, and that Rock was Christ.
So
we see that the major covenants of the Old Testament were all household
covenants and that there are New Testament Scriptures in each case which refer
back to these Old Testament covenants as representative types of the New
Covenant. The fact that the Biblical definition of household includes young
children and infants is evident from the examples above of Abraham and Moses,
but I will add one more Old Testament example where it is stated explicitly
that the household includes young children:
Num. 16:27,31-32 So they got away
from around the tents of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram; and Dathan and Abiram came
out and stood at the door of their tents, with their wives, their sons, and
their little children… Now it came to pass, as he finished speaking all these
words, that the ground split apart under them, and the earth opened its mouth
and swallowed them up, with their households and all the men with Korah, with
all their goods.
2. Additional Evidence
that the New Covenant Follows the Household Covenant Pattern
There are numerous additional evidences in the New Testament that the New
Covenant follows the same household pattern as God’s previous covenants.
a. Additional Types
Related to the Abrahamic Covenant
The New Testament states that we as Christians are partakers in the
promises made to Abraham:
Rom. 4:1-12 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found
according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before
God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham
believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him
who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. But to him who does
not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted
for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to
whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And
whose sins are covered;
Blessed is the man to whom the LORD
shall not impute sin.”
Does this blessedness then come upon the
circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was
accounted to Abraham for righteousness. How then was it accounted? While he was
circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised.
And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the
faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of
all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might
be imputed to them also, and the father of circumcision to those who not only
are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our
father Abraham had while still uncircumcised.
Gal. 3:5-16 Therefore He who
supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the
works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?—just as Abraham “believed God, and it was accounted to him
for righteousness.” Therefore know that only those who are of faith are
sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the
Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.”
So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. For as
many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in
all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.” But that
no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.” Yet the
law is not of faith, but “the man who
does them shall live by them.” Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the
law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”), that the blessing of
Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the
promise of the Spirit through faith. Brethren, I speak in the manner of men: Though
it is only a man’s covenant, yet if it
is confirmed, no one annuls or adds to it. Now to Abraham and his Seed were the
promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And
to your Seed,” who is Christ.
Notice that not only are we as Christians participants
in the covenant made with Abraham, but that:
i.
the gospel was preached
to Abraham (Gal 3:8),
ii.
he entered the covenant
by faith (Ro 4:3, Gal 3:6),
iii.
he (and we know his
household) were given the sign of the covenant (Ro 4:11).
Abraham believed the good news of the coming Seed and
entered into the covenant by faith. When he entered, he and his household
entered and received the sign of the covenant. As Christians we now look back
in history to when the Seed came and enter the New Covenant also by faith. If
we follow the pattern of our father Abraham, we bring our household into the
covenant also and give them the sign of entrance into the covenant – baptism.
b. Household Authorities Still Taught in
the New Testament
For there to be a household covenant, there must be a
household and a head of that household, just as Abraham had his household and
was the head of it. In the New Testament, although God abolished the physical
nation of Israel, God does not abolish the concept of a household and begin
speaking only to individuals, but continues to reinforce the idea of a
household and its spiritual headship:
1Cor. 11:3 But I want you to know that the head
of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is
God.
Eph. 5:22-23 Wives, submit to
your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also
Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.
c. The Promise is Still to the Children
The promise made to Abraham was to him and his descendents,
starting with his own child Isaac.
Gen.
17:10 This is My covenant which you shall keep, between Me
and you and your descendants after you…
When the New Covenant is announced for the first time at Pentecost,
we see the same type of promise to the hearers and their children:
Acts 2:38-39 Then Peter said to
them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ
for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as
many as the Lord our God will call.”
d. Numerous Households Baptized in the New Testament
There are numerous examples in the New Testament of households
being baptized (Acts 11:13-14, 16:14-15,
16:29-34, 18:7-8; 1 Co 1:16). Note that the Greek word “oikos” used for
household is the same word in both the New Testament and the Greek Old
Testament (Septuagint), which was the Old Testament used by the apostles. Following
are two examples:
Acts 16:14-15 Now a certain woman named Lydia heard us. She was a seller of purple from the city of Thyatira, who
worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul. And
when she and her household were baptized, she begged us, saying, “If you have
judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay.” So she
persuaded us.
Acts 16:29-34 Then he called for a
light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. And he brought
them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” So they said, “Believe
on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” Then
they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. And he
took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately
he and all his family were baptized. Now when he had brought them into his
house, he set food before them; and he rejoiced, having believed in God with all
his household.
Finally, Paul makes a simple statement about his practice of
baptizing:
1Cor. 1:16 Yes, I also baptized the household
of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other.
It is important to read this putting yourself in the shoes of a 1st
century reader. Paul was a former Pharisee (orthodox Jew) who says that he
baptized the household of Stephanus. For Paul, a household would include all
members of a house including children. Conversely for the Baptist position,
there is no example in the New Testament of a Christian family waiting to
baptize their children.
e. Children are “in the Lord”
In Ephesians, there is a direct reference to the children of
Christian parents:
Eph. 6:1 Children, obey your parents in the
Lord, for this is right.
The phrase used here in Greek for “in the Lord” is the
same one used many other places in the New Testament such as Ephesians 6:10,
Eph. 6:10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power
of His might.
The phrase “in the Lord” means that the person is a
part of Christ’s Body and is empowered by His Spirit, and this phrase is
applied to the children of Christian parents in Ephesians 6:1.
Baptist
Self-Contradiction Regarding Children’s Salvation
The Baptist position is that only those individuals
who can repent and make a confesion of faith can be saved and are candidates
for baptism; therefore, to be logically consistent this would mean that if an
infant or young child dies he is not saved but is condemned. Even though this
is the logical conclusion from their position, nearly all Baptists would say
that God does save infants and young children who die. Thus, while arguing that
household baptism is wrong because infants and children are not candidates for
salvation and baptism, Baptists themselves admit that God saves infants and
young children.
Evidence
from the Early Church
In addition to the previous evidences, it is important
to look at the writings of the early Christians to see what light they shed on
the baptismal practices of the early assemblies.
Justin Martyr lived from 100 to 166 A.D. and died as a
Christian martyr. He notes,
“And many, both men and women, who have been Christ’s
disciples from childhood, remain pure at the age of sixty or seventy years…”
He also confirms the parallel between circumcision in
the Old Covenant and baptism in the New Covenant, as spoken of in Colossians 2:
Col. 2:11-12 In Him you
were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off
the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him
in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working
of God, who raised Him from the dead.
when
he says,
“And
we, who have approached God through Him, have received not carnal, but
spiritual circumcision, which Enoch and those like him observed. And we have
received it through baptism, since we were sinners, by God’s mercy; and all men
may equally obtain it.”
Irenaeus was an elder of the Church in Lyons, France
in 180 AD. He was a disciple of Polycarp, who himself was trained by the
apostle John, so Irenaeus was only one step away from the apostle John. In discussing
Jesus’ own baptism and life beginning as an infant and continuing through
adulthood, Irenaeus says:
“He (Jesus) came to save all persons by means of
Himself–all, I say, who through Him are born again to God–infants, children,
boys, youth, and old men.”
Here, Irenaeus specifically mentions infants and
children as being included in the list of those “born again.”
Origen lived from 185 to 254 A.D. and was the most
learned Christian teacher in the world in his day. His statements concerning
household baptism are clear and give the origin of this practice as the
Apostles:
“Infants
are baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Of what sins? Or, when have they
sinned? Or, can there be any reason for the laver in their case, unless it be
according to the sense which we have mentioned above: namely, that no one is
free from pollution, though he has lived but one day upon earth? And because by
baptism native pollution is taken away, therefore infants are baptized."
(Homilly in Luke 14)
“For what is sin? Could a child who has only just been born commit
a sin? And yet he has sin for which it is commanded to offer a sacrifice, as
Job 14:4ff and Psalm 51:5-7 show. For this reason the Church received from the
Apostles the tradition to administer baptism to the children also. For the men
to whom the secrets of divine mysteries had been entrusted knew that in
everyone there were genuine sinful defilements, which had to be washed away
with water and the Spirit." (Commentary on Romans 5:9)
"According to the usage of the church, baptism is given
even to infants; when if there were nothing in infants which needed forgiveness
and mercy, the grace of baptism would seem to be superfluous." (Homily 8
in Leviticus Chapter 12)
In the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, written in
the early 200’s there is a description of baptism that includes the following:
“And they shall baptise the little children first. And
if they can answer for themselves, let them answer. But if they cannot, let
their parents answer or someone from their family.”
From this quote, it is clear that infants were being
baptized, since they would be unable to answer for themselves. We also see that
the parents, or the sponsors, answered for the child.
In the same timeframe, there are inscriptions from the
catacombs where Christians buried their dead. One of them reads,
“I, Zosimus, a believer from believers, lie here
having lived 2 years, 1 months, 25 days.”
This child was born of Christian parents and the
testimony of those who wrote the inscription is that he was considered a
believer, which would only be true if he had been baptized.
From the year 250 AD, we have a quote from Cyprian,
who was a Christian elder in the Church in North Africa. Here he is speaking to
a brother who has given the opinion that baptism should be done on the eighth
day after birth and who has asked a meeting of overseers to consider the
question of when the baptism of a child should occur:
“In respect of the case of the infants, you say that
they should not be baptized within the second or third day after their
birth–that the law of ancient circumcision should be regarded. So you think
that one who has just been born should not be baptized and sanctified within
the eighth day. However, we all thought very differently in our council.
...Rather, we all believe that the mercy and grace of God is not to be refused
to anyone born of man. ....As far as we can, we must strive that no soul be
lost, if at all possible. For what is lacking to him who has once been formed
in the womb by the hand of God?”
Here we see that Cyprian and his fellow elders
unanimously supported the practice of household baptism.
And again from Cyprian and his fellow elders:
“Even to the greatest sinners and to those who have
sinned much against God, when they subsequently believe, remission of sins is
granted. Nobody is hindered from baptism and from grace. How much more should
we shrink from hindering an infant. For he, being lately born, has not
sinned–other than, in being born after the flesh according to Adam, he has
contracted the contagion of the ancient death at its earliest birth. For this
reason, he more easily approaches the reception of the forgiveness of sins. For
to him are remitted–not his own sins–but the sins of another. Therefore,
dearest brother, this was our opinion in council that no one should be hindered
by us from baptism and from the grace of God.”
Note that all of these quotes are from men who lived
well before the existence of the Roman Catholic Church. It is a common myth that the Roman
Catholics invented infant baptism.
So how did infant baptism come to be viewed as a Roman Catholic
corruption by many post-Reformation groups?
In the early 300’s, the Roman emperor Constantine
merged the Roman state and the Christian Church, bringing in numerous worldly
practices and corruptions to the original apostolic faith. He and his
successors eventually decreed that all children in the Roman empire must be
baptized. In addition, entire tribes and nations of people were forced to
submit to baptism or be killed. Soon after Constantine, the proper practice of
household baptism had been corrupted. It is interesting to note that the proper
practice of adult baptism was also corrupted. Baptism at the point of the
sword, or baptism without faith to obtain money and position degraded the
practice of adult baptism also. In fact, Constantine himself epitomized the
corruption of adult baptism in the Roman Church by waiting until his deathbed
until being baptized. He reasoned that he could live as he pleased until his
deathbed and then take advantage of the forgiveness offered through baptism.
In the Reformation, some of the reformers saw the
corruption of the Roman practice and reacted against it. In the process, some
threw out the practice of household baptism completely, believing the entire
issue to be an invention of the Roman Church. In this they were mistaken and
literally “threw the baby out with the bathwater.” Some of the reformers such
as John Calvin and Martin Luther did not reject household baptism, but others
such as the Baptists and Anabaptists did. There is a lesson of history here
worth noting. There is always a danger when reforming of overreacting and
creating another error in the opposite direction. This has been dubbed
“Newton’s Law of Theology,” because the first error can create an equal and
opposite second error.
Since the Reformation, there have been many
outstanding Christians who have practiced household baptism. Men such as John
and Charles Wesley who founded the Methodists, George Whitefield who is
considered one of the greatest evangelists of all time, the translators of the
King James Bible, and in more modern times, Richard Wurmbrand the founder of
Voice of the Martyrs and a man called “the apostle of the persecuted church” all
practiced household baptism. These are just a few in a long list of those who
have born good fruit for the Kingdom of God and who have practiced household
baptism.
Why
Practice Household Baptism?
Even if a person accepts the above evidence that household
baptism is a biblical option, they may ask, “Why practice it? What benefits
does it give as opposed to waiting?” Here are some benefits to consider:
- A Matter of Obedience – Jesus says not to hinder
the little ones from coming to Him and that they can believe in Him. I
don’t want to argue with Him about it - just obey Him. In household
baptism, the children are brought into God’s family as soon as possible
and given all of the benefits of believers.
- Continuing the Covenental Pattern – Household baptism
continues God’s covenental pattern and connects us with our spiritual
father Abraham and the believing saints who have gone before in the Old
Testament.
- Holding to the Faith of the Early Church –
Household baptism was widely practiced by the early Christians and we
follow their example by practicing it.
- Oneness of the Household – As a household of
faith, all the members strive together as one unit to mature and run the
race for the prize. The house does not consist of believers and
unbelievers, but is one.
- Raising Children in the Lord – Children are
taught from the beginning about their God and His relationship with them.
All of Christ’s commandments are taught to apply to them right now because
they are Christians too. They are trained in what they are a part of and
warned of the consequences of departing from it, as opposed to being
treated as unbelievers who will later decide if they want to enter the
covenant or not.
- The Gift of the Holy Spirit – The children
receive the gift of the Holy Spirit to help them grow in Christ.
- The Spiritual Food of Communion – The children
receive the spiritual food of Christ’s Body in communion for spiritual
growth.
Conclusion
This concludes my summary of the Biblical and
historical evidences related to household baptism. Although I have made the
case that there are many good biblical and historical reasons to choose the
practice of household baptism, I will not claim to have directly proven
household baptism, as Baptists cannot directly prove their position. Yet I believe
the great weight of Biblical and historical evidence is in favor of the
practice of household baptism, and that it is, as Origen said, the apostolic
teaching.
