Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: dvnspc1!tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Original sin of infants Message-ID: Date: 25 Apr 91 03:30:17 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Unisys Corporation, Devon Engineering Offices Lines: 57 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes: > >If one applies the following reasoning to infants, then batism is >pointless. > >In order to be 'saved' one must acknowledge one's state of needing >grace and that Jesus is the one who will supply that grace. ... If you apply your reasoning, then you must come to the conclusion that infants and the mentally defective cannot be "saved," since neither can acknowledge the need of saving grace. And you cannot say that the infant is "innocent," for the Bible teaches us that the wicked "are estranged from the womb, they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies." (Ps. 58:3) The Bible seems to paint a somewhat different picture of the place of children in God's covenant community. Under the covenant God made with Abraham, believers and their children were included in the covenant by virtue of the faith of the father. The covenant was between God and Abraham, along with his children (Gen. 17:10). Now, from the New Testament we now that all those who believe in Christ are the children of Abraham because we share the faith of Abraham (Gal. 3:7). Since we share in the faith and blessings of Abraham, does it not make sense that our children also share in those blessings? As Peter told the crowd, "For the promises are to you, and to your children, and to all who are far off." (Acts 2:39). There are several instances where entire households were baptized as a result of the faith of the head of the house (Acts 16:15,33; 18:8) We are told that the children of even one believing parent are "made holy" instead of being "unclean." (I Cor. 7:14) Why would Paul tell the Corinthian believers that their children need to be "made holy?" And if our children also share in the blessings of Abraham, should they not receive the sign of the covenant? If there is a covenant, should their not be a sign of identification? It would seem from the NT that baptism has replaced circumcision as the sign of the covenant. Identification with the covenant community comes about when one is baptized. As we are told in Colossians 2, spiritual circumcision is closely related to spiritual baptism. Those who have truly believed have experienced the circumcision of the foreskin of the heart (Deut. 10:16), and have received the washing of the Spirit (cf. Ezekiel 36:26). And water baptism is the outward sign of the inner reality of "Christ in you." The need many folks have for something short of baptism for their children is evident by the number of churches that engage in infant "dedication." This is a quaint practice unsupported by the Scriptures, esp. the NT. It is loosely based on the "dedication" of some OT saints such as Samuel by his mother Hannah, but has significant differences. (For instance, how many Christians who dedicate their children leave them at the Temple?) For many Christians infant baptism remains the most appropriate means by which we acknowledge that our children are blessed by God because of our faith, and that the New Covenant is between God and our families. In this we totally identify with our father Abraham. -- Tom Albrecht