|
Rom. 4 and Gen. 17: A Key Baptist Argument Fails
Q. The New Testament is very clear in its requirement that people must believe and then be baptized. How can the practice of infant baptism ever be squared with that clear requirement?
A. This is another example of the importance of knowing the Old Testament as well as the New Testament. Romans 4 tells us that circumcision was the seal of the righteousness Abraham had by faith. That is the same language Baptists use when they talk about believing and then being baptized. With this in mind we must now go back to Genesis 17 where God commands Abraham to apply the sign of circumcision to eight-day old Isaac. If circumcision is a seal of righteousness by faith, how can it be applied to an infant? It was applied to an infant because, in addition to being a seal of righteousness by faith for Abraham, it was also a sign of the Abrahamic covenant for Isaac. This is nothing less than an example straight from Scripture which proves that the Baptist insistence on believing before being baptized is not a biblical requirement.
Statue of Zwingli Grossmünster
|
