Rebuttal of Paedobaptism (Sam Waldron)

Driving home: It may be said at the outset that there is no explicit command in the Bible to baptize children. Lewis Bertholdt said that. And that there is not a single instance in which we are plainly told that children were baptized…

Martin quotes Robert Dabney, who uses military imagery to describe how paedobaptists 'entrench' themselves behind the ordinance of circumcision, daring Baptists to attack this position. This illustrates the perceived strength of the paedobaptist argument from circumcision.

He says, Yet circumcision was, by God's command, applied to all the infant males of God's people. Let the immersionists, the Baptists, therefore go and turn all the confident denunciations of baby sprinkling against this parallel ordinance of God. We entrench ourselves behind it. You see what Dabney is saying.

12:15 - 12:36 Read in full sermon

Driving home: The Old Covenant people was a physical nation. The New Covenant people is a spiritual nation. Unregenerate infants are, by definition, included in a physical nation. But they are, by definition, excluded from a spiritual…

Martin uses an analogy of concentric circles to describe Old Covenant promises (spiritual promises surrounded by temporal/physical ones) versus New Covenant promises (only spiritual). This illustrates why infants could benefit from Old Covenant physical blessings but not New Covenant spiritual ones.

Now, again, let me give another way of saying the same argument that we're going to use and try to prove. The Old Covenant people were a physical nation with physical promises, and unregenerate infants, unregenerate people may profit from physical, temporal blessings. But the New Covenant people have spiritual promises from which only spiritual people may profit. Let me illustrate this.

15:40 - 16:05 Read in full sermon

The point: Either we do not baptize infants or we say that they are converted and regenerate. That is the choice.

Martin explains that unregenerate people enter the New Testament church only by lying about their conversion, contrasting this with the Old Covenant where unregenerate infants were knowingly inducted. This clarifies the distinction between the intended and actual composition of the church.

The New Testament church includes unregenerate people only if they lie to get in. I say that advisedly. They have to say they are converted and believe in Christ to get in. If they lie, they can get in.

49:31 - 49:44 Read in full sermon

The point: Either we do not baptize infants or we say that they are converted and regenerate. That is the choice.

Martin addresses the common paedobaptist use of the parable of the wheat and tares to justify unregenerate members in the church, clarifying Christ's own interpretation that 'the field is the world, not the church.'

They weren't regenerate in the Old Testament. The one scripture that has been used to back that up is the parable of the wheat and pears in Matthew 13. Oh, yes. You see, the field is the world, not the church.

49:55 - 50:08 Read in full sermon

In this part of the sermon: Martin concludes that paedobaptism is unbiblical because the New Covenant's superiority breaks the paedobaptist argument from circumcision. The national structure and temporal…

Martin quotes John Murray's definition of the visible body of Christ (from 1 Corinthians 1:1-2) as those 'called of God, sanctified by God, crucified in Christ Jesus,' to show that even paedobaptists define the church in spiritual terms, highlighting their inconsistency regarding infant baptism.

. Yes, the definition of the visible body of Christ, John Murray himself gives this very clearly. It is those who are called of God, sanctified by God, crucified in Christ Jesus, 1 Corinthians 1, 1 and 2. John Murray himself defines the Church that way.

51:15 - 51:52 Read in full sermon

In this part of the sermon: Martin concludes that paedobaptism is unbiblical because the New Covenant's superiority breaks the paedobaptist argument from circumcision. The national structure and temporal…

A listener points out the inconsistency of paedobaptists allowing only confessing children to partake in Holy Communion (the New Covenant Passover) but baptizing infants. This highlights a perceived double standard in their sacramental theology.

So, we say then, yes, Mel? Another thing I can't quite understand is that they will go all the way with the sacrament of Holy Communion, but they don't allow their children to partake of that, so they get made to switch over from Passover to Lord's Supper, all the way, only confessing children can partake of that. Mm-hmm. And yet the others finally have watched the way it was.

51:52 - 52:19 Read in full sermon