Jesus Blesses Little Children, Part 2

In this part of the sermon: Martin introduces the controversial topic of infant baptism, expressing reluctance and fear of stirring sinful passions, but asserts the necessity of addressing two stubborn…

Martin uses the example of Stephen's enemies gnashing their teeth at his facts to illustrate that facts are stubborn things, and people often reject truth rather than argue with it, setting the stage for presenting the 'stubborn facts' about infant baptism.

But I am reluctant and fearful to take up the subject because it's one in which it is easy unnecessarily to stir up sinful passions. Furthermore, I'm fearful that I should in any way lessen your esteem for men of God in the past and the present whose works in print ought to be household items with many of us. And I would hate, having to cite proven guides in the Scripture on this matter, in any way to prejudice your mind to say, well, if someone could be so wrong on that issue in this passage, can I trust them anywhere? It would grieve me if that would be the result of our study together. Howe...

15:12 - 16:10 Read in full sermon

In this part of the sermon: Martin provides extensive quotations from prominent commentators (Matthew Henry, John Calvin, J.A. Alexander, Lenski, William Hendrickson) to demonstrate how they use Mark…

Martin notes the unusual length of time spent quoting commentators, explaining it was to shock the audience into realizing the widespread use of Mark 10 to defend infant baptism, which many may not have known.

In later years through parental, etc. instruction applied to the heart by the Holy Spirit the divine blessings received earlier becomes a mighty incentive to wholehearted personal surrender to Christ. End quote. Now dear people some of you who have attended upon this ministry for over 20 years you will know that perhaps rarely if ever have I ever taken 16 minutes to quote commentaries in a given point of a sermon.

32:47 - 33:18 Read in full sermon

Driving home: This text has not the shadow of the shade of the ghost of a connection with God. This is baptism.

Martin quotes Charles Spurgeon's vivid and emphatic statement that Mark 10 has 'not the shadow of the shade of the ghost of a connection with baptism,' using it to powerfully dismiss the paedobaptist interpretation of the passage.

Spurgeon's heading in treating this text head number one was this. This text has not the shadow of the shade of the ghost of a connection with God. This is baptism.

36:16 - 36:30 Read in full sermon

Driving home: This text has not the shadow of the shade of the ghost of a connection with God. This is baptism.

Martin breaks down Spurgeon's imagery of a 'shadow of the shade of the ghost of a connection' to emphasize the utter lack of any link between the text and baptism, making Spurgeon's point even more forceful.

Whatever is connected to it this passage Mark 10 13 is not even the shadow of the shade of the ghost of a connection. You see the imagery? Here's a connection and it has a ghost or a spirit. The spirit has a shadow and the shadow has a shade.

36:44 - 37:04 Read in full sermon

The point: Do not perpetrate an ordinance without warrant from Christ's Word, even if it means forfeiting human approval.

Martin invites listeners to imagine themselves as a 'fly on the wall' in the church to observe the love and care shown to children, countering the accusation that refusing infant baptism is an act of cruelty.

And who said in John 14, 21, He that has my commandments and keeps them, he it is that loves me. Dear people, we refuse baptism to our children not because we don't love our children. All you need to do is come around here one Lord's day and stand off in the corner. Plant yourself on the wall like a fly and just watch.

46:33 - 46:56 Read in full sermon

Driving home: Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament ordained by Jesus Christ not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible church, but to be unto Him.

Martin creates a hypothetical dialogue between a child and parents about the meaning of infant baptism, illustrating how it can lead to profound confusion about the child's spiritual state, forgiveness, and need for personal faith.

And then when that little babe in arms begins to understand that little ones are brought to the front of the church and in the solemn ceremony, and I am not mocking it, dear people, I don't want any laughter, but in the solemn ceremony, water is applied to them and prayers are made. And he says, Mommy, Daddy, what does this mean? Oh, we did that to you. Why?

52:27 - 52:45 Read in full sermon

In this part of the sermon: The second reason is loving concern for children, arguing that baptism always signifies the application of salvation's blessings (forgiveness, regeneration, union with Christ)…

Martin offers an alternative, biblical way for parents to explain their child's privileged position (prayers, instruction, loving support) without confusing them about their need for personal salvation, contrasting it with the confusion caused by infant baptism.

When they ask, am I any different from the neighbor's kids, we say, yes, you're greatly privileged. You were prayed for before you were ever conceived. And we didn't even know what we were praying for. At our wedding, the pastor prayed that if God would bless our union with little ones, such and such would be changed.

54:27 - 54:51 Read in full sermon

Driving home: Though they have already regarded them members of the church and given them the sign and seal of engrafting into Christ, new birth, cleansing, newness of life, they treat them for what they really are, privileged pagans.

Martin acknowledges that many paedobaptist parents, despite their doctrine, faithfully treat their children as 'privileged pagans' who need conversion, highlighting a 'blessed inconsistency' where their parental love and biblical understanding override their baptismal doctrine.

Thank God for that blessed inconsistency. Though they have already regarded them members of the church and given them the sign and seal of engrafting into Christ, new birth, cleansing, newness of life, they treat them for what they really are, privileged pagans. Privileged, unregenerate children who need to be born again, who need to be converted, and thank God. But you see, in so doing they give up a biblical doctrine of baptism because when God answers their prayers and blesses their efforts and the child comes forward and says, I believe God has wrought a work of grace in me.

61:10 - 61:49 Read in full sermon

The point: If you believe in Christ but have not been baptized as a confessed disciple, obey His command for believer's baptism.

Martin uses the analogy of a child repudiating a parent's unbiblical teaching (e.g., 'don't talk about sex, that's dirty') to illustrate that correcting a parental error regarding baptism is not disrespect but a higher allegiance to God's Word.

Oh, but you say that would be to disrespect my parents. Not necessarily. It is simply to say that my godly loving parents were wrong on that issue. As much as they were wrong when they told you, don't talk about sex, that's dirty.

64:52 - 65:11 Read in full sermon