Why Do So Many Practice It? Part 2

Introduction and Review of the Series on Infant Baptism

0:00 This adult Sunday school class was held on August 14th, 1983, at the Trinity Baptist Church in Montville, New Jersey.

0:12 Now once again, particularly for the benefit of our guests and visitors who are with us, whom we do cordially welcome, in Christ's name and in the fellowship of his truth and of his gospel, a word of explanation is in order with respect to what we are doing here in our adult class. Due to a number of factors which I'll not go into, back some weeks ago, Pastor Nichols, who is this day and tomorrow night completing a three-week ministry in South Africa, began at the encouragement of his fellow elders a series of studies in this class on the subject, Infant Baptism, Is It a Biblical Practice? And Pastor Nichols announced that in approaching this subject, we had first of all, the responsibility of coming to it with a proper attitude. And for those of you who do not know us as a church, we should say, not in the way of bragging, but simply as a matter of fact, that through the years we have sought consciously to cultivate a truly Catholic spirit with all of our brothers and sisters in Christ. And we have many dear personal friends who practice infant baptism. We pray for them privately and publicly and in our prayer meetings regularly, and in crisis situations.

1:34 They have ministered from this pulpit, and when we introduce them, we do not introduce them as those who, though they believe a lot of things that we regard as truth, have this terrible blot upon them that they put water on little Willie's head. We receive them without question as our brothers in the Lord. So lest you in any way misconstrue our overall spirit, which you would not know, not being a part of our fellowship, I feel, that that disclaimer is essential at the outset. And in introducing the subject, Pastor Nichols was careful to underscore this fact.

2:11 But nonetheless, a number of factors have brought us to the place where we feel the time has come, for the first time in our 16-year history as a church, to deal with this subject in a thorough and biblical manner. And so Pastor Nichols has taken the approach, first of all, of looking at the express testimony of the Word, the Word of God, regarding the question, should infants be baptized? And the first block of teaching was the biblical teaching, with respect to the subjects of baptism. And in opening up that line of consideration, he led us into a study of every passage in the Word of God in which it is said that our Lord, John the Baptist, or the apostles, or anyone else, practiced water baptism. We examined those passages with one fundamental question in view, namely, who were the subjects of baptism? And we came away with the clear conviction that the only subjects of baptism that can be established from the Word of God are professed disciples. Men and women, chief priests, not a few, Jews, Gentiles, whole households.

3:32 But the clear teaching of the Word of God is that professed disciples and professed disciples alone are the proper subjects of baptism. Now if you have a differing conviction and believe the Bible teaches otherwise, I do not have time to go back over five weeks of exposition, but these studies are available on tape, and we would commend them to you. Now before he moves on to deal with the subject of the significance of baptism, in the light of the Word of God, studies that will take you into such passages as Colossians 2, Romans 6, and 1 Peter 3, what does baptism signify? And then you will note as those passages are opened up that it signifies nothing less than the actual, not the potential, but the actual possession of the blessings of new covenant salvation. Forgiveness of sins. Washing from sins. Reconciliation.

4:33 Union with Christ. Etc. Then he will go on to open up other lines of biblical truth, the biblical doctrine of the sacraments, the church, and the covenant community. Now when he went off flying to South Africa, that left the class without a teacher for a couple of weeks, and so what I decided to do was to bring in some parenthetical elements, some bracketed elements, which no doubt grow out of the initial study, and we addressed ourselves to the question.

The Question: Why Infant Baptism Without Biblical Warrant?

5:02 Is this a proper approach to the subject? And I trust we convinced you that it is indeed the proper approach to the subject. And now we're taking up the question that has been asked by any number of you to me directly, and I'm sure more of you have thought it, though you did not express it. Why then, if there is no express warrant for infants being baptized, why then do so many in Christendom, particularly that segment of Christendom, be baptized?

5:29 Why then, if there is no express warrant for infants being baptized, why then do so many in Christendom, particularly that segment of Christendom, be baptized? Why do so many in Christendom, if this is Christendom, all branches of the professing Christian Church, particularly that segment of Christendom that manifests the respect and love for the Bible, why do so many people practice a ritual for which there is no clear biblical warrant? And last week we began to take up that question. And again with some, what I hope were gracious and fair qualifications, I suggested two reasons.

6:01 And hopefully this morning we'll take up the third and fourth reason as to why so many practice a ritual for which there is no clear warrant in the word of God. The first one we considered was what I called a humble but misguided deference to godly and learned men of the past and the present. And humble people of God say, well, I can't see infant baptism in the Bible, but godly learned men who knew Greek and Hebrew and studied ancient and modern theology, they believe it. So if those great men believe it, I ought to defer to their wisdom and follow the practice on their account.

6:42 And we saw from scripture that this is to violate the biblical injunction, call no man teacher, you have one teacher, even the Lord Jesus. And then we noted the second major reason why this ritual is practiced is a sincere and often grateful but uncritical acceptance of a religious tradition. So many times infant baptism is practiced in the context, if this is water on the head of an infant, it is practiced in the context where there is true godly nurture, where there is a true godly example, where there is genuine Christian love. And grace shown in a family.

7:26 And because people are so grateful for all of these things, they dare not even question this practice that was part and parcel of the whole context, lest they appear to be ungrateful for that entire context, lest they be disrespectful. And so they practice it out of a sincere, often grateful, but uncritical acceptance of a religious tradition. Now that's a brief summary of about seven weeks of teaching. Pastor Nichols.

Distinguishing Heresy from Error in Infant Baptism

7:53 And my own. And as we concluded our teaching last week, someone asked the question, and this is where we'll pick it up today. Someone asked the question, should we regard then this practice and the teaching of the necessity of baptizing infants as a heresy? And I said we must be very careful in making a distinction between heresy, which is generally associated with the belief of something, which is inconsistent with someone being in a state of grace, and error, which one can hold and still be in a state of grace. If someone denies that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that is, God the Son, denies that in Jesus Christ we have one who is just as much God as though he were not man, just as much man as though he were not God, the Bible says, he that denies the Son has not the Father. So it is impossible for someone to be in a state of grace who holds heresy with regard to the person of Christ. Now some practice of infant baptism is not merely erroneous, it is heretical.

9:14 If someone teaches that because the minister or the priest takes a few drops of water, goes through some mumbo-jumbo in English or Latin, and places water upon the head of an infant, he is regenerated and made a member of the kingdom of Christ by virtue of the mumbo-jumbo in the water, that's heresy.

9:35 That's blatant, unadulterated, damnable, rotten heresy. And you can call it that, and when you say heresy, don't ever say it with a smile. It's nothing to smile about. To say that what Christ did upon the cross, the application of which can only be sovereignly applied by the Holy Spirit, is automatic.

9:58 It is perfectly effected when someone takes a little water and in the name of the Triune God puts it on a baby's forehead, that that substitutes for the mighty work of God's sovereignly and graciously changing the heart through the ministry of the Word upon the conscience, that's heresy. But not everyone believes that in conjunction with infant baptism. And we regard the notion that baptized infants should be baptized because they are born in a so-called covenant, a covenant family, and therefore God has made special promises to them, and the way we indicate that relationship is to baptize them. We regard that as an error, but not as a damning or a delusive heresy.

10:42 So you see the difference. Heresy, in our general usage, I can't support this distinction from the Bible. What I'm saying is, in our general usage, heresy is the term given to views which it held will take you to hell.

10:59 Or a person may hold enough truth and much truth which takes them to heaven while carrying some excess baggage of some errors along the way, all right? But they're on their way to heaven, not on their way to hell, all right? Now then, let's pick up the third reason, and hopefully time will allow us to take the third and fourth, and then hopefully have some further opportunity for interaction. There is a third reason.

Reason 3: Capitulation to Unsanctified Parental Emotions

11:29 Why people practice a ritual for which there is no clear warrant in the Word of God. And I'm describing it this way. A capitulation to powerful but unsanctified parental emotions. A capitulation to powerful but unsanctified parental emotions.

11:59 Now let me explain what I mean. Again, you who are visitors, don't be scared when I give you a mouthful at the beginning. I usually chew up the mouthful and, like a mama bird, chews up the food for the little birds before she gives it to them. I attempt to do that.

12:16 Now there are many emotions which parents feel toward their children that are the actings of what we call common grace. For instance, unconverted parents, for the most part, feel protective towards their children. They will relate to their children in self-giving love. Saved and unsaved parents do this.

12:38 And it's a sign of great degeneracy when the Bible describes, in Romans 1.31, people who are without natural affection. Even animals have programmed into them, genetically, with no soul and mind to reflect, a care for their young. And God even draws an analogy in the Old Testament prophets of how the animal showed more grace, common grace, than even his people, Israel.

13:10 He spoke of the ox, knew where its crib was. But he said, my people don't even know their true resting place. They have forsaken me. Well, when people are without natural affection in the realm of parent-child relationships, that's when they can kill babies in their wombs instead of instinctively protecting them.

13:26 That's when they can neglect them. That's when they can beat them and abuse them. And that's a terrible thing. So, every parent has, by common grace, a measure of natural affection.

13:40 It's a sign of degeneracy if that natural affection is eroded or negated. Now, when God regenerates a person, what happens? Well, many of those natural emotions and affections that are the gift of common grace are now heightened by the power of the Holy Spirit, into the orbit of special grace. So, a parent who had some natural affection of self-giving love to a child now has measures of self-giving love far beyond anything he ever knew before.

14:15 And that love will cut new directions now. Before, he thought loving my kid meant giving him everything he wanted, not making anything hard or difficult. And so, what he was doing was creating a monster of a little self-centered brat. Now, he thought he was doing it out of love.

14:31 But that person gets saved and now begins to think God's thoughts after him in the light of the Bible. And that intensified parental love will cut new channels. Channels that are already legitimate will be widened and deepened. But now, follow me closely.

14:48 When a person is regenerated, father or mother, he not only carries into the kingdom of grace and of God, out of the kingdom of darkness and sin, he not only carries those natural affections, which are now increased and heightened, but he still carries remaining sin, which has perverse affections. And those perverse affections, along with perverse thoughts and patterns, need to be what? Mortified and sanctified. Now, I've said all of that to explain what I mean by this third reason as to why many people practice infant baptism. You see, in the heart of every parent is that natural emotion and affection heightened in regeneration that longs that each of his children be the objects of God's special love, that they prove to be elect and eventually become regenerate, converted, visible disciples, so that we have confidence that they are on their way to heaven. Now, any saved parent who doesn't have that longing has something wrong with them, something tragically wrong.

God's Sovereignty and Election in Romans 9

16:14 It's the natural affection now overlaid with perspectives and desires brought by the grace of God. However, however, however, with regard to the children of any belief, any believer, Almighty God is under no obligation to make them all His elect. And the Bible clearly teaches that God is utterly free and utterly sovereign with respect to choosing and bypassing sinners, even within the covenant line.

17:04 And that's the important point. And I want you to turn now to Romans chapter 9. You'll remember that when God said to Abraham that he would bless him and his seed, make of him the father of many nations, be a God to him and to his children or to his seed, Abraham said, Oh, that Ishmael might live before thee! And God said, No!

17:36 In Isaac shall thy seed be called. And now in Romans chapter 9, the first five verses, Paul expresses his tremendous burden for his fellow Israelites. As he thinks of the nation of Israel, those to whom he is tied by Jewish bloodlines, he speaks of his great heaviness of heart, his tremendous pain for his brethren, his kinsmen, who have all these tremendous privileges. And then he lists the privileges given to the nation of Israel.

18:15 But for the most part, that nation is in blindness and unbelief. So the question arises, Well, if that's so, what about God's word? Did not God promise to Abraham and then to Isaac and to Jacob He would be a God to them and to their seed? Well, if He promised to be a God to them and to their seed, and yet the multitude of their seed are in unbelief and in condemnation, the word of God has come to no effect.

18:42 Now, notice verse 6. But it is not as though the word of God has come to naught. No, God's word of promise originally given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, it has not failed of fulfillment. It is not as though the word of God has come to naught, for they are not all Israel who are of Israel.

19:11 Now, you see what he's doing? He's using a play on words. They are not all the true people of God, the true Israel, who happen to be within ethnic national Israel. You see the two Israels?

19:26 They are not all Israel, true sons and daughters of the promise, who are of Israel, the nation that God promised to bring through Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, neither because they are Abraham's seed, his literal, physical offspring, are they all children, that is, children of God and children of promise. But, now he's going to illustrate how this process of selectivity, and I want to emphasize it because our paedobaptist friends continually argue from the doctrine of the covenant, as unfolded in the Old Testament, and that very doctrine cuts the jugular vein of their very argument. Notice. But in Isaac shall thy seed be caught. With reference to Abraham, there is not a total election of his earthly seed.

20:26 The electing grace of God terminates upon Isaac. It bypasses Ishmael. That is, it is not the children of the flesh that are the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned for a seed. For this is a word of promise.

20:47 According to this season will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. So in the case of God's promise to Abraham, I will be a God to thee and to thy seed. That did not mean that Abraham had the right to expect that all of his earthly seed were the elect of God. And if it didn't mean that to Abraham, pray tell, why do my pedobaptist friends say it must mean that to all believers in the church?

21:18 I will be a God to thee and to thy seed. Paul is making it very plain. It didn't mean that to Abraham. There was a process of divine selectivity.

21:27 Sorry, process. I must have been conversing with one of my English friends recently. There was a process of selectivity. In Isaac, he is the son of the promise.

21:38 Now he's going to use another illustration. The next generation, and not only so, but Rebekah also, having conceived by one, even by our father Isaac, for the children, not being yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that is in their life history, but that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto her, the elder shall serve the younger, as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. And there in the womb, in the next recipient of the covenant promise, Isaac and his wife Rebekah, two children in her womb. Now did she have the right, while she's carrying those children, say thank you, oh Jehovah, God of the covenant, that I'm carrying in my womb two covenant children, whom I can presume are elect, and whom I can presume will be regenerated, and to that end I will pray and labor until proven otherwise. She had no such warrant from God before they were ever born. God says one is elect and one is reprobate. Now dear people, am I reading anything into the passage, or is it there?

22:57 Please tell me, am I reading anything into the passage, or is it there? You see the principle? Not all Israel, are of Israel. How was this Israel propagated?

23:10 According to natural procreation. When two Jews came together, and had sexual intercourse, and it was the proper time of the month, and there was conception, you had another Israelite. How you got a nation? By natural procreation.

23:31 And God set every male in that nation without any previous requirement of faith or anything else. Every male child in the eighth day shall be circumcised. Whoever is not circumcised shall be cut off. He had no right to be regarded as an Israelite.

23:49 There was no spiritual requirement for circumcision. You were not only entitled to it, you were commanded to place it upon your child to mark him as part of external Israel. Now that's not all circumcision signified. It became in the flesh of every Israelite, a call that he should have inwardly what he had outwardly.

24:12 But God never said, wait till he has it inwardly before you give it to him outwardly. And there's the fatal flaw, another one in the paedobaptist equation of circumcision and baptism. No Baptist in his right mind says that circumcision, all it signified, was an external sign to mark him out as a man as part of external Israel. But it did signify that.

24:34 That was the starting place. Then God called upon Israelites, you have circumcision in the foreskin of your flesh, circumcise your heart. When he came to years of discretion and the prophets preached, they said you ought to have inwardly what you have outwardly. And the gospel was preached to these Israelites after the flesh with a view to calling them to become true Israelites after the spirit.

25:02 You see? And you find that all the way through the prophets. But here's the crunch. Nowhere did God say until we see a man giving evidence of being an Israelite after the spirit, he's to wait and have circumcision afterwards.

25:17 Oh, no. Circumcision came first. Why? Because he was born after the flesh and he was an Israelite after the flesh.

25:26 But the Bible nowhere teaches that because they were merely children of those to whom the covenant promise was given, they were elect. Nowhere in the Old Testament is that taught. And likewise now in the New Testament, what does God say? God no longer has an ethnic, national Israel with whom he is in special covenant.

25:53 He has the new Israel as we'll see in our study of John the Baptist this morning. And the new Israel is made up only of those who are Israelites in heart, only those who prove themselves in elect by their regeneration and conversion. And upon that evidence that they are regenerated, when they are converted, when they repent and believe, they take the covenant sign of the new Israel, which is baptism. And it's so plain and simple and it fits together so beautifully.

The Unsanctified Parental Desire for Guaranteed Election

26:27 And it's such hopeless confusion when circumcision is brought into this picture and tries to regulate our doctrine of baptism. Well, you say, Pastor, what in the world does all of that have to do with parental emotions? Well, it has this to do with parental emotions. The question is not, are my children more likely eventually to prove themselves elect as are the children of my neighbors where there's no gospel, no prayer, no Bible reading, no church attendance?

27:00 No one debates that it is more likely that God has more of his children as elect among the children of those of you sitting here this morning than among the children of people in the neighborhood who are under no instruction, under no influence from the gospel. No one debates that in his right mind. Of course it is much more likely that God has many more of his elect from the seed of the members of a gospel church. So the question is not, are our children more likely eventually to prove themselves elect as through the means with which God has surrounded them they are regenerated and converted?

27:44 Rather, the question is this, do I have a biblical warrant to presume that they must be elect and make them undergo a ritual which signifies the benefits flowing from election? And what are the benefits that flow from election? Forgiveness of sin, union with Christ, and all the blessings of salvation. Now do I have a right to place upon my children a ritual or submit them to a ritual which signifies not the potential or possible eventual conferral of the blessings of grace?

28:26 As you will see in your studies with Pastor Nichols, every significant passage on baptism, even as the Paedo-Baptist Westminster Confession of Faith, says is to be unto the party baptized a sign and seal of his engrafting into Christ, of his forgiveness of sins, of his giving up himself to walk in newness of life. That's Westminster Confession language, not Baptist language. Now the clear question that a parent must face, solemnly on his knees before God, not morbidly, is whether or not God is under obligation to have his electing eternal love set upon all of my children simply because they are my seed as a believer. And if you know your Bible well enough, you know what the answer to that question is. And now that's where the rub stops. All of my natural emotions as a believer, as a Christian, I'm sorry, as a human being, plus all of my sanctified emotions as a believer, longs that my children, as well as every other one, as well as every other child around me, would indeed prove to be elect.

29:44 Does anyone want to say that a Christian heart can sit back and say, well, some are elect, some are reprobate, some will be saved, some will be damned, ho hum. Can a Christian heart think or feel that way? Of course not. The heart of every believer longs that every person on the face of the earth be elect.

30:05 I remember one time praying on, in my knees with another brother, from India that I knew many years ago, and we were in the midst of a student conference with thousands of students, and I remember him praying with tears, and he said something like this, Oh, my father, I know that you have your own, upon whom you've set your love from all eternity, and that the Lord Jesus said, other sheep I have, and I must bring them. Lord, I know you have your elect, but oh God, forgive me if I long that they would all be your elect. You think God's displeased with a prayer like that? No.

30:43 That reflects the heart of Jesus who says to a reprobate crowd, Oh Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how oft would I have gathered, but ye would not. But you see, dear child of God, once you allow that natural sanctified emotion to begin to regulate your theology of your children, it is now an unsanctified parental emotion. You see where I've come from now? I've taken all this time to come right around full circle, so that a moment of truth must come periodically when every godly parent on his knees looks into the face of his father and says, Oh God, my father, though I have many promises to plead on behalf of my children, train up a child in the way he should go, general promises, the rod in reproof give correction, beat him with the rod and he will not die, thou shalt deliver his soul from hell, and every godly parent pleads the promises. There comes the moment of truth periodically when you must say, Oh God, your ways are right and past tracing out, and you are under no obligation to show mercy to my children because they are my children. It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth,

32:11 but of God that showeth mercy. As many as received him, to them gave he the right to become the children of God, even to them that believe on his name who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Now I ask you, do you find that teaching offensive? If so, let me ask a second question.

32:41 Is it unbiblical? Is it unbiblical? If not, then my friend, the issue is between you and God. And no amount of pious wishing will influence God's eternal sovereign rights to love his Jacob's and to hate his Esau's.

33:05 You say, God like that? I want nothing to do with him. My friend, you better go make another God then because that's the only God that is. That's the only God that is.

33:16 That's the only God that is. You better bring every emotion of your parental heart subject to the word of God by the power of the Holy Ghost. If you don't, you dishonor the God whom you say you love. Now am I saying that parents ought to sit for an hour every day and meditate in a concentrated way upon the fact that some of their children might be reprobate?

33:46 No. That's not the overarching emphasis of the Bible. And if I were to assert that, it would be imbalanced. The overarching emphasis of the Bible is that as a parent, I'm to meditate on how to fulfill my duties.

34:01 I'm to plead the general promises. I'm to give myself to prayer and nurture and discipline and training in the hope and prayer that God will make them effectual to the salvation and development of my children. That's what I'm to give myself to. That's the overarching emphasis.

34:19 But as one of our dear friends says, at the end of the day, when you ask yourself the question, is God under obligation to make it manifest that all of my seed were in His sovereign electing grace? If you're thinking biblically, you've got to answer, no. And I am personally, now I'm speaking out of my own heart, after observing the mechanics and the mentality of paedobaptism for some 30 years, that this is one of the most powerful reasons for the perpetuation of an ordinance for which there is next to nothing in the way of even the semblance of biblical warrant. It is a capitulation to powerful but unsanctified parental emotions. And I see it working in a great theologian. Listen to Charles Hodge, page 588, volume 3 of his three-volume work on systematic theology. The promise is to us and to our children.

Critique of Charles Hodge and Parental Emotions

35:32 It's a great evil to be aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and from the covenants of the promise. You see what he does? He equates the church with national Israel. The term aliens from the commonwealth of Israel is taken from Ephesians 2 to describe national Israel, marked out by circumcision and the covenants of God.

35:54 He equates the church. Therefore, they sin against God in their own souls who neglect the command to be baptized in the name of the Lord and those parents sin grievously against the souls of their children who neglect to consecrate them to God in the ordinance of baptism. Do let the little ones have their names written in the Lamb's book of life even if they afterwards choose to erase them. Being thus enrolled may be the means of their salvation.

36:32 I didn't write it, friends. Xerox copy. I just quoted it and not out of context. What could cause so clear a thinker as Hodge to make such a woolly statement?

36:48 I don't believe it was wicked perversity in handling the word of God. It was a capitulation to powerful but unsanctified parental emotions and the emotions that clouded the judgment. That's why it's never safe to argue theology. In a heated context, once heat begins to pump up into the brain, it no longer gets light.

37:12 Heat negates light. So you just say, we won't discuss it for now until the heat is gone and then something of the white light of truth can break in upon us. Before I move on to number four, while this is fresh, are there questions? Yes, Pastor Clark.

37:29 That same argument is used in many contexts. It was our experience in Mexico. People would be confronted with the truth of the gospel, the word of God, and they couldn't deny them. But can we believe the religion of our fathers?

37:46 Our fathers have taught us to venerate Mary and the saints. Can we turn our back on our fathers? No, we can't do that. So there was unsanctified filial emotions.

38:00 Of desire to honor father and mother. But that was an unsanctified expression of the fifth commandment. Very good point. Further questions?

Addressing Paedobaptist Arguments and the New Covenant

38:16 The Roman Catholic Church believes heresy. That in baptism the child is cleansed from original sin and is put in a status of what we might call sort of neutrality. And if the child then is brought up in the church with a proper relationship to the other sacraments, then eventually, of course, the child will be a candidate for salvation. But basically, in Roman Catholic theology, baptism actually cleanses the child from inbred or Adamic sin.

38:49 Alright? So you have a sacramentalist view that the water actually, infallibly, in every case, accomplishes something. And isn't it frightening to me to think that they are still debating in the new, in the enlarged PCA church, Presbyterian Church of America, one of the largest reformed and evangelical communities. They would fit that segment of Christendom who loved the Bible.

39:20 They had a year's study report and it wasn't accepted and they're asked to study for another year. I just read the report this past week on whether or not someone who was baptized as a Roman Catholic, I'm sorry, I want to be accurate here, as a Mormon, I think Roman Catholic, there and several other things, heretical groups, whether or not their baptism should be accepted as valid baptism. And for years, in many Presbyterian churches, they are accepted as valid. If you were sprinkled as an infant in the Roman Catholic Church, you're brought right into these Presbyterian churches, that's valid baptism because you were sprinkled in the name of the Triune God.

39:57 It's unbelievable, but those are the facts. And you see, there's no explanation that something so full of inconsistency can maintain such an imposing fabric. It can't be that the white light of truth and logic are at work. Something's muddying up the waters and causing fog and mist.

40:17 And I'm personally convinced, and this is the first time I've publicly said this, so I haven't come to this hastily, after 30 years, and particularly the past 20 to 25 years, consciously wrestling with this in related matters, that one of the major factors is this capitulation to powerful but unsanctified parental emotions. Yes. Now, I think I know what you're saying. The accusation is often made by our paedobaptist friends that if God's promise in the Old Covenant included believers

41:23 and their seed, should we expect something less in the greater age of the New Covenant? But you see, the major premise is wrong. That promise in the Old Testament did not, according to Romans 9, mean that all Israel was the heir of spiritual blessings. It was only the remnant within Israel, the children of the promise, not the children after the flesh. You see the point, Janet, that even in the Old Testament what you had was Israel within Israel. Now, what's in the New Covenant? This little remnant, bless God, has become the mighty church of Jesus Christ in all of the nations. Where did you find this remnant in the Old Testament? 99

42:18 and 44, 100 percent of it was in a little hunk of real estate in the Middle East. And once in a while some people in Nineveh, a widow of Zarephath, look how narrow was the role of God's true Israel, the identity of it. But now where is the true Israel found? I love on a Sunday morning sometimes when I pray, I take my globe down, put it where I pray, and I spin the globe, and I think of just the little bit I know of groups of believers all around the world, and I get the goosebumps just conveying it. What's happened to the true Israel? Why it's broken all the bounds of Palestine and now that which the remnant was has expanded into the true people of God throughout all the nations. And when our paedobaptist friends say, oh will you show that God has a narrower heart now? I reject that out of hand.

43:15 That's an unfair accusation. That's not fair at all. We are saying, yes, God's heart is large, so large that it takes in the true Israel from all the nations. And who are the true Israel? Paul tells us.

43:31 In Christ Jesus, neither circumcision or uncircumcision availeth anything but a new creation. And he says, peace be upon the Israel of God. And who are the true Israel of God? Those who've come to regenerating grace manifested in repentance and faith, and then declare the reception of the blessings of the new covenant in the new covenant ordinance of baptism, and where you have the communities of the baptized throughout the earth, there you have the greatly enlarged Israel of God. Okay?

44:05 Well, get me excited on that question. Alright. Okay. Yes, question. Yeah.

Dealing with Reprobate 'Covenant Children'

44:30 This comes into the whole question of what does the Bible teach about the criteria by which we ascertain whether someone is indeed a true disciple. And that's another question that grows out of this, and we hope to take that up down the road after we finish the subject of baptism, because it inevitably follows, as indicated by your question, but it would not be wise to try to get into that this morning because we have to start with some very fundamental building blocks and we would only probably raise more questions than we'd ask. So with your permission, I'll table that question. Alright? Good.

45:09 Alright, any other question now on this basic point that we've made this morning, that the third and major reason for the practice, for the perpetuation of this practice is capitulation to powerful but unsanctified parental emotions. Alright, Louise, and then down to your sentence. Yeah. Well, they would say that if anyone of mature years, John was preaching to the Pharisees, and we'll be dealing with that this morning, when the Pharisees came to him, it says, when John saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said unto them, Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth fruits, meat for repentance. If you want to join the new Israel, in enough that you've got circumcision and you know the law, you must be a repentant believing sinner. And he anticipates their objection. Wait a minute,

46:16 we're in the covenant, he said, and think not to say within yourself, we have Abraham to our father. Sure, you have Abraham as your earthly father, and you're in physical, earthly, ethnic Israel, but God is constituting the new Israel. And, membership here is not enough. God's able of stones to make more Jews. That's his point.

46:38 Now, most of our pedo-baptist friends would say, if a baptized infant came to adulthood and showed no evidence of repentance and faith, and then he was pressed on the necessity and said, oh, I don't need it, I was baptized as an infant, they would say to him, think not to say within yourself you're a covenant child. You must bring forth fruits, meat for repentance. Now, most of the people, not all, but most would say, now what some would do, and this is a tragic fact, now it's only some, so please hear me carefully, I'm trying to be fair and accurate. Some would say, don't trouble yourself. You were made a member of the kingdom of heaven through baptism, go look at your baptismal certificate and that settles it. You need nothing more than what you got then. And they would lull people to sleep and send Pharisees to hell with a lie in their hands. But men, such as Professor Murray, such as Hodge in his preaching, when you read his other writings, Warfield, and these great men, they would have said to anyone who tried to base his comfort on the fact that he was a covenant child, who had the covenant sign, and in that sense, part of Israel, they would say that's not enough.

47:48 You must have a new heart and bring forth the fruits of that change. Okay? Alright, Sens? Yeah.

48:08 Alright, you see the point that Sens is making. What do you do then if a so-called covenant child whom you've presumed was going to be, show himself elect, proves himself reprobate. Again, you can't generalize. Some, like Lutherans, many sacramentalists Lutherans, and even within Lutherans you have differences, so you see it's hard to generalize.

48:30 But some would simply say, and I've heard this done at a funeral out in Wisconsin years ago, a man who lived and died impenitent on his deathbed. I went in to speak to him and God shut my mouth. I couldn't speak to him. God shut my mouth.

48:44 He died impenitent. At his funeral, the minister, the priest said, Elmer Christensen was made a member of the kingdom of heaven through baptism on such and such a date at such and such a place, and read from his baptismal certificate. So the comfort was given that he was regenerate in his baptism. Now that's heresy.

49:02 Now, most of our pedobaptist friends would say, well, baptism and the initial presumption that they would be elect is no proof that they will ultimately prove that they are elect, and we just must accept the fact that there are reprobate people. And as Esau, who was reprobate, was nonetheless circumcised, so even those who prove reprobate are still to be baptized as infants. So that's how they reason. And again, I don't believe that's unfair. I've read it in page after page of their literature when this question is raised. And they would say, just as you baptize people who are professed disciples who ultimately prove apostate, so we baptize some of our infants who ultimately prove apostate. It's a standoff. So you see, the question is not whether we infallibly believe that everyone baptized as a professed disciple has the real issue.

49:59 The issue is, do we have warrant to baptize anyone who does not profess to be part of this Israel of God? See, that's the question. Now, not everyone who professes to be part of this really is. We'll see that again in our study of John the Baptist this morning. Not everyone who was baptized by John and professed repentance ultimately showed that he had repentance. But at least John was being obedient, namely baptizing only those who professed repentance by confessing their sins when they came to his watery ritual. And that's all we are saying. We do not say that every person that we baptize who is a professed disciple will persevere to the end.

50:40 But what we are saying is we have biblical warrant to baptize professed disciples and only professed disciples. And if we had warrant to baptize cats, we'd baptize them. No, I'm serious. If we had biblical warrant to baptize oranges, we'd baptize oranges. The question is, what baptism is God warranted? And has he warranted the baptism of infants simply because they are born of believing parents? And the answer of the word of God is a clear no. Alright, we have a minute and a half left. Any further questions?

The Necessity of Baptism as an Act of Obedience

51:16 I'll have to steal some of Pastor Thunder's... Pastor Thunders.

51:20 Pastor Nichols' thunder, I said God willing next week and come up to that fourth reason because it's another very powerful reason and what I'm calling a subtle but essentially pagan superstition. Somehow if you get them done, maybe more chance if they die in infancy they'll make it. But that's another whole thing. Larry? Oh, alright.

51:40 Dottie? But if someone professes to be saved and willfully refuses to be baptized, should we regard them as saved? Is that your question?

52:47 Just very quickly now in the minutes remaining. The Bible clearly teaches that guilty sinners come out from under the weight of their guilt when they turn their back upon their sin, that's repentance, and they believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, that's faith. But now if that's true repentance and true faith, what will the inevitable result of them be? A life of obedience. Faith works by love. Galatians 5 and verse 6. Now what is the first in the normal course of things, what's the first act of obedience? Obedience to the command to be baptized.

53:33 Repent and be baptized. Acts 2.38. Acts 10.48. Then he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. So, if the faith and repentance are real, they will issue in a life of obedience. And if someone knows his duty to be baptized and says, well since baptism has nothing to do with salvation, we're saved by grace and faith, I don't need to be baptized, alright, let's take the argument, is it the command, thou shalt not commit adultery? Yes or no? Alright, are we saved by the keeping or non-keeping of that command? Yes or no? Alright, since we're not saved by the keeping of that command, let's go shack up any time we get the urge. Who are we to treat God's commandments that way? You see, that's the fundamental

54:21 flaw in that reasoning. Because it's not necessary for salvation, it's not necessary, oh wait a minute, some things may be necessary that are not necessary for salvation, but are necessary as the proof that my salvation is real, that my professed faith is real. And as my dear friend Ernie Reisinger says, he says, there's only two commands that any Christian can perfectly keep. All of them we've got to say, Lord, we fall short.

54:48 Two commands we can keep perfectly. Be baptized, and this do in remembrance of me. And if we won't keep the ones that we can keep perfectly, what makes us think we're dead in earnest about the ones we can't keep perfectly? So that's why we can't treat baptism lightly. Well, our time is gone.

55:07 Let's thank God for his presence and help. Our Father, we thank you again for the privilege of meeting in this way with an open Bible. We confess, many of us as parents, how difficult it has been, and to this day is, to acknowledge that you have the right to be God, even with respect to our own flesh and blood. But by your grace, oh Lord, we would confess our earnest desire to say from the depths of our being, thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven. We pray that you'd clear away the mists and the fog that have come through the years on this subject. We pray for any sitting amongst us who are struggling with unsanctified parental emotions. Lord, give them grace to have every thought brought captive to the obedience of Christ.

56:13 If we have said anything this morning that has been untrue, that does not line up with your word, that has not expressed the spirit of the Gospel, blow upon it and bring it to naught. Whatever has been an accurate reflection of your mind and of your heart, seal it to our hearts and our minds by the power of the Spirit. And may we alter every practice that must be altered that we might be obedient to the word of God. We ask these mercies for Jesus' sake.

56:46 Amen.