Baptism

 

I am a credobaptist. That means I believe that a believer should only be baptized once they come to genuine faith in Christ following repentance and acceptance of the Gospel. This is known as believers' baptism.The opposing viewpoint is paedobaptism.This is known as infant baptism, here a young child is baptized whilst still an infant. They have no repentance, and no belief. 

There is not a single instance of infant baptism in the New Testament. The Old Covenant was entered into through circumcision (for males only, females were left in the lurch), and the vast majority of Israelites who were circumcised were not saved. The New Covenant is wholly different and better. The entrance into the new covenant is the baptism of the Holy Spirit (spiritual) not water baptism (physical). And unlike the Old Covenant, all members under the New Covenant are saved.

Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans and some Anglicans, further believe that baptism is salvific. This theological position is known as baptismal regeneration. I reject this position in the strongest possible terms. It betrays a lack of understanding of the nature of salvation. No act of man (work) can force the Holy Spirit to regenerate someone. According to baptismal regeneration even if an atheist were baptized with the proper form, using the phrase "I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost" and administered water, God would be obligated to regenerate that person! Such a position is utter blasphemy and makes a mockery of Scripture.

The best book I've ever read explaining believers' baptism is: "Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ" by Thomas R. Schreiner (Editor), Shawn Wright (Editor). With contributions from Andreas Kostenberger, Robert Stein, Thomas Schreiner, Stephen Wellum, Steve McKinion, Jonathan Rainbow, Shawn Wright, and Mark Dever. The collection of essays clearly and rigorously defends credobaptism, and shows using Scripture why paedobaptism is simply untenable.

Another related book I highly recommend is "The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology" by Pascal Denault. In this book Denault demonstrates, using Scripture, that credobaptism best fulfills the covenants. He meticulously contrasts Baptist covenant theology with Paedobaptist covenant theology and shows that the distinct baptist position best fits the substance of the New Covenant. He does this within the context of 17th century sources.

By the way just to show there is no love lost for my paedobaptist brothers and sisters, here is an very good article written by Guy M. Richard at Ligonier making the case for paedobaptism. If you're interested in learning more about the case for credobaptism, here is an excellent article written by Dr. Sam Renihan.

Further, I am not just a Baptist, I am a Reformed Baptist. Here is a great article explaining what makes one a Reformed Baptist.