The Promise of Infant Baptism | Doug Wilson
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 พ.ย. 2024
- The last several years Christ Church has tried an experiment in grace and has not charged for the Grace Agenda conference. In keeping with this spirit of grace, they are accepting free will donations at christkirk.com/give. Be sure to select 'Grace Agenda' in the form.
History and God's word is on our side. The bible is so obviously teaches infant baptism. May God be glorified.
This was helpful Doug thank you
Question? Is there anyone that can make Doug laugh more than Doug? I love his joy!
Doug Wilson is the man. Such great teaching. When I grow up I wanna be Dougy.
Same
😂
Being a Reformed Baptist, this makes tons of sense.
No it doesn't. Listen to John McArthur's sermon on Infant Baptist for a very clear, Biblical refutation of the Anglican, Lutheran and Presbyterian doctrine of Covenant Theology.
@@deniseoates5358 we are just going to have to disagree.
@@deniseoates5358 dispensationalism is a modern invention by John Nelson Darby around 1830.. it isn't anywhere in church history before that. John Nelson Darby became a pope-like dictator questioning salvation of anyone who disagreed with him. Then Scofield had study notes that went along the same line and was produced as a study bible. Scofield left his wife and children without supporting them and gave himself the title "dr." without any education. There is no view in the historical church of the church being a parenthesis in history. If you want to learn more, seek out Gary Demar. Mr. Macarthur is most likely incorrect in his view.
@@Golfinthefamily I really like MacArthur, but I believe RC Sproul has one up on him here. I think what scares most believers' baptism Christians, is that they think that we all believe that just because we baptize our children it means then they are now saved (like the catholics believe) or will DEFINTITELY be saved.......It's the parents faithfully showing that they will raise their family in the fear and admonition of our LORD......etc..... Since baptism is ultimately a sign what harm is it to people who only believe in 10 year old's being baptized? If that kid when he grows up eventually believes different than his parents, he or she can get rebaptized in their new belief....
@@solochristo65 what about the idea that baptism is more than just a sign. It is a seal of the covenant (romans 4:11) and a fulfillment of the covenant Jeremiah foretold of in Jeremiah 31&32... they will all know the Lord. :)
This is a brilliant sermon. Thank you for how clearly you speak.
The argument that Acts 2:38-39 says the promise is “to their children” is a desperate misuse of the term. It means their descendants who also “gladly receive the word” (Acts 2:41) and would seek to “be saved from this perverse generation.” We are always “children” of our parents no matter how old we are, but the people the promise is talking to are any future descendants who also “call on the name of the Lord” in their repentance and baptism. Babies are not calling and repenting. When they come to first “know the Lord” and become convicted in heart about their sinful and lost condition, they will want the circumcision of God, and will voluntarily ask to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. They enter the New Covenant after first “knowing the Lord.” In the Old Covenant, you were circumcised at 8 days old and later taught to know the Lord. So, the above argument is just another contrived argument to try to justify forcing babies into an act that adults impose on them with no knowledge of God in their hearts, and that is not the will of God.
I think my favorite part about this video is the fact that the ad beforehand is for a woman claiming to be a medium.
20min As Peter Leithart say, this subject is really about the essence-meaning-function-nature of the Church, WHAT-IS-THE-CHURCH.
If I had heard this very precise and persuasive presentation I whose is a creedo Baptist
would be tempted two years ago but having listen to Dr James White doing a series on both the Lord's supper and baptism. It his dismantling of Calvin's take having follow the biblical meaning of baptism and how it has been understood through out church history .
I’m going through those now. 16 one hour sermons….
Where were the baptists in church history ??
Thanks for publishing this here! Somehow the TH-cam algorithm knew it had been on my mind 🙃 In all seriousness, thank you for clearly articulating your position with such grace and deference to credo-baptists and those somewhere between there and paedobaptism. After returning to the Lord and having a son, this issue is near the top of my mind. He turns one in just a few weeks! Would you pray that the Lord would bless him with godly, covenant-faithful parents? There is much to sort through, but the Lord has been faithful!
My son just turned two, my daughter just turned one.
I had not given this much thought until lately. My priors always assumed that you got baptized when you were ready. That has changed. I am convinced of the need to baptize your children.
Covenant Theology leading to the paedobaptist position gives a more satisfying explanation to the verses Doug has used and many more (John 15, 2 Pet 2, Heb 10, Rom 9-11 et al) than the baptist individualistic position omitting any difference between the elect and members of the new covenant. This position needs to be explained much more often in the reformed community. Thank you! Blessings to yall.
Yes! So much!!
yeah that would be great and all, if the Bible actually talked about infant baptism
@@guillermodominguez8643 Scripture is very plain on God’s promises in the sacraments. Why would you withhold them from your children?
Baptism buries and raises you with Christ. Romans 6:4
Baptism is of water and spirit.
John 3:5
Baptism is the washing of regeneration.
Titus 3:5
Baptism is the circumcision of Christ.
Colossians 2:12
Baptism clothes you with Christ.
Galatians 3:27
Baptism is the washing of water with the word.
Ephesians 5:26
Baptism washes away your sins.
Acts 22:16
Baptism now saves you.
1 Peter 3:21
I encourage you to read church history and learn what Christs bride has believed for 2000 years. Blessings.
Old Covenant Baptism vs. New Covenant Baptism (water vs. Spirit)
Water baptism was a part of the Old Covenant system of ritual washing. The Old Covenant priests had to wash before beginning their service in the temple. (Ex. 30:17-30) When Christ was water baptized by His cousin John in the Jordan River, He was under the Old Covenant system. He also only ate certain foods, and wore certain clothes, as prescribed by the 613 Old Covenant laws. Christ was water baptized by John and then the Holy Spirit came from heaven. The order is reversed in the New Covenant. A person receives the Holy Spirit upon conversion, and then believers often declare their conversion to their friends and family through a water baptism ceremony. Which baptism makes you a member of Christ’s Church?
The New Covenant conversion process is described below. (Born-again)
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
(A person must “hear” the Gospel, and “believe” the Gospel, and will then be “sealed” with the Holy Spirit.)
Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
(See Jer. 31:34 for the New Covenant promise, and 1 John 2:27 for the fulfillment)
============
Which baptism is a part of the salvation process, based on what the Bible says?
What did Peter say below?
Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Acts 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
Based on Luke 3:16, and John 1:33, and Acts 11:15-16, the most important thing about the word "baptize" in the New Testament has nothing to do with water. The Holy Spirit is the master teacher promised to New Covenant believers in Jeremiah 31:34, and John 14:26, and is found fulfilled in Ephesians 1:13, and 1 John 2:27. Unfortunately, many modern Christians see water when they read the word "baptize" in the text.
Based on the above, what is the one baptism of our faith found in the passage below? How many times is the word "Spirit" found in the passage, and how many times is the word "water" found in the passage?
Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (See 1 Cor. 12:13)
“baptize” KJV
Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Water or Holy Spirit?, See Eph. 1-13.)
Luk_3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
Joh_1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;
Joh_1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
1Co_1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (See Eph. 4:1-5)
Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Old Covenant ----> New Covenant)
How many people have been saved by the Old Covenant water baptism of John the Baptist?
Who did John the Baptist say is the greatest Baptist that ever lived in Luke 3:16? What kind of New Covenant baptism comes from Christ?
Hebrews 9:10 Old Covenant vs. New Covenant
(CSB) They are physical regulations and only deal with food, drink, and various washings imposed until the time of the new order.
(ESV) but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
(ESV+) but deal only with R5food and drink and R6various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
(Geneva) Which only stood in meates and drinkes, and diuers washings, and carnal rites, which were inioyned, vntill the time of reformation.
(GW) These gifts and sacrifices were meant to be food, drink, and items used in various purification ceremonies. These ceremonies were required for the body until God would establish a new way of doing things.
(KJV) Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
(KJV+) Which stood onlyG3440 inG1909 meatsG1033 andG2532 drinks,G4188 andG2532 diversG1313 washings,G909 andG2532 carnalG4561 ordinances,G1345 imposedG1945 on them untilG3360 the timeG2540 of reformation.G1357
(NKJV) concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.
(NLT) For that old system deals only with food and drink and various cleansing ceremonies-physical regulations that were in effect only until a better system could be established.
(YLT) only in victuals, and drinks, and different baptisms, and fleshly ordinances-till the time of reformation imposed upon them .
==================================================================================================
New Covenant Whole Gospel:
Let us now share the Old Testament Gospel found below with the whole world. On the road to Emmaus He said the Old Testament is about Him.
He is the very Word of God in John 1:1, 14. Awaken Church to this truth.
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by
husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1 (Gal. 3:16)? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel (John 1:49)? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis?
Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, man-made Bible doctrines fall apart.
Let us now learn to preach the whole Gospel until He comes back. The King of Israel is risen from the dead! (John 1:49, Acts 2:36)
We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24.
1Jn 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
Watch the TH-cam videos “The New Covenant” by David Wilkerson, or Bob George, and David H.J. Gay.
Reading the responses, it's clear who failed to listen to the sermon with an open Bible and traditions checked at the door. Just saying.
Actually the author of Hebrews did refer to the Old Cov as weaker and inferior:
Heb. 7:, 18-19 - “For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.”
Very well explained.
It's really that simple!
So what were the results of the crowd survey?!🤣
John 15:2 - Every branch in me that does not bear fruit, He LIFTS UP…” refers to the practice at the time on which the vines weighed down by the dust and diet of the ground would be lifted up off of the ground via a cross-shaped object so it could bear fruit. Not a “falling away” verse.
Which version are you reading from? My bible says “takes away”, not lifts up.
Now I’d like to see you debate James “The debater” White on this subject.
th-cam.com/video/jlTMsNPjBLo/w-d-xo.html
Done and done. Look it up
This is what happens when you approach the text of scripture with your own paradigm in hand and force the text to conform to your paradigm. No Doug, what the old covenant "could not get done" was actually affecting salvation. Why? First and foremost, because it did not promise it. And why did it not promise it? Because the old covenants primarily existed to present us with tangible things that foreshadowed intangible/spiritual realities. We understand God dwelling with us because of the tabernacle. We understand Christ's mediatorial work because of the priesthood. We understand his sacrifice on our behalf because of the lamb. "The law was a tutor to bring us to Christ". What Doug's view ultimately does is to make redemptive history more about the individual Christian and his family than about God and His. And that is the new covenant emphasis. Being a child of God through faith, not lineage.
The promises we read of in the old testament, and that Doug, however sincerely, misappropriates, are promises to Abraham and his offspring, not to a generalized "believers and their children ''. They are promises, in their initial fulfillment, to national Israel. And those promises to Abraham's offspring then have their ultimate fulfillment in precisely who the new testament authors say they do: In Christ Himself, the singular offspring spoken of in Galatians 3, and those who are in Christ by faith.
John 1 does not emphasize that those who received Him were given the right to become children of God through faith, not lineage, in vain. It is only the faith that comes through regeneration that makes us children of God. Not who our parents are. God makes, and keeps, the promises He made to be a God to Abraham's offspring, but the text must tell us who that offspring is. And it does. It is Christ Himself and all those who are in Christ by faith. The promised gift of the Holy Spirit is for those, and only those, who repent and believe. Lineage no longer gives us the title of children of God. Only savingly believing on the name of Christ does that.
What then of our children? We raise them in such a way that they might come to repentance and faith and be made children of God as well. And the idea that if our children are not in covenant with God from birth that they must be considered unclean or "treated as pagans" simply has no biblical foundation. The uncleanness that paedo baptists insist must be the logical conclusion of the baptist view that the new covenant is not genealogically oriented simply has no biblical support. Gentiles are no longer to be regarded as unclean, and neither are unbelieving spouses, or the children born from them. There is no possible uncleanness that they can possess. They are simply your children and in need of proper instruction in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. So lead them to Christ, because they need it. Their lineage does not make them children of God. Only believing on the name of the Lord can do that.
What exactly do you do with acts2:39, brother? Remember that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Therefore since He was God of the Abrahamic covenant, He is God of the new covenant in His blood. Same God, same history of redemption. The New covenant is fuller than the Old, so why would Jesus Christ exclude the children of believers in the New Covenant until they become believers themselves?
@@peteverhelst2088exactly right. Baptism saves. It’s all in the Bible. God does the work together with the Word.
@@kylekieswether459 this is what happens when you approach scripture with your own paradigm… search your heart brother and the scriptures.
@@peteverhelst2088 I'm a former paedo baptist brother. The position I take now is the result of searching the scriptures and letting the authors of scripture themselves tell me how to understand the old covenant and how it relates to the new rather than starting with the assumption that infants had ought to be baptized and reverse engineering a justification for it as men like Calvin did.
One example of this is that there is no reason to take the fact that God made a covenant with Abraham and his offspring after him and broaden and generalize this into the idea that God just always covenants with "believers and their children"( It gets even worse when you say that the "pattern" is for "believers and their children to receive the sign of the covenant", when circumcision was for males exclusively. Making it an even more clearly inaccurate generalization than the first one). The new testament authors don't speak this way. Instead, specifically being a child of Abraham is the point of reference we are given. The only reason to massage the facts in this way is if you need the generalization in order to justify a new covenant genealogical paradigm rather than the one the authors of the new testament give us, which is a paradigm whereby God's people are now reckoned in terms of a spiritual genealogy. Those who have faith are Abrahams offspring. For my children to be children of God, they must also be children of Abraham, not children of Kyle.
That being said, I appreciate your sentiment, but if you don't have a good reason to supply for why I'm wrong, there's no point in starting a conversation. I've discussed and studied and debated this topic for more than 10 years now. Respectfully, having someone I don't know tell me to search the scriptures, as though I'd never done that, isn't going to change my argument. Just being honest and clear brother. God bless you!
@@kylekieswether459not yet watched the video, but isn't the giving of the promise hinged on "all whom the Lord will call" , not on adults, children and those far off?
If you start anywhere but the definition of baptism, you will go awry. It's an immersion in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. What it means as a sign, seal, and/or symbol is a function, not the definition.
What does it mean as a sign, seal, or symbol?
All of us believe in believer's baptism. Scripture only shows first generation believers being baptized. Scripture doesn't speak directly about what to do with the CHILDREN of baptized believers (second generation). Therefore both of us are required to demonstrate and prove our practice (and even assumptions) from Scripture. The question is really about the covenant status of children. Are they considered rejected pagans; alienated from the people of God or as our Lord said, "of such is the kingdom of heaven"? Belonging to God's Church and beloved people? Is a child born in a Christian home no different from those born in a Muslim home? It's clear that they're different and disciples of the parents (Ephesians 6:1-4) therefore we baptize our "disciples" (Matthew 28:19). They are welcome in the Church and marked out as distinct from the world by that special covenant sign.
"Are they considered rejected pagans" - actually, yes, unsaved children are pagans, yet are trained disciples by their parents albeit yet unsaved children. "alienated from the people of God or as our Lord said, "of such is the kingdom of heaven" - Alienated in the sense they're not in The Church, the Bride of Christ, alienated in the sense they are unsaved sinners who need to be redeemed - "as such is the kingdom of heaven" has to do with how one approaches God, in that you have to approach God with a humble heart knowing that the sinner has a need. " Belonging to God's Church and beloved people?" - no, unsaved children are not of God's church and God's beloved people. "Is a child born in a Christian home no different from those born in a Muslim home?" - both babies, regardless if born of Christian parents or Muslim, are the same - they are sinners who need to be saved. "They are welcome in the Church" - unsaved children may be treated kindly, and welcomed in that sense, but are not "welcomed in the Church" in the sense they are received as true born again believers in Christ.
@@soulosxpiotov7280 1 Cor 7:14 says children are holy, if one of the parents are a believer.
@@jules47127 Holy as in as God is holy, equally holy as God? Or...."holy" as in set apart, distinct, separate, which is what holy means, as a result of one of the parents being saved in Christ, not because of water baptism but because of the saved parent?
To be baptized, a person must have awareness of his sins and his need for a Savior, repenting of his actions (Acts 2:36-38; Rom. 3:23; 6:23). He must hear the word of God (Matt. 28:18-20; Rom. 1:16; 10:14-17) and believe its testimony that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 20:30-31, Mark 16:16) who died on the cross and was raised from the dead to provide redemption for mankind (John 3:16; Rom. 5:6-10). He must confess this belief publicly (Rom. 10:9, Acts 8:26-40).
A baby is incapable of doing these things. A baby taken by his parents to be baptized is not a Christian baby, just a wet baby. An actual baptism has not occurred. Baptizing a baby with the notion of making it a child of God reduces baptism to nothing more than a work. Mere works absent of faith cannot save. Moreover, it is a work performed on an individual by a third party, without his consent, or even his knowledge.
God saves in Baptism, including babies. We are unworthy of anything, but God saves us anyway. God is sovereign.
@leviwilliams9601 He does not, and how? Tell me how a baby is responsible for its actions? How can a baby repent of their sins when they have no sins? How can a baby believe in Jesus?
OIKOS covenant baptism is the standard for all new testament baptisms...
Please read Jeremiah 31:34
I think i understand and get very excited for the deeper understanding into the covenant promise, although I have quite a few questions about how it relates to regeneration, BUT what I do fail to see is how infant BAPTISM is the sign of that covenant? The instruction is to believe and be baptised. Why then not continue with infant circumcision instead? At least the Biblical evidence for that sign associated with covenant is significant and defensible compared to a sprinkling baptism.
Hi, you may be interested in this short book explaining that very question in detail: "To a Thousand Generations" canonpress.com/products/to-a-thousand-generations
@@CanonPress Does this book go into the replacement of sacraments? (i.e. circumcision to baptism, Passover to Lord's supper) These are signs and seals of the covenant of grace (vs. Works) I came to understand infant baptism this way, as signs but not the reality. WCF 27.5 and 28.1.
I was hoping to hear more about this in this talk but Doug didn't quite get to that aspect.
@@bfrankwthme Indeed
Heidelberg Catechism (1563):
Q. Should infants, too, be baptized?
A. Yes.
Infants as well as adults
belong to God's covenant and congregation. (1) Through Christ's blood the redemption from sin
and the Holy Spirit, who works faith, are promised to them no less than to adults. (2) Therefore, by baptism, as sign of the covenant, they must be incorporated into the Christian church and distinguished from the children of unbelievers. (3) This was done in the old covenant by circumcision, (4) in place of which baptism was instituted in the new covenant. (5)
1.Gen 17:7; Mt 19:14.
2.Ps 22:10; Is 44:1-3; Acts 2:38, 39; 16:31.
3.Acts 10:47; 1 Cor 7:14.
4.Gen 17:9-14.
5.Col 2:11-13.
Jews remained in the covenant community yet were grafted out. This is talking about the true body of believers and not the "outward church."
13min, Peter Leithart uses Historical and eschatological to define this issue. Terms used by confessions is invisible and visible church and yes apostasy does happen. Inspection of Jealousy does take place, Yahweh does cast those in covenant in union with Him out into the Bundus, no mans land.
Babies are not subject to God's command for baptism because no command was given to them, they could not understand the need nor meaning, they could not comply (perform the necessary actions nor hold the proper attitudes) and they have no sin to be washed away. One cannot obey God by proxy; no parent can obey God for a child; no child can make peace with God for a parent (Ezekiel 18:4,20).
Then why did the Israelites circumsize their newborn males?
They have no sin to wash away? You lost me there.
Babies were commanded by God to be circumcised? No, their fathers were commanded by God to circumsize them as the sign of the covenent--before those babies would ever have any idea what it was
@brusopatcelts In the first place, we do not inherit sin, although this is a common belief among many denominations. Consider God’s Word from Ezekiel 18:20: “The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.”
If we inherit sin, then every baby that is aborted, or that dies in delivery or in infancy that has not been “baptized” goes to hell. Obviously, there are millions of such infants that have not had their sins washed away. Who can believe that God would send a three-day-old baby to hell if the child died before being “sprinkled” or had water poured on its head?
The whole silly argument that believers' baptism believer's have (not to be mean) is a bit like the jw's or others like them do.....they use their own thinking when it comes to a text..... When John the Baptist or the Apostles or Christ Himself were saying repent or believe and be baptized they were speaking to adults, so of course they would now go and be baptized after believing. But when there were crowds of people who is to say that there were not people under 10 or 8 or 6 or 4 years old that believed and went with their parents and got baptized......Do you really think Christ said to a small child's parent.....Oh no not your little ones...... they're not old enough. Remember there were believers already who were born during the Old Covenant that most likely knew a lot more of what was being said about baptism because of their understanding of the Old Covenant ETC
Is there any promise of God in infant baptism?
While I love my brother and listen to him often, I disagree with his olive tree analogy; after all, didn’t Jesus curse the olive tree that no longer bore fruit!
We must baptize by the time we are 30 yrs old like Jesus!
What's the purpose of warning people of falling away if they can't because of election?
Because no one knew who are elect
@@gege8747 the elect cannot fall away and the non elect will, so there's no need for a warning if Calvinism is correct
What does Christ mediate to his covenant people?
Tares and wheat...
@bigtobacco1098 what does Christ mediate to his covenant people?
@@David-cw7pd grace... they are within the visible covenant...
@@David-cw7pd is everyone baptized regenerate ??
@bigtobacco1098 if Christ mediates grace to all of his covenant people, why are some of his covenant people lost in the end?
"The promise is to you and to your children" ....after they are old enough to understand 🙄
5 min in, the Jew in Acts day, early days Church was thoroughly imaged and thought in terms of Genesis to Malachi right. These men and women throughout in these very specific terms, they lived and moved in these 22 books. So Acts piggy backing this image the 22 books, was a natural thing in there minds. For instance you never ever here the outcry my seed offspring infant's are not included in this new man- new world- new kingdom of heaven- this new birth resurrected in the mature Man Jesus. silence is so powerful in this regard, as the infants even persons in there household bought with many were included. I mean imagine leaving your infants out in the wilderness out of the club. these early Jewish Christian breathed the Torah the writing all 22 scrolls, us westerners shamefully do not. I mean the way Paul does his theology why women cannot preach and teach is so outlandish and weird to us to day, I mean all he says was Why? Adam was made first. the problem folks is not the Word of our Father who by the way gives seed to us as a gift, its us, our minds need to be captivated and brought into line, submitted to the way He does things/theology/living.
Does affirming infant baptism always necessitate believing in baptismal regeneration or could it be essentially be considered best practice?
@Joseph Bruce oh OK, thanks for responding, perhaps I assumed that infant baptism usually entails holding to baptismal regeneration. I hold to believers baptism though.
You hold to "professors" baptism
Eisegesis.
not all grafts take.. hmm
Old Covenant Baptism vs. New Covenant Baptism (water vs. Spirit)
Water baptism was a part of the Old Covenant system of ritual washing. The Old Covenant priests had to wash before beginning their service in the temple. (Ex. 30:17-30) When Christ was water baptized by His cousin John in the Jordan River, He was under the Old Covenant system. He also only ate certain foods, and wore certain clothes, as prescribed by the 613 Old Covenant laws. Christ was water baptized by John and then the Holy Spirit came from heaven. The order is reversed in the New Covenant. A person receives the Holy Spirit upon conversion, and then believers often declare their conversion to their friends and family through a water baptism ceremony. Which baptism makes you a member of Christ’s Church?
The New Covenant conversion process is described below. (Born-again)
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
(A person must “hear” the Gospel, and “believe” the Gospel, and will then be “sealed” with the Holy Spirit.)
Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
(See Jer. 31:34 for the New Covenant promise, and 1 John 2:27 for the fulfillment)
============
Which baptism is a part of the salvation process, based on what the Bible says?
What did Peter say below?
Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Acts 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
Based on Luke 3:16, and John 1:33, and Acts 11:15-16, the most important thing about the word "baptize" in the New Testament has nothing to do with water. The Holy Spirit is the master teacher promised to New Covenant believers in Jeremiah 31:34, and John 14:26, and is found fulfilled in Ephesians 1:13, and 1 John 2:27. Unfortunately, many modern Christians see water when they read the word "baptize" in the text.
Based on the above, what is the one baptism of our faith found in the passage below? How many times is the word "Spirit" found in the passage, and how many times is the word "water" found in the passage?
Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (See 1 Cor. 12:13)
“baptize” KJV
Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Water or Holy Spirit?, See Eph. 1-13.)
Luk_3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
Joh_1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;
Joh_1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
1Co_1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (See Eph. 4:1-5)
Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Old Covenant ----> New Covenant)
How many people have been saved by the Old Covenant water baptism of John the Baptist?
Who did John the Baptist say is the greatest Baptist that ever lived in Luke 3:16? What kind of New Covenant baptism comes from Christ?
Hebrews 9:10 Old Covenant vs. New Covenant
(CSB) They are physical regulations and only deal with food, drink, and various washings imposed until the time of the new order.
(ESV) but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
(ESV+) but deal only with R5food and drink and R6various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
(Geneva) Which only stood in meates and drinkes, and diuers washings, and carnal rites, which were inioyned, vntill the time of reformation.
(GW) These gifts and sacrifices were meant to be food, drink, and items used in various purification ceremonies. These ceremonies were required for the body until God would establish a new way of doing things.
(KJV) Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
(KJV+) Which stood onlyG3440 inG1909 meatsG1033 andG2532 drinks,G4188 andG2532 diversG1313 washings,G909 andG2532 carnalG4561 ordinances,G1345 imposedG1945 on them untilG3360 the timeG2540 of reformation.G1357
(NKJV) concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.
(NLT) For that old system deals only with food and drink and various cleansing ceremonies-physical regulations that were in effect only until a better system could be established.
(YLT) only in victuals, and drinks, and different baptisms, and fleshly ordinances-till the time of reformation imposed upon them .
===============================================================================================
New Covenant Whole Gospel:
Let us now share the Old Testament Gospel found below with the whole world. On the road to Emmaus He said the Old Testament is about Him.
He is the very Word of God in John 1:1, 14. Awaken Church to this truth.
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by
husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1 (Gal. 3:16)? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel (John 1:49)? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis?
Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, man-made Bible doctrines fall apart.
Let us now learn to preach the whole Gospel until He comes back. The King of Israel is risen from the dead! (John 1:49, Acts 2:36)
We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24.
1Jn 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
Watch the TH-cam videos “The New Covenant” by David Wilkerson, or Bob George, and David H.J. Gay.
Thank you for this, I agree with you as I can see this too in scriptures, but the problem is that I'm a bit confused by other passages too.
For example, is Acts 22:16 not talking about water baptism?
I have been baptised as a baby, and now I'm not too sure on what to do. On one side I would like to get baptised again, on the other the Word says there is one Lord, one faith and one baptism (I believe is talking about spiritual baptism, but I am so confused) 😢
@@ilarial.4814
The word "water" is not in Acts 22:16. However, Ananias was trying to keep the Old Covenant, according to the text. Many of the Christians of Hebrew ancestry could not let go of the Old Covenant system they had been trying to keep their whole lives. In Acts chapter 21 James goaded Paul into going to the temple and performing an Old Covenant ritual. It ended with Paul causing a riot at the temple, and the Romans coming down from Fort Antonia to rescue Paul. The final word on baptism is found in Eph. 4:1-5 and Hebrews 9:10.
Act 22:12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,
Act 22:13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.
Act 22:14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.
Act 22:15 For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.
Act 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Love your teaching Doug, but have to disagree with you on this one. 🙏
Maybe Esau should have been baptized?
What does it mean then to be elect, regenerate and broken off the tree? What does it look like for born again justified saints cut off from the vine and burnt? I'm hearing but not at all understanding.
The elect and regenerate can't be broken off the tree.
@@CanonPress Okay. Went back and listened again. The interpretation offered is this, "Those being broken off and cut out are the unregenerate members of the New Covenant." They had some kind of real organic connection to Christ but in their unbelief they are cut off like the 2/3rds of the Jews by 70 A.D. I hope I am closer to what Doug Wilson said. Am I?
@@michaeldirrim2361 Yes. Being in the covenant does not equal regenerated heart.
Nor does baptism... we don't baptize on regeneration but on profession...
44:48 Checkmate? lol
I don't understand how the title relates to the video. The Gospel is the Promise, and I was therefore worried there would be a false "gospel" preached here, but thankfully the title is not a fit for what was said. If it was click-bait, then well played.
There is no scripture in the Bible that says God promise infant baptism in Acts 2:39 Peter is saying that God promise the Holy Ghost not infant baptism.. Getting water baptize doesn't saved you believe the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 in the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ...in Ephesians 1:13 In whom ye also trusted after that ye heard the word of truth the gospel of your salvation in whom also after that ye believed ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise..A infant can't understand the gospel and believe the gospel... Water Baptism is for believers that believe in Jesus Christ not for unbelievers...In Ephesians 4:5 One Lord one faith one baptism and that is being baptized with the Holy Spirit not water baptism and that is the only baptism that matters... Water Baptism doesn't put away the filthiness of the flesh the blood of Jesus Christ does..In Hebrew 9:22 Without shedding of blood is no remission and the context is no forgiveness of sins ..In Colossians 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood even the forgiveness of sins ...in 1 John 1:7 The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sins... Water Baptism can't do that... Getting water baptize doesn't saved you it by simply believe the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4
Being born into the covenant through flesh is how the shadow was done, but the heavenly way is to be born into the covenant spiritually; this spiritual birth was always the spiritual case, that the true, which the shadow shadowed, could only be entered into through belief, but now the veil is lifted; the association with flesh-birth is a shadow, it is of the veil. Paul and John speak of their spiritual children in Christ, because the earthly children of Israel represent the heavenly children born through belief. The Gospel Promise is good enough, and God is trustworthy, so we don't need to be desperate for an earthly ceremony to console us as if the Gospel-as-is is not good enough. Shall we worship in Jerusalem, or on that mountain? Neither. We shall worship in Spirit and in Truth. To be baptized represents to die in Christ, and to invent a ceremony which redefines that meaning is obviously a false teaching, and there is no excuse such that this practice may continue. I could invent any doctrine I so desire, if I were to be as loose with argumentation as what Doug has been here. I am desperate to have Scripture clearly interpret itself for me, because I am fatally untrustworthy to interpret the text; I advise the same to yall: let God tell you how He has interpreted His text.
BOOOOOOOO!!!.........😜🤪
Love, your Baptist brother 👊🏾
I do, wrong an innovative as they are
Canon is right name for this site ha ha .. because it's not scripture.. it's a church council thing with a side Canon on creating it .. circumcision was the old Covenant and the promise of the holy spirit came in the new Covenant and gave us circumcision of the heart.. not baptism. Romans clear on that .
27:11 I don't like the dishonesty which is exaggeration. God is saying we are in the same situation, but specifically it is not exactly the same. Christ is superior to the angels. The voice which speaks from heaven is superior to the voice which spoke from the mountain. The sacrifice which we rely on is the Once Sacrifice which is ever sufficient. The differences between our situations, is what is cited as the foundation of all of the argumentation in the book, so to say the text teaches we are in "exactly" the same situation is to ignore God's argument.
Doug even pointed out the differences when (27:55) he listed a bunch of mere shadows of the heavenly (shadows are not exactly the same as that which they shadow). For instance, the bread from heaven: Lord Jesus specifies in John 6 that they ate that bread and did die, but Christ Himself is the Bread From Heaven which we eat and never die. God is showing how the shadows demonstrate the nature of the heavenly, but God is not then saying that the shadows are more than shadows or that the heavenly is less than heavenly, but rather we see that the shadows preached the heavenly to Israel and were also written down for our admonition. To say shadows are "exactly the same" as the thing of which they are a shadow, is blatantly false. One of the main points throughout the entire book is that, because the Jews of that time had, through Christ, received the direct and unveiled Heavenly Proclamation Of God Upon The Cross, that they therefore would be rejecting God if they were to look back to the Old Covenant... how does Doug see this as pointing him toward using the Old Covenant to justify inventing paedo baptism?
Why does Doug have such a Gospel-centric blind spot here? Perhaps he reads the text with more focus on how he would like to argue, and less focus on hearing how God Himself has already argued. There must be some reason for the huge blind spot; the book is very blatant about how important these differences are, such that the entire point is to admonish us to rely on our superior situation, superior to shadows, so that we do not end up like the unbelieving Israelites. To invent paedo baptism as a new shadow, in order to have something earthly to rely on, is specifically in opposition to what the text is teaching about the relationship between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. If paedo baptism were a thing, that would be swell by me, but to impose that onto the Book Of Hebrews is invalid and therefore impermissible.
This is very dangerous. Check your heart, and do not stiffen your neck to the good and honest words of God.
OIKOS covenant baptism was the standard for all new testament baptism
@@bigtobacco1098 Believer's baptism is every case without exception: "believed and was baptized, him and all his house". Also, individuals (such as the Ethiopian eunuch) were baptized with zero reference to OIKOS covenant baptism, so I'm not sure if "standard" is accurate, but there certainly is something to be learned from the instances when whole households came to belief, yet I don't see anything that indicates we should baptize anyone before they confess belief.
If there is an argument for it, it is not the one which Doug tried to cobble together here. Your argument is a bit better, and I've heard Doug make a more complete presentation of it, but it also fails to validate the doctrine. By my own human wisdom, I would think to institute pedobaptism, but I have, by God's grace, died to my own human wisdom so that I may live in Christ. I need a clear Biblical doctrine which institutes preconfessional baptisms.
Perhaps the keys given to Peter can somehow be applied to make the case, but that has to be done in a way which does not also make an argument for the Papacy.
@@NicholasproclaimerofMessiah AND, not THEN....
@NicholasproclaimerofMessiah as well Acts 2:38 is a direct repetition of the OIKOS format.... for me to believe that it means something else I'll need an explanation from scripture or tradition
@@bigtobacco1098 Thank you for the engaging discussion.
When (in John 13 v7) Lord Jesus told Peter that he would come to understand the meaning of the footwashing through the footwashing itself, did Peter then insist it be explained to him in explicit words? Well, (in v8) Peter was momentarily a bit stubborn, but then (in v9) he came to understand apart from any explicit explanation.
The sacraments of baptism and communion have deep spiritual meaning which cannot be explicitly conveyed in words, but how to outwardly practice the rituals can easily be put into clear instruction. Salvation is apart from the rituals, but not apart from the reality shadowed therein; the thief on the cross was not baptized with an earthly baptism upon his conversion, and yet in his conversion he was baptized spiritually unto the remission of sins. Likewise, the promise of salvation to children faithfully parented is separate from the matter of earthly ritual.
The texts which you cite relate to our topic in a framework of typology rather than technical commandment, in that these texts do not specify whether any preconfessional infants had come to believe and be baptized, such that they do not make a case for an earthly ritual of preconfessional baptism, but they do make a case for the salvific promise which such a baptism would point to. What they do specifically include, is that those who were baptized also believed; so it looks to me like the necessity of belief is specifically accounted for, just as the promise that children faithfully parented will be saved also seems to be specifically accounted for.
Hopefully that conveys my hermeneutical foundation without me having written an essay on the topic, and I hope it clarifies why I think the Scriptures compel the one application against the other. Perhaps you'll consider it, and please offer any further clarity on your perspective which you would like me to consider.
That's your New Covenant glory?! Keep the kids? What a canard. God has been saving his people by his own will, by grace through faith . I used to love you. Now I'm not so sure. But I , well, ok. Still love you. Brother 😡
Baptism without faith? Without repentance? Without regeneration? If my parents are saved, I automatically am also??? Really?????
That's not is being said, listen to the general Presbyterian view from a Baptist view, th-cam.com/video/hrfwmjYG-cc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=-IgbexuuMHaGqcvK
He definitely didn't say anyone was saved because of the faith of their parents. In fact, he said believing that was a huge peril of both the old and new covenant. Did you listen to whole video or are you just arguing in bad faith?
@@gsp8489 Presbyterians believe that Their children are automatically under the covenant and should be baptized even as babies.
Yes but under the covenant does not mean you’re saved. It is just a sign of the covenant
@@justinholt2247 explain
Seems like baptizing infants is like man trying to be God. Being part of Gods family is by Gods grace alone, through our faith alone, in our savior Jesus Christ’s work on the cross alone. Then we are baptized. No infant has the ability to make that decision through God opening their heart and soul to what Christ did for them. There is no where in the Bible which is inerrant of any infant being baptized and I personally live by scripture alone. I’ve listened to many many hours of brother Wilson’s sermons and teachings and never would of thought he would teach on something God does NOT teach us to do. Seems so very wrong on a very high level. No matter how he try’s to spin.
There is also not one example of a woman receiving Communion yet we know by implication that it must be biblical. You're wrong that children cannot have faith. Our Lord mentioned "little ones who believe in Me" and speaks of infants literally praising God in Matthew 21. There are numerous other examples of regenerated infants. By your standard, these little ones would be proper recipients of baptism.
"I personally love by scripture alone" - your baptism position is, by necessity, your interpretation that you read into the text
All of us believe in believer's baptism. Scripture only shows first generation believers being baptized. Scripture doesn't speak directly about what to do with the CHILDREN of baptized believers (second generation). Therefore both of us are required to demonstrate our practice from Scripture. The question is really about the covenant status of children. Are they considered rejected, alienated from the people of God or as our Lord said, "of such is the kingdom of heaven"?
@@axie_grinder9676 Wholeheartedly agree, friend! The original poster (above's) baptismal position is, by necessity, an interpretation
@@Mic1904 Thank you brother! I'm a former Reformed Baptist by the way. I once said to a friend at seminary that infant baptism is an "unbiblical tradition" but flip flopped due to SCRIPTURE ALONE ;-)
The lie of infant baptism.
Paul in 1 timothy 6:12 clearly says make a good confession in the presence of many witnesses.. so not sure why you would tell your audience that no where in scripture do people make a confession and are baptised .. like your southern Baptist friends .. sorry you lost me right there .. done listening.. any one listening to this .. study to show your self approved or be deceived ...