On another blog, I've been following (and involved in) a discussion on infant baptism. Someone named Jim made the following perceptive comment:
I often find myself highly suspicious of “doctrines” that require lengthy and convoluted explanations. What should be a simple “look at this verse” becomes a diatribe that emphasizes minutia.
1. Question: What does the Bible say about Jesus? Answer: Look at this verse…
2. Question: How does the Bible define the Gospel? Answer: Look at this verse…
3. Question: What does the Bible say about being a godly husband? Answer: Look at this verse…
With that said, we do love our (erroneous) padeobaptist brothers and sisters. I can see the splinter in their eye, though I do hope this side heaven the Lord helps me see whatever beams may be blocking my vision.
4. Question: What does the Bible say about infant baptism? Answer: “Let me give you a long lecture about why all Christians must follow a practice that is never mentioned a single time in Scripture, and I’ll do it by appealing to an Old Testament custom that we were clearly and directly commanded to NOT practice as Gentile Christians.”
I think we can chalk this up as a definitive argument against infant baptism. What more can one say? :)
ReplyDeleteYes - although strong hermenutics does say that we shouldn't cherry-pick verses.
ReplyDeleteWhat we should do, what we OUGHT to do is allow scripture to interpret scripture and develop our theology based on an over-arching concept that all of scripture conveys.
This is a lot more difficult, because first we lay down our pre-suppositions and interpretive technique. Then we can start agruing - because if we disagree on the manner in which we read the book there is not way we can look at verses in the same light.
I am a "believers" baptist btw - I agree with you, but I think the arguments we have inside Christianity basically all boild down to hermenutics.
I have TRIED to believe as the Reformed believe about baptism, but I cannot. Infant baptism is a fascinating theological construct - astoundingly lacking in exegetical support or example.
ReplyDelete