Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Mark 16:16 "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Mark 16:16 "He who has believed [in Me] and has been baptized will be saved [from the penalty of God's wrath and judgment]; but he who has not believed will be condemned. |
Subject: Children/Baby baptism Scripture? |
Bible Note: Believers become members of this Body of Christ by the baptizing work of the Holy Spirit. "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one Body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles..." (1Cor. 12:13). this work is simultaneous with the work of salvation. Every truly saved person in this dispensation has thus become a member of the Body. this baptizing work of the Spirit does not take place in any visible, physical, or emotional experience. In fact, in the great majority of cases it is only after the study of the Word that he has thus become a member of the Body of Christ. This in in shapr contrast to the so-called Spirit baptism at Pentecost when there ver visible tongues as of fire, the sound of a mighty rushing wind, and other physical and emotional phenomena. If for no other reason this great contrast should serve to show that these two baptisms are different. One had to do with the fulfilling of the prophets: "This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel" (Acts 2:16); the other had to do with the formation of the unprophesied Mystery Body of Christ. Very few theologians have noted the distinction between these two baptisms in which the Holy Spirit is involved. Covenant or Federal Theology is specifically that type of Theology which is held by the Reformed bodies. It is based upon a supposed covenant of works between God and Adam and a covenant of grace as a method of forgiveness and salvation through Christ. It is covenant theology that teaches that Baptism has taken the place of Circumcision as the initiatory rite into the Church. However, there is no mention of circumcision in verses such as: Acts 15:1, 2; 21:21; Gal. 2:3-5; 5:2-6; 6:12, 13, 15 as some would give as support of this position. The fact of the matter is that as far as the historical recored of the Bible is concerned, the Jewish apostles and believers continued the practice of circumcision along with baptism. It would have been a very simple matter to settle the problem which occaisoned the Council at Jerusalem in Acts 15 had baptism taken the place of circumcision. There was no question raised about Jews practicing circumcision; the question was, must Gentile converts be circumcised in order to be saved" (Acts 15:1, 23, 24). Even Paul circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:3), and he took a vow that he had not taught the Jews that they out not to circumcise their children (Acts 21:21). Infant baptism supposdly makes the infant a member of the Chruch and a child of the covenant. Unbaptized infants are outside the covenant. This idea is more or less contained in Roman Catholic Theology, where it is held that unbaptized infants are lost and if they die in infancy will go to a limbus infantum which is outside the lake of fire but removed from the featific vision of God. Reformed theologians do not teach taht unbaptized infants dying in that state are lost. In trying to wind this up, the theory that baptism took the place of circumcision is not substantiated by the Scripture. There is no statement to this effect in Scripture. All so-called proofs are purely inferential. The fact that the Twelve Apostles never commanded the cessation of circumcision, but continued circumcision along with the practice of baptism, is proof that one did not take the place of the other. In fact, baptism was practiced in the Old Testament along with circumcision, and both were practiced together during the early ministry of Christ. The same thing may be said for infant baptism. There is no explicit command in the Bible to baptize infants, nor any single instance where they were so baptized. It is difficult to see how circumcision, which was performed only upon the male, can be equated with baptism, which was practiced upon both male and female. While it may be agreed that the ideal is for parents to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and that it is a great advantage for children to be reared in the environment of the Church, there is nothing in the epistles of the New Testament limiting the ministry of the church to so-called baptized children of the covenant. It is true that Paul said:"For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy: (1Cor. 7:14). The condition here is not if the husband or wife are baptized church members, but simply if they are believers. And there is surely nothing in the context about the children being baptized and thus becoming children of the Covenant in order to make them clean. None of the covenants of the Bible were made with the Gentiles. I hope this has not been to long in reply and that it has helped to answer your question. |