;)
"Semi-Infant Baptism" in Baptist Churches
Posted by David Rogers in Baptist Life
In 2006, the most recent year for which on-line statistics are available, 118,741 of the 364,826 baptisms in the Southern Baptist Convention (32.5%) were of children age 11 and below. 4,179 of these were of children age 5 and below. Some have suggested, as churches are increasingly reporting baptisms of even pre-school children, that we come to grips with the practice among us of “semi-infant” or “toddler baptism.”
Personally, I believe there are several good reasons for postponing baptism until sometime after the age of 12. Among these are the historical practice of Baptist churches and the practice of Baptist churches around the world today. As John Hammett states: “Historically, Baptists prior to the twentieth century were slow to see childhood decisions as faith commitments warranting baptism … Any Baptist church of the eighteenth century that baptized those younger than mid to late teens could expect to be questioned by other Baptist churches in their association, and to this day childhood baptisms are very rare among Baptists outside the United States” (Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches, p. 272).
However, as Baptists, we should never be content just to follow the precedent of church history or the example of others. We believe (or at least, make lip service to believing) in the absolute authority and sufficiency of Scripture in matters of faith and practice.
At the root of the question of “semi-infant baptism” is the whole issue of the “age of accountability.” The Bible does not deal directly with this issue. However, Al Mohler and Danny Akin recently published an article that does an excellent job of examining the evidence we do have in Scripture. I am in agreement with their conclusion that there is good reason to hold to the view that there is indeed an “age of accountability,” and that children who die before reaching this age go to heaven.
Also, though the Bible never directly states that baptism must be administered as soon after an individual comes to faith in Christ as possible, the examples given in the New Testament provide a practically unanimous testimony to this practice. In addition to this, Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” Though we all are familiar, from our discussions with our paedo-baptist friends, of the cases of “household baptisms” of the extended families (gr. oikos) of Cornelius, Lydia, and the Philippian jailer, what the New Testament does not tell us is the age of those who were baptized. Neither does it tell us at what age children should be baptized today.
However, in my opinion, the following evidence, while not conclusive in and of itself, adds weight to the argument in favor of postponing baptism until after the age of 12:
1. The Jewish practice of bar mitzvah. This ceremony celebrates the time in the life of a Jewish boy when he officially becomes “a son of the commandment,” which is how the term bar mitzvah is literally translated. It would seem to me that this is a strong indication of what Jews think (and have thought down through the centuries) regarding the “age of accountability.” Also, although the bar mitzvah, as we know it today, was not yet in practice at the time of Jesus, I think there is a possible correlation with this and his visit to the temple, accompanying his parents, at age 12. In relation to this, the IVP New Testament Commentary states: “If the Mishna is relevant to the first-century Jewish practice, which is likely in this case, then religious instruction would have become more intense for Jesus upon his reaching twelve (m. Niddah 5:6; m. Megilla 4:6; m. `Abot 5:12).”
2. The practice of many paedo-baptist groups regarding “confirmation.” Though I do not generally agree with paedo-baptist biblical interpretation, I think it is significant that most paedo-baptists down through history have advocated the practice of “confirmation” sometime around the age of 12 for those who were “baptized” as infants. I believe this is reflective of an intuitive recognition of the spiritual significance of this age in the life of a child.
3. The studies of secular researchers such as Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg regarding phases of moral development and the human brain. Though there is not room here for a full-blown discussion of this, there is good evidence that children below a certain age are unable to make totally independent moral decisions apart from the influence of their parents and/or other significant individuals in their environment. It seems to me that this has much more to do with the “age of accountability” than the stated ability of a child to accurately verbalize an intellectual understanding of the plan of salvation.
4. The church growth studies of Flavil Yeakley. As a Church of Christ minister whose research was carried out specifically among Church of Christ congregations, Yeakley’s conclusions must perhaps be taken with a grain of salt as to the degree with which they may accurately represent Baptists. However, I think the following may well be relevant. In the late 1970’s, Yeakley, a professional sociologist and statistician, carried out an extensive study on the causes for “back door” losses, in relation to church growth among the Churches of Christ in the United States. When the age of one’s baptism was contrasted with the likelihood they would drop out of active church participation later in life, there was a direct correlation, with those baptized at an earlier age consistently more likely to eventually drop out. To some degree, this was to be expected. What was really significant, though, was that, for all age increments leading up to the age of 12, the decreasing likelihood of abandoning church attendance followed a steady, predictable pattern. However, between the ages of 11 and 12, there was a quantum leap, with those baptized at the age of 12 much less likely to eventually quit attending church than those baptized at the age of 11.
In light of all of this, how should we approach the whole issue of child evangelism? I offer the following suggestions:
1. Christian parents should do everything within their grasp to assure that their children understand and embrace the gospel. One day, we will be held accountable for how we carry out this crucial assignment that God has given us.
2. There are certain aspects of the gospel message that are “age-appropriate.” These aspects should be taught and communicated to the degree and at the stage in their lives our children are able to comprehend them.
3. We should encourage our children to believe in God and trust in the finished work of Jesus on the cross for the forgiveness of their sins, their reconciled relationship with the Father, and their eternal destiny. We should also encourage them to be sorry for their sins, confess them to God, and repent of them on a regular basis, to the degree they are able.
4. We should avoid telling our children that, just because they prayed the sinner’s prayer on such and such an occasion, they can rest assured that when they die they will go to heaven. I believe in the doctrine of assurance. I believe it is generally a good thing for each of us to “nail down once and for all” the eternal state of our souls before God. It is also a good thing to continually “examine (ourselves) to see whether (we) are in the faith” (1 Cor. 13:5). However, I believe it is best for children to find this assurance as a result of their personal understanding of the gospel, and not because someone else continually reminds them of the time they “made a decision” or “prayed a prayer” to “give their heart to Jesus.”
5. In our churches, we should help and encourage Christian parents in our midst regarding their responsibility to raise their children “in the training and instruction of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4). We should also provide sound biblical teaching that supports and complements what they are teaching them at home. At the same time, we must be careful to find an appropriate balance in our evangelistic efforts with children of non-believing parents that takes into account both the desires of their parents as well as their over-arching need of a saving relationship with Jesus.
6. In keeping with all of the above, I believe it is best to baptize only those who are at least 12 years old, and make a credible profession of faith.
;)
;){kind=logo}
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
David,
I’m not sure if I buy into the age of accountability… but I’m not sure that I don’t buy into it. I read Dr. Akin and Dr. Mohler’s article a year or so ago (it was published in the SEBTS magazine Outlook). I will reread it when I can, but I seem to remember not being comfortable with how they got to their conclusions.
With that said, consider these verses:
Acts 16:14-15 – “A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul. And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, ‘If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay.’ And she prevailed upon us.”
—AND—
Acts 16:30 – “and after he brought them out, he said, ‘Sirs, what must I do to be saved?’ They said, ‘Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.’ And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house. And he took them that hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his.”
The question is, do these two “households” have children in them? I think it is likely that they do, however, the biblical evidence is just about as firm as the the evidence for an age of accountability. We have to do a lot of assuming and hoping to reach both conclusions.
As far as I know, the main reason for this concern is at a time of grief, when a parent loses a young one. What do we say to the parent? How do we console them? It is easy to say, that the child is in Heaven or Paradise (or whatever you believe). But what if we’re wrong? Are we handing out false hope? Some may say that false hope is still hope and I can understand that point, but I don’t think Jesus cares that much for false hope.
I really don’t have a good “answer” to give to people in this situation, not one that I would think that most people would find comforting. The best advice/answer I could give is to state the facts. David felt like he would see his child in the After-Life and God is a just God. I probably wouldn’t state them as coldly as that though
.
Oh yeah, and we can’t forget that Jesus told us not to be a stumbling block to little children.
God’s Glory,
Lew
The Pursuit Online Store
I do buy into the age of accountability. I can find no other reason why God would have pointed out, in 2 Chronicles, that there was a time in Jesus’ own life that HE did not “know enough to reject the wrong and choose the right”. God could easily have stated the time frame involved, in some other way, but He chose to say that anyway.
And it would be interesting to see, of the 80% (so I’ve heard) of teens who fall away when they go off to college, what percentage were the early baptizees vs those baptized in, say, their teens.
David,
Thank you for doing the work to put this post together. You have said well what I have been thinking for some time (although I hadn’t bothered to put the time into the research you have done).
I’m afraid that our numbers emphasis in the IMB is part of the reason for baptizing such young children. I’d much rather see fewer legitimate baptisms than have so many numbers-driven semi-infant baptisms.
Thanks again, Eric
David,
When I typed “IMB” in the second paragraph above, I meant to type “SBC.”
Eric
I will buy into a “time of accountability”, but not really an age. I am having a hard time with the suggestion that a person wait until age 12 to be baptized. The NT example seems to be that of baptizing believers almost immediately after a profession of salvation, as the “first step” of obedience. Has anyone considered the harm that could possibly be done by delaying baptism a couple of years (say 3 years for example, if a child is saved at age 9).
Personally, I was saved one month shy of 8 years old. I had been taken to church 3 times a week my entire life. At 8 years old, I probably knew much more about the Bible and the Lord than the average non-christian, non-church goer who might come to church for the first time and get saved at say 28 years of age. However, I believe GREAT care should always be taken when dealing with a child.
Salvation requires a full understanding of my sinfulness and God’s grace: both require higher reasoning skills and the ability to think abstractly. The ability to reason abstractly doesn’t occur until puberty (well… near the onset of puberty). Neural networks rapidly expand and then shortly before puberty are pruned back; at this point higher order thinking kicks in.
I know it’s an extra-biblical argument, but… my point is if there is an age of accountability it’s not likely to be measured by a birthday but by the ability to think through one’s own sin nature and Christ’s redemptive work on the cross.
David,
You have addressed a very important issue, and I appreciate the work you’ve done to prepare this post. I agree that many young children are being baptized these days, and I suspect that many of them were not properly counseled, but I have no proof of that suspicion. When counseling is done well, we can pretty accurately gauge whether children can intellectually understand the plan of salvation, but even with good counseling, it is very difficult to gauge what is happening spiritually in their lives (i.e., genuine conviction, faith, and repentance). Having said that, I also believe that the age of accountability for some people can occur below the age of twelve, and thus I believe that children under the age of twelve can be saved. If they are truly saved, then we have no good biblical reason not to baptize them. As you mentioned, the NT pattern was to baptize new converts immediately. I would also argue that baptism is the first major step of obedience after salvation, and as I have said in the past, it is a testimony to a group about what has just occurred in the person’s life. As the 2000 BF&M states, baptism is “prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord’s Supper.” To tell a child who is 8 years of age that he is saved but that he cannot be baptized or be a member of the church until he is 12 years of age just doesn’t seem to have any biblical basis. I therefore believe that baptism is appropriate for children under the age of twelve, but I also believe that we should be very cautious in this matter of child conversion and baptism.
Question for Baptist Theologue and Joe White:
So twelve is too old for you? Is there an age below which you will not baptize a child?
Most of us have thought about this and probably have an age in mind.
William
David – Thanks so much for your Suggestion #4. I’ve seen parents get virtually fighting mad because a pastor led their child to Christ after the child had “already been saved!” This was with a little girl less than seven, if I remember the age right…
Also, although the bar mitzvah, as we know it today, was not yet in practice at the time of Jesus, I think there is a possible correlation with this and his visit to the temple, accompanying his parents, at age 12.
I believe most paedo-baptist groups – Presbyterian, Lutheran, and certainly Catholic – say that baptism is more akin to circumcision. Among Jews it took place on the eighth day after birth and was practiced long before Christ. As circumcision was the sign of entry in the Mosaic Covenant, they see baptism as entry into the New Covenant brought by Christ.
Confirmation is something else entirely, based on Acts 8. The deacon Phillip baptized many Samaritans, but they did not receive the Holy Spirit until the Apostles Peter and John came and laid hands on them.
William,
To answer your question, I would not baptize an infant, a toddler, or a young child that has not yet reached the age of accountability or has not been correctly counseled in regard to his salvation. The problem comes in identifying the age a specific child becomes capable of intellectually and spiritually understanding the plan of salvation. That age is different for each child, and thus the age of accountability is different for each child. One child that is seven years of age might be able to surrender his life to Jesus in repentance and faith, but another child of the same age might not be able to do so. Only God knows the exact age of accountability for each child. In our counseling experiences with children, as I said in an earlier post, we should be very cautious.
Let me rephrase my first two sentences in my last post for clarity:
To answer your question, I would baptize neither an infant nor a toddler. I would also not baptize a young child that has not yet reached the age of accountability or has not been correctly counseled in regard to his salvation.
Lew,
It seems your main point of discrepancy is with the “age of accountability.” As Mohler and Akin (and you) admit, the Scripture is not totally clear one way or another on this. However, I am still convinced that the composite of evidence favors the view taken by Mohler and Akin.
In the meantime, as far as I am able to ascertain, the practice of “infant baptism” has been linked historically to the belief in “baptismal regeneration.” If we (as Baptists), on the basis of our study of Scripture, do not accept “baptismal regeneration,” then I do not see a justification for either “infant baptism” or “semi-infant baptism.” Also, even though one might not accept the argument in favor of the “age of accountability,” if he/she does not believe in “baptismal regeneration,” the fact that a child dies before being baptized is of little relevance.
Bob,
Yes, I agree it would be interesting to see those statistics. Yeakley’s findings seem to point to a high percentage of those who do “fall away” having been baptized as children. Even more important, in my opinion, would be to know how many have been led to a false assurance of salvation and eternal security based upon a childhood “decision” and baptism. That is the real issue, and one for which I believe God will hold us ultimately accountable.
Eric,
I agree. The bottom line, statistically, is the number of authentic disciples made. But, that is very hard to objectively measure.
Joe White,
I also made a profession of faith as a child, as have each of my sons. However, I think it is best, as I said in my post, to let the Holy Spirit convict each of us of assurance, as we continue forward as disciples. I can say that I, and many others (according to their testimony) have had an experience of a fuller understanding of repentance, after going through a time of adolescent rebellion. As a child, I repented to the degree I was able to understand it. But, later on, my repentance took on a deeper significance, as I understood better the implications of making a clear choice between two different paths for my life.
Also, I am curious to know what specific harm you think may be done by delaying baptism a couple of years in the life of a child.
Bowden,
Thanks for your input. I would be curious if your studies in psychology provide any additional insight regarding point #3 on the studies of Piaget and Kohlberg. Are you aware, for example, of any additional current scientific consensus on these issues? Do you see any difference between “abstract reasoning” and “independent moral decision-making capability”?
Mike (Baptist Theologue),
Yes, you present, as I understand it, the best arguments from the alternative point of view. However, when all the arguments are laid out, I still lean toward the option of postponing baptism for children. I am especially concerned about the tendency to lead people to false assurance. I will agree that, unfortunately, the Bible is not totally conclusive on this matter.
David, another factor to consider is the faster biological development (earlier onset of puberty) of children in today’s world. For example:
“A girl is to become Britain’s youngest mother after becoming pregnant at 11. The girl smokes 20 cigarettes a day despite being eight months’ pregnant. She conceived aged 11 when she lost her virginity to a boy of 15 on a drunken night out with friends.”
By IAN DRURY, Daily Mail, Last updated at 16:17 12 May 2006
We can probably agree that children are physically maturing at earlier ages. Is that also true of their intellectual and spiritual abilities?
[...] Children And What Age Is Appropriate? Posted on July 9, 2008 by Tom I have just read this article by David Rogers over at SBCImpact. He addresses the issue of baptizing children and at what age [...]
Well, let me be a bit of a “monkey” in this developing “wrench.”
Might we be over-complicating things just a bit? Over-complicating the simplicity of the Gospel message is, I believe, far more dangerous than affirming the simple faith of a child. After all, didn’t Jesus Himself affirm such faith … like that of a child?
Bowden makes an interesting argument based upon the stages of cognitive development. I have heard and considered this argument before. And I might buy into it, if (and here’s the big “IF”) faith were merely a cognitive response or intellectual exercise. But isn’t faith far more than that?
The problem that I have with the “Over 12″ standard is multi-tiered. First, I just don’t think it’s biblical … or at least it cannot be demonstrated in the Scriptures. Second, it does tend to relegate faith in Christ to an understanding/affirmation of a certain set of facts.
But my biggest objection is found in the circumstance in which we now live. By the time my children were 12 years old (both are now teen-agers … girls), they were pretty much set in their ways. They pretty much established in their personality, habits, and moral life. Age 12, in our “culture” today, is pretty easily identifiable as the “point of departure” with regard to the individuals who have the most influence in their lives. That influence shifts dramatically from parents to “friends,” and the teen culture at large. I submit to all that, by age 12, many of the children in our culture have, indeed, already made many life-defining, eternal decisions. And their parents (and maybe even the church) do not have as much influence in their lives as friends, media, Disney Channel, and MySpace.
I would greatly prefer that one of those life-changing decisions be a decision to follow Jesus Christ. There is nothing in the world more natural than a child, born and raised in a Christian home and church life, to accept the fundamental Gospel of Jesus Christ as a child. Both of my girls accepted the Lord at age 7. I baptized them both a short time later. They are two of the godliest, most compassionate, serving young Christian women I have ever known.
Bottom line … I believe we should all guide our children to faith in Christ during their most formative years. They learn all of the most critical tasks for life before age 12 … to talk, walk, read, etc… Why require them to wait until WE are comfortable with their decision before we can affirm their faith in Christ?
I don’t think we should. I will continue to carefully, thoughtfully, and prayerfully evangelize the children of our church and community.
I say all that with one caveat. I cannot, personally, affirm the “preschool” decisions. Like William said, we all have an appropriate age “in mind.” For me, that minimum age is more in the range of seven or eight … depending upon the individual child.
Just my nickel’s worth…
Patrick,
Yes, your take on paedo-baptist interpretation is correct here, at least as I understand it. However, as I state in my post, I am not convinced, generally, of paedo-baptist interpretation. I would say that baptism corresponds to circumcision, in the sense that circumcision marks and symbolizes one’s entrance into the physical Israel, whereas baptism marks and symbolizes one’s entrance into the spiritual Israel, not at the time of physical birth, but, rather, at the time of spiritual birth.
Mike (BT), and Geoff,
I think the key issue here, if we agree on the basic concept of the “age of accountability,” is until what age this continues. Here, I think the findings of Piaget and Kohlberg are significant. I also think it is important that we are not just talking about “understanding/affirmation of a certain set of facts,” as Geoff alludes to. It is the capability to make independent moral decisions. This is why I am interested to hear something more about this from Bowden, or anyone else who has studied this from the perspective of psychology. I have heard many parents give as a justification for their child’s baptism the fact that they are able to articulate perfectly well the essentials of the gospel. But, as I understand it, that is missing the point. It is not a question of intellecutal, rational understanding. It is a question of independent decision-making.
By the way, I hope neither of you, or no one else feels criticized by what I say here. As parents, we each are trying to do the best we know how before the Lord. I affirm all of us who are sincerely giving our best effort at being faithful in this regard. Neither do I believe that child baptisms are necessarily invalid, and should thus be repeated later on. I just think that, overall, it is preferrable to postpone baptism to adolescence than do it beforehand.
David,
Perhaps the word “harm” is not the best choice of words. I was thinking more along the lines of hinder. As Baptist Theologue and Geoff Baggett have already pointed out, 12 year olds in our culture are pretty far along. If from our counseling and examiniation we believe a child of 8 to be saved, why not baptize them? Why delay it until age 12? I too think it wrong to give false assurance, but it is just as wrong to give no assurance. The great commission is to evangelize, baptize, and then stabilize. My concern is that if a child is saved but not baptized and stabilized in a NT church what may happen latter on. I believe we ought to always place our emphasis where Christ placed his emphasis. Christ both began and ended his earthly ministry with an emphasis on baptism. In my opinon, to with hold baptism from a new convert is unbiblical and wrong.
David, I don’t want this to be taken wrong, but it seems odd to me that someone like yourself who has consistently argued against “extra-biblical” requirements involving baptism, is now arguing for that very thing. Would you agree that there is no command in scripture to delay baptizing someone other than a salvation experience? Would you also agree that to not obey the Lord’s command immediately is to disobey His command?
That is what I meant by possible “harm”.
Joe,
I would counter that the arguments in favor of baptizing children are based just as much on “extra-biblical” reasoning as those against it. Also, since the Bible is not clear on this, I would not make it an issue for dividing with other true disciples.
What I am concerned about is the implications for long-term discipleship. You and Geoff point out the danger of allowing a child to become set in his/her ways before being obedient to the Lord’s command to be baptized. My read (though I admit I cannot presently confirm this with hard evidence) is that it generally is helpful for individuals to have a clear moment of public commitment to Christ sometime after the onset of adolescence. As I mentioned before, I do not strictly agree with paedo-baptist interpretation regarding “confirmation.” But, I do think they have a point. It is important, as a child enters into adolescence, to re-visit his/her decisions of childhood, and re-confirm them, with a view to the new stage of life’s journey upon which they are getting ready to embark. It seems to me that it may be more helpful in one’s lifelong discipleship to couple this with baptism, than it would be to make baptism a separate, previous experience.
David,
You wrote, “I would counter that the arguments in favor of baptizing children are based just as much on “extra-biblical” reasoning as those against it.”
I want to be clear about this, I am not arguing for the baptizing of children. I am arguing for the baptizing of believers; whether they be young or old. In this regard, I think I have clear biblical commands. However, I cannot find one biblical example of prolonging baptism or of any association of baptism with a “re-confirm” later in life. So while it may seem to you to be “helpful”, it seems to me to be an needless hindrance to spiritual growth and obedience to our Lord’s command.
Joe,
Okay, granted, we are talking about the baptizing of believers. I guess, at the bottom line, I am more hesitant to define the moment of crossing the line from unbelief to faith in the life of a child as the moment they “pray the sinner’s prayer.” I see children as in a process of growth in both faith and repentance, from infancy up, if they are properly instructed in a Christian home, and respond appropriately. I do think it is important for them, and for anyone, at one time or another, to eventually make a public profession and embracing of Jesus’ lordship over their life, though.
I guess this is where William’s question becomes more relevant. If age 12 is too old, is there any minimum age limit at all? And, why or why not?
Personally, I see a profession of faith of someone who is at least 12 as more indicative of an informed, mature, “morally independent,” life-long choice to follow Jesus than that of a younger child. I believe we should be affirming and encouraging of any steps taken toward this point on the part of younger children. But, at the same time, I think we should be hesitant about declaring them “saved” and “eternally secure” until they have the chance to confirm their decision later on from a more mature perspective.
It seems to me an underlying question is “at what point are people saved”? Is it simply repeating a prayer? Or, is it understanding the concepts within the prayer? If a meaningful understanding of salvation is a necessary part of being saved, then it seems clear to me some children are simply too young to be saved.
If, however, salvation takes place APART from the intellect, then age (or mental capacity) would make no difference.
I am not about to take the Holy Spirit out of the equation; I do, though, think some rudimentary understanding of concepts such as sin, grace, atonement, etc. plays a role in determining if someone has genuinely been saved. Therefore, I would argue not for a chronological age of accountability, but some degree of cognitive maturity.
How much theology does one have to understand in order for salvation to be real and meaningful?
David,
I see your point and agree that this is the case about 90% of the time. Instead of using the Age of Accountability, which is my 90% we have to watch how the Holy Spirit works in all of this. I personally know 2 young girls, age 7 that Truly excepted the Lord and have been a better witness than a lot of people setting in the Pews. Only God Knows and Convicts the Heart.
4just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love 5He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, 6to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in
the Beloved. NASB
Wayne Smith
David,
Yeah, I realized after posting that my comment was a little off your topic. I do not believe that infant baptism or semi-infant baptism is worth a hoot. I guess part of my point though was that there is possibly precedent in the bible for Children being baptized. But they are Children who believe. And definitely not baptism as an act of regeneration.
God’s Glory,
Lew
There was a big controversy at the council of Carthage in 254 whether infants should be baptized immediately after birth or on the eighth day, to reflect Jewish circumcision practice. Apparently it became quite heated.
Seventeen centuries later we’re discussing whether baptism should be at age 7 years or 12 years. Looks like history does repeat itself.
Apples … Oranges …?
Does the fact, as David Roger references, that baptising children under the age of 5 or even probably under the age of 10 is an almost uniquely American practise raise any questions?
If pretty much all the other Baptist traditions of the whole of the rest of the world take a markedly different view then should there be some serious pause for thought. I have never baptised someone younger than 10 and cannot current conceive of doing so – and i have only baptised someone under 13 twice out of over 300 candidates.
Were i to suggest baptising a 5 year old or even a 7 or 8 year old i could see myself fired as pastor pretty quickly for betraying a commitment to believer’s baptism and christian discipleship!
I tend to agree with Geoff on comment #15.
I would also wonder how much knowledge is required for salvation to take place. I read for example of Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus, and it seems he gained more knowledge after his conversion. Granted he being a Sadducee knew the Old Testament, but did he know what is being discussed here.
Also, Geoff mentioned this, but Christ said in the Gospels for the children to come to him. Doesn’t that mean in faith that leads to salvation?
For the record, I too believe in the age of accountability.
Rob,
Thanks for your input. I think that if we have never lived and worked outside of our native culture, it is difficult sometimes to see just how much our culture and traditions influence the way we see and do things.
Debbie (and others),
I understand and appreciate the desire to not invalidate the spiritual sensitivity and decisions of the children in our lives. I made a profession of faith and was baptized as a child myself. And, we have had to deal with the same dynamics with our own children.
However, as I have already alluded to several times here, I think it is important that we not confuse the ability to intellectually understand and accurately articulate the gospel with the ability to make independent moral decisions. As I understand it, a child prodigy may well be able to write a theological treatise on biblical soteriology, and yet not be able to make truly INDEPENDENT moral decisions. Does this mean we should not encourage them to believe in Jesus, repent of their sins, love and follow him with their whole heart? By no means!! But, I think the decisions a 6, 7, or 8-year-old makes will be of a qualitatively different nature than those a 13 or 14-year-old makes.
David: While I agree with you, you make some good points, as does Bob Cleveland, a 6,7,or 8 year old can make some moral choices. I guess I’m wondering how much about salvation or baptism someone has to know to have either. Then we could go the direction of those with mental disabilities, which I won’t here.
Debbie,
Yes, a 6, 7 or 8-year-old can make some “moral” choices, and can also make some “independent” choices. What I am talking about, though, are specifically “independent, moral choices.” Admittedly, I don’t know a whole lot about cognitive development theory. And, I am very hesitant about letting secular scientific theories determine positions on theological issues. But, in this case, it does seem to me to be a relevant question.
The way I am thinking, the amount of “knowledge” per se, is less relevant. It is the capability of volitionally trusting your entire life into the hands of Jesus, not being able to explain all the theology behind it.
I was just thinking of a few anecdotal events pertaining to this post. Perhaps others have seen it, too. It only takes one 6 or 7 year old to get baptized before you start seeing other little ones fall in line soon after. Beware of copycat baptisms where the parents are coaching them into baptism?
I have also seen quite a few baptized 7 year olds whack their little brother and feel GOOD and justified about it with no godly sorrow whatsoever.
)
The point I am making is that when we are saved, we have a new relationship with SIN, too. We now hate the sin we used to love and feel godly sorrow for it. I certainly hope that describes the 6-7 year olds some are talking about baptizing.
It would be very interesting to see stats on those baptized real young who leave the Body for while but are baptized again as adults. Or who ‘rededicate’ their lives.
Since baptism does not save, and there still seems to be many baptist parents who think differently as they prime their children to be baptized rather than have a personal relationship with Jesus, waiting is not a terrible thing.
Yet the term “age of accountability” is difficult for me because I don’t think one can stick an age on someones ability to comprehend the things of Jesus and need for receiving His gift of grace.
Do I believe we in the SBC baptize some children who are still lost (You know those who want to go to heaven but are not wanting to be cleansed of their sin – do they even understand what sin is?)? Absolutely. I also believe we baptize many adults who are still lost. Another topic for another day.
If we as pastors know “who” should be baptized and don’t baptize anyone who does not fall into the biblical standard, the problem would go away. But we are often told to raise our baptism numbers but not told to win the world to Christ.
I find it interesting that in all the many comments there has been little discussion as to the children’s salvation.
There seems to be some consensus on an “age of accountability,” which strangely is not identified in the Bible. The Bible found being insufficient, the proof then goes extra-Biblical: Piaget, Bar Mitzvahs, confirmation.
So, if all these children under the age of accountability are unable to make a profession of faith, as most of the commenters claim, how are those children that die before being able to make a profession of faith saved? Is there a second doctrine of salvation, without faith alone? Should we not be concerned for our own children’s salvation?
It seems that any doctrine on baptism of children should neatly fit within all other doctrines regarding salvation and baptism, should it not?
God bless…
+Timothy
Timothy,
Just trying to understand where you are coming from. Are you saying that you don’t believe in the so-called “age of accountability”? Do you believe children who die (no matter what age) without making a “profession of faith” go to hell?
David,
This is going to be a tough issue to argue biblically.
We both adhere to the authority of scripture and use it to settle discussions, which you affirm in the third paragraph of the post you linked to. Yet, as to the “age of accountability” you admit that the Bible does not speak directly. I will also admit that there is no direct biblical evidence concerning child baptism in the New Testament. Your proofs for your position are a historical argument, the argument from the later Jewish practice of Bar Mitzvah, the Paedobaptist practice of confirmation, Piaget and Kohlberg’s research on the human brain and Flavil Yeakley’s study. It will be hard to decide issues like this with scripture, won’t it?
The historical argument is strong, but not decisive, as you admit. I don’t really have the knowledge of historical Baptist practice to defend my view against this argument. If what you say is right (or, more accurately, what Hammett says), then my view is certainly out of the mainstream of Baptist history. But, as you admit, that is not an absolute argument.
You said, “So, though the Bible never directly states that baptism must be administered as soon after an individual comes to faith in Christ as possible, the examples given in the New Testament provide a practically unanimous testimony to this practice.” Of course, that is the chief argument I advance. In eight examples, the book of Acts is unanimous in its pattern. Baptism immediately follows conversion.
The rest of the arguments you give – well-stated and convincing – seem to be basically saying that it is not to the age of 12 (or so) that a child has the ability to make a genuine independent, moral decision. You present a compelling case.
Here is the crux of my argument: Baptism immediately follows conversion in every New Testament example. It is the beginning of the process of discipleship. Since there is no biblical instruction in this matter that would lead us to vary from this clear pattern, I baptize those who clearly confess faith – at whatever age.
I would point out a couple of scriptures that while, again, not definitive, would tend to argue against a set age limit on baptisms. I admit they are not the strongest biblical arguments, but on this subject, we have both admitted that the biblical evidence may not be absolute. I’m going to argue my point from these, even though I know it is hardly the surest foundation.
Matthew 18:3-5 says, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.” (See also Mark 10:14)
It does not say that children need to become adults, but that adults need to become like children. It also (perhaps the strongest evidence we have here) that these “little ones” believe in him. Jesus, here, indicates that there are little ones who genuinely believe in him.
Luke 9:47-48 adds another perspective. “But Jesus, knowing the reasoning of their hearts, took a child and put him by his side and said to them, ‘Whoever receives this child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me. For he who is least among you all is the one who is great.’”
Luke 18:15-17 presents another story from Jesus. “Now they were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them. And when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them to him, saying, ‘Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.’”
The disciples stopped people from bringing children to Jesus. He told them to let the children come (no, I’m not arguing that he’s talking about baptism) and then says that the kingdom belongs to children like these.
Do these settle the issue? No. But they do give some indication that Jesus saw the reality of the faith of small children. What age? I’m not sure. But, from what little I know about the words used here, it seems unlikely that the words apply to a child of 12.
Some summary statements:
1) I would agree with you that there is a problem with young children and their baptisms. I would disagree that the problem is that we baptize children at all. I would say it is the failure of churches to adequately evangelize children (weak “Jesus wants to be your friend” gospel presentations), and the tendency of some to put pressure (intentionally or unintentionally) on children.
2) I would agree that churches are often foolish (or worse) in the way we baptize children. Baptism is our denomination’s key statistic. I would hope it would never be true, but do some baptize small children without adequately instructing them or reviewing their understanding, so that they can build their baptismal statistics? I would guess its so.
3) I do not deny the reality of the age of accountability. It can also not be proven from scripture, one way or another.
4) As to your 6 suggestions at the end of your article, I would make the following observations.
Point 1 – I would only add “Christian parents and churches”
Point 2 &3 – full agreement.
Point 4 – I fully agree. In fact, I think this is the most important issue. Whatever happens should come from the child, not from the parents, an evangelist, or a church. It should flow from within, from the work of God’s Spirit within the child. Parents and churches need to let God work.
My disagreement is that, if that has happened, and when it happens, I baptize.
Point 5 – the consistent teaching and training from God’s word is the most important thing for families and churches. Immerse kids first in the word of God. Then, when the Spirit works, immerse them in water.
Point 6 – I am still of the belief that children, when they come to Christ, should publicly testify to their faith in baptism.
Look forward to your response.