All For Christ - What is the World to Me?

Thursday after Trinity 11 

Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. For me to write the same things to you is not tedious, but for you it is safe. Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation! For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh, though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead (Philippians 3:1-11). 

Rejoice in the Lord, not in the flesh. Paul gives the people who receive his letters this message again, and again. It is a message Jesus gave: For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?[1] We are to take up our cross and follow Jesus. He calls us to deny ourselves. And, He says that whoever desires to save his life, this life he lives here and now in the flesh, will lose it. He will lose real life. He will lose Jesus, who is the resurrection and the life, as he tries to hold on to the things of this world, which is in decay and passing away.

Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation. The people to whom Paul is referring here are sometimes called the circumcision party, or the Judaizers. They were the ones sowing dissension in the ranks; they were teaching false doctrine. They were teaching men to trust in their own works, literally in the cutting of their flesh in circumcision. They taught that you had to keep the Law and be circumcised to be a Christian, and that Paul was a false teacher. 

But Paul calls these men, these evil workers and the act they propagate, “the mutilation.” The circumcision they advocate is not the true circumcision. It is a kind of destruction. Not simply physically, by removing a bit of flesh from the body; It destroys Christians by removing faith in Christ: 

Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.[2]

It is a work of man designed to please God by keeping the Law. But the Law has been fulfilled by Christ. And the covenant sign of circumcision, which God gave to Abraham, is obsolete. It is a shadow of the true sign that marks you as one of God’s people: Baptism, the circumcision of Christ, which He performs on your heart. Paul says that we, those who have been baptized into Christ for the forgiveness of sins, are the true circumcision: 

In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.[3]

We were dead in our trespasses. We were dead in the uncircumcision of our flesh. Jesus made us alive in Him. He has circumcised us with the true circumcision – the circumcision not made with hands, but with water and the Word, the circumcision of Christ – in our baptism. He has taken, as Paul writes to the Colossians, “…the hand-writing of requirements that was against us,” and nailed it to the cross. Jesus, who had no sin, became sin for us. Because we have been circumcised with the circumcision of Christ in our baptism, His death on the cross as the sacrifice for sin is also ours. We died in Jesus through our baptism. Through that same baptism, Jesus’ resurrection from the dead also belongs to us. We have risen from the dead already, in Him. And even though this body will die and be buried, we will not die. We are immortal. We are baptized into Christ. We have put on Christ. Our bodies will die and be buried, if Jesus should delay his coming, like a seed in the ground, but we will be with Christ. He is our body. And one day He will return to judge the living and the dead. And, in the twinkling of an eye, the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised, sprouting forth from the earth, only now incorruptible and utterly changed, with immortal bodies like Jesus’ immortal body. In that way, this corruptible will put on incorruption, and this mortal will put on immortality; Death will finally be swallowed up in victory, once and for all. Thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. 

Looking at our situation in that way, you can see how Paul is able to say that the things he formerly counted as gain – his fleshly circumcision, his blood connection to the nation of Israel, his zeal in working to please God and keep the Law – he now counts as loss, for the sake of Christ. These things are ultimately worthless. What Paul has gained by the grace of God through faith in Christ is priceless: the forgiveness of sins, life everlasting, membership in the true Israel of God, adoption as a son of Abraham by faith.

We have received the same gracious gifts. In comparison with such a treasure, what is a little suffering in this present age? In comparison to life with Christ in a remade world, one without sin and death, with a perfect, immortal body, living in perfect relationship to the Almighty Creator of the universe, what is it to endure a little scorn, a little ridicule, some persecution. These things are not pleasant, but they cannot separate us from the love of God in Christ.[4] Even death, our bitter enemy, need no longer be feared, though the devil and his angels do their best convince us otherwise. We have something more precious. We have eternal life in Christ. What is this world to me?

The world is sorely grieved

Whenever it is slighted

Or when its hollow fame

And honor have been blighted.

Christ, Thy reproach I bear

Long as it pleaseth Thee;

I'm honored by my Lord,-

What is the world to me![5]

The world with wanton pride 

Exalts it’s sinful pleasures 

And for them foolishly 

Gives up the heavenly treasures. 

Let others love the world 

With all its vanity; 

I love the Lord, my God – 

What is the world to me![6]

---

[1] Mark 8:36 

[2] Galatians 5:2-4 

[3] Colossians 2:11-12 

[4] Romans 8:38-39 

[5] Ev. Luth. Synodical Conference of North America. The Lutheran Hymnal. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1941. Hymn 430, “What is the World to Me?” stanza 5. 

[6] ibid. TLH 430, stanza 6.

Timothy Joins Paul and Silas: A Comment on Acts 16:1-5

St. Paul, and his big knife.

Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek. He was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. As they went on their way through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decisions that had been reached by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem. So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily (Acts 16:1-5). 

Ok, so we just finished reading in Acts 15 about how the Jerusalem Council came to the conclusion that it was not necessary for Gentiles to obey the Mosaic Law and be circumcised to be Christians. What is the very next thing that we read about Paul? He circumcises Timothy, “because of the Jews who were in those places.” How is this different from what Paul describes Peter doing in Galatians, when he stops eating with the Gentiles because of the Judaizers[1]? And, why does Titus get a pass[2]? If I were Timothy, I might be a little perplexed – not to mention slightly upset – with Paul at this point. Perhaps this is the reason Paul is often depicted holding big knife… 

Evidently, the Jews whom Luke mentions in Acts 16 are different from the Judaizers Paul writes about in Galatians. Luther writes: 

When [Paul] encountered the stubborn Jews who insisted upon circumcision and the law, he took delight in teaching and doing the every opposite; he would not be coerced. But when he came to the weak and simple people he even practiced circumcision and let the law stand, until such time as he might strengthen them and deliver them from the law (Luther and Lehmann 1959)[3]. 

When a work, such as circumcision, is commanded by anyone to be performed as a requirement for salvation, it must be resisted, which was the case with Paul and Titus in Galatians 2. As a matter of Christian freedom, however, it (circumcision, or any other work) may be practiced in ways which are beneficial to the faith, as Paul does in this case, so as to facilitate his outreach to the Jewish community[4]. 

End Notes

[1] Galatians 2:11-14 

[2] Galatians 2:3 

[3] Luther, Martin, and Helmut T Lehmann. Luther's Works. Vol. 36. Saint Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House, 1959. 

[4] Engelbrecht, Rev. Edward A., ed. The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2009.

Three Examples of How Lutherans Deny Justification by Faith Alone: A Response – Part One of Two

Rev. Dr. Robert Preus

This blog article, “How Lutherans Implicitly Deny Faith Alone in Christ Alone,” showed up in my Facebook news feed a couple days ago. I usually allow things like this to drift past without a second glance. This one, however, I thought merited a response because the author – whether intentionally or not – seems to be presenting a bastardized version of confessional Lutheran theology. I have no idea what “Free Grace Theology” is. I am merely a layman with no formal theological training. I have simply extracted the author’s three points and attempted to answer them from the confessional Lutheran point of view. The first two points regarding baptism are dealt with below. The third, how Lutherans deny justification by faith alone by teaching that a believer can lose their salvation will be dealt with in a separate article.

The photo of Robert Preus has been included, as the author of the offending article used it, and that irritated me. - THL

Unfortunately, unlike Free Grace theology, the Lutheran tradition has not kept to faith alone in Christ alone, despite their stated intention. Indeed, I believe the Lutheran tradition has adopted a number of doctrines in direct opposition to justification/eternal life by faith in Christ apart from works. Let me give three examples:

1) Infant baptism: The fact that Lutherans baptize infants denies justification by faith alone. Infants cannot believe and yet Lutherans claim they are justified in the act of water baptism. By baptizing people who do not have faith, the Lutheran churches effectively teach that justification is apart from faith, not by it. Some Lutherans will respond by saying that infants can believe and be justified by faith apart from works, and so are the proper subjects of baptism. If so, that leads to an obvious problem. If infants can believe, they can also disbelieve. How can you tell the difference between believing infants and non-believing infants? How can you tell a difference between infants who believe in justification by faith alone and those who believe in salvation by works? You can’t. Indeed, the whole idea is quite silly, and yet that very argument is often made by Lutherans. I have heard a Lutheran dismiss the problem as being “rationalistic,” whatever that means. In reply, it seems like special pleading of the worst kind to insist that infants can believe, but deny that we would be able to tell whether they do or not.

If Lutherans held consistently to justification by faith in Christ alone, they would not baptize infants. They would only baptize believers (however old they may be).

Response

Let’s forget for a second that infants are included in the phrase “all nations[1].” Let’s set aside for the moment that St. Peter explains that a) baptism now saves you[2] and b) is for you and for your children and all those who are far off[3]. Let’s even ignore for the moment that St. Paul equates baptism with circumcision by calling it a circumcision of the heart[4] not made by hands[5], and circumcision was mandated for infants eight days old (all those things will be dealt with in greater detail later)[6]. Leaving all that aside, let’s focus our attention on the idea that infants can’t believe. Such an idea is totally, completely, and utterly true. Infants cannot believe…and neither can adults. We are all, by nature, objects of God’s wrath. In fact, let’s take a look at St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. No one can explain it better than him.

And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them (Ephesians 2:1-10).

The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing[7], the sinful mind is hostile to God[8], and we all – every single human being since The Fall – have been born dead in trespass and sin. We were all born with a mind hostile to God, and with a heart inclined to evil[9]. Left on our own to make a decision using our reason, whether or not to put our trust in Jesus, we would all choose “not Jesus” every time.

The analogy of a dead body is often used, but for good reason: Just as a corpse has no power to raise itself to life, so the spiritually dead person has no power to raise themselves to spiritual life, as St. Paul explicitly says in Ephesians 2. It is the Holy Spirit who calls people by the Gospel when and where he wills. And we know, from Christ’s institution of the Lord’s Supper and from what is normally known as “The Great Commission” – not to mention the rest of Holy Scripture – that God works through means. Christ has specifically commanded his Apostles to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them…and teaching them to observe all that he has commanded. So, it doesn’t matter if an unregenerate person is nine seconds old, nine days old, nine years old, or nine decades old because, as St. Paul writes, no one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit[10]. That faith by which they are saved comes from God as a gift through the Word. So, to be accurate, man is saved sola gratia, sola fide – by grace, through faith. That Word – God’s promised redemption – comes to an adult through preaching, or reading; that same word comes to an infant through the sacrament of Holy Baptism, which leads to the next point of contention.

2) Baptismal regeneration: Paul chastised the Galatians for thinking that circumcision was necessary for our salvation. And yet Lutherans insist that we must be baptized in order to be saved. Water baptism was as much a work of the Law as circumcision (Lev 16:23-24). How can Lutherans teach that making circumcision a condition of salvation is legalism but making baptism a condition of salvation is not? Some Lutherans will respond that baptism is not a work like circumcision, but the Gospel promise put into visible form. It is a work that God does to us, not something that we do for God. But this same reasoning could also apply to circumcision. Infant boys certainly don’t circumcise themselves. It is something done to them. And yet Paul denounced this practice as seeking to be justified by works of the law. What if the Galatians had said to Paul: “Paul, this isn’t legalism. It isn’t the boy’s work. This is God’s gift to the boy—a circumcised heart!” Apparently, Paul did not take that view. Adding any requirement to faith was a form of salvation by works, and another gospel.

If Lutherans held consistently to faith alone in Christ alone, they would not make baptism a condition of eternal salvation.

Response

The author of this article seems to be confused about the Lutheran position regarding baptism. He certainly doesn’t understand what St. Paul writes regarding baptism’s relationship to Old Testament circumcision. It isn’t a condition of eternal salvation in the way the author suggests. Baptism is the vehicle through which God’s promises are delivered. I guess baptism is a condition of eternal salvation in the same way that going through the front door is a condition of entering a house. You can try to crawl in through the mail slot, but the blessing is available by the means through which the homeowner has provided access. Baptism works the forgiveness of sins[11], rescues from death and the devil[12], and gives eternal salvation[13]. It is a washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit.

Today in the United States circumcision is performed routinely in hospitals when a male child is born. The practice has little to do with religious faith, and is heavily debated between those who support the practice for medical and hygienic reasons, and those who decry the practice as mutilation and an infringement on individual liberty. The purpose of circumcision as instituted by God in the book of Genesis, however, was to be a mark of his covenant with Abraham. God had promised to send a savior to redeem mankind after The Fall, and he promised that savior would be the seed of Abraham. By the removal of the foreskin, males received a visible sign of this promise that God would send a Savior, born of a woman. No Hebrew male could live a day without being reminded of the promise God had made long before, and every conjugal act between a husband and wife would illustrate the hope that God was working to restore creation and redeem all people (Engelbrecht 2009). As a pledge, or sign, of the covenant, circumcision pointed to something greater than merely the act itself. The Word – the promise of God – not the mere removal of flesh from the body, was the chief thing in circumcision (Engelbrecht 2009).

St. Paul correlates baptism with Old Testament circumcision. As a covenant sign, circumcision physically established the covenant and pointed to what God was doing in order to redeem us to himself. In Christ, however, the purpose of the covenant with Abraham (i.e. to be a blessing to all the families of the earth) was fulfilled. The new covenant is established with a different kind of circumcision – baptism (Engelbrecht 2009).

As the Bible sees it, baptism is not primarily a sign of repentance and faith on the part of the baptized. It is not a sign of anything that we do at all. It is a covenant sign (like circumcision, but without blood-shedding), and therefore a sign of the work of God on our behalf which precedes and makes possible our own responsive movement (Harrison, Bromiley and Henry 1990).

Certainly, based on what the Bible tells us about the nature of circumcision, and St. Paul’s correlation of circumcision with baptism, one is certainly justified in concluding that there is a Biblical basis for baptizing infants. This rite was performed on infants eight days old. It would be odd to refer to Baptism as the “circumcision of Christ” if Baptism of infants was to be forbidden while circumcision was given almost exclusively to infants. However, this is by no means the only reasoning for infant baptism. Babies, even before they are born as evidenced in the case of John the Baptist, are capable of faith by the working of the Holy Spirit. The work of God’s Holy Spirit is not limited by age, or anything else. The Holy Spirit works when and where he wills.

For he [John the Baptist] will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb…When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. And she cried out with a loud voice and said, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And how has it happened to me, that the mother of my Lord would come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy'" (Luke 1: 15, 41-44).

Children clearly have a part in God’s kingdom, and are not merely some sort of amoral being until they reach a nebulous “age of accountability”. Being born in the flesh, children have a sinful human nature. Along with that corrupt nature comes the inclination and desire to flee from God, and they therefore need the forgiveness that Christ offers in baptism, just as an unregenerate adult does. Scripture tells us that all people are sinful from the time of their birth[14]. St. Paul tells us in Romans 3: 23-24 that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. Christ distributes this grace to us in the sacrament of baptism, by the working of the Holy Spirit, and makes it possible for us to respond to him, though feebly[15]. In this way baptism is not unlike the defibrillator used by paramedics on a person whose heart has stopped beating; such a person is technically dead, and is powerless to make themselves alive again. Someone – a paramedic – must do something to them without their help to get their heart beating again. St. Paul tells us that we are dead in our transgressions. Through baptism, God takes us who were dead in our transgressions, and makes us alive in Christ.

Additionally, there are several reports in scripture where people bring their children to Christ to have him touch and bless them. Jesus warns against the danger of offending against little ones that believe in him, and in the same context says that to be Christians we have not to become adults but to become as children (Harrison, Bromiley and Henry 1990).

One such passage is in the Gospel of St. Mark:

People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them (Mark 10: 13-16).

St. Luke also writes:

People were also bringing babies to Jesus to have him touch them (Luke 18:15).

On the contrary, there is a long tradition in the church of baptizing children, derived from Scripture, dating back to apostolic times. Infant Baptism was common practice in the early church. Scripture lends support to this when it reports that the Apostles baptized entire families – some of which, at least, would normally include children. When entire families, and all indeed who belonged to them were baptized, it is probable that if there were a number of children in these families, the Apostles did not exclude them. More importantly, the Apostles could refer Jesus’ command to “let the little children come to me,” and to the rite of circumcision from the Old Testament. The fathers of the early church certainly debated the subject of infant baptism. However, the volume of writings in favor of infant baptism far outweighs those in opposition to the practice, from the second century to the time of the Apostolic Constitutions:

He came to save all persons by means of Himself – all, I say, who through Him are born again to God – infants, children, boys, youth, and old men[16]…Even to the greatest sinners and to those who have sinned much against God, when they subsequently believe, remission of sins is granted. Nobody is hindered from baptism and from grace. How much more should we shrink from hindering an infant. For he, being lately born, has not sinned – other than, in being born after the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of the ancient death at its earliest birth. For this reason, he more easily approaches the reception of the forgiveness of sins. For to him are remitted – not his own sins – but the sins of another. Therefore, dearest brother, this was our opinion in council that no one should be hindered by us from baptism and from the grace of God[17]…Baptize your infants also and bring them up in the nurture and admonition of God. For He says, “Allow the little children to come unto me and do not forbid them[18],” (Bercot 2002).

Baptism is not just plain water, but it is the water included in God’s command and combined with God’s word (Concordia Publishing House 1991). Through baptism, God receives people into fellowship with himself. Babies are to be baptized because they are included in the Savior’s command to baptize all nations. And, like all of mankind, a baby is, by nature, an object of wrath, prior to regeneration through faith in Christ. Thanks be to God that he has provided for mankind this means of grace by which he works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.

Stay tuned for part two.





Works Cited

Bercot, David W., ed. A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2002.

Concordia Publishing House. Luther's Small Catechism. Translated by Concordia Publishing House. Saint Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House, 1991.

Engelbrecht, Rev. Edward A., ed. The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2009.

Harrison, Everett F, Geoffrey W Bromiley, and Carl F Henry, . Wycliffe Dictionary of Theology. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1990.





End Notes

[1] Matthew 28:18-20
[2] 1 Peter 3:21
[3] Acts 2:38-39
[4] Romans 2:29
[5] Colossians 2:11-14
[6] Genesis 17:12
[7] 1 Corinthians 1:18
[8] Romans 8:7
[9] Genesis 6:5; Psalm 51:5
[10] 1 Corinthians 12:3
[11] Acts 2:38; 22:16
[12] Romans 6:3-5
[13] 1 Peter 3:21
[14] Psalm 51:5
[15] Galatians 3:27; Colossians 1:13-14; 1 Corinthians 6:11
[16] Irenaeus (c. 180 E/W), 1.391
[17] Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.354
[18] Apostolic Constitutions (compiled c. 390, E) 7.457

The Circumcision of Christ

In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of you flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross (Colossians 2:11-14).

A rite of passage is generally defined as a ritual marking a person’s coming-of-age in a culture, or marking one’s passage from one phase of life or status into another. There are many rites of passage in our modern society. When you’re five years old, you get to go to Kindergarten and begin your formal education. Many parents become misty-eyed when they take their child for his or her first haircut. I don’t know a mother who does not choke up just a little bit when they talk about when their baby lost that first tooth. Some of them even still have that memento secreted away in a memory box somewhere as a reminder of when their baby was a “baby”. In the United States age 16 is marked by many teenagers’ most important coming-of-age ritual – the driver’s license. At 18 years we take a couple more important steps down the road to adulthood when we become eligible to vote and boys are required to register for the draft (though that particular rite of passage is significant only with previous generations of Americans). In America, however, the magic age is 21. That is when our society finally views people as an adult. At 21 a person can drink alcohol, they can drive a car (preferably not at the same time, or in close proximity with one another), and they can enjoy most all the privileges of a full-fledged adult in our society. At 21 you are an adult, though there may still be quite a bit of maturing to be done.

There are many religious rites of passage as well. In Judaism, boys (at age 13) and girls (at age 12) reach bar/bat mitzvah. Prior to bar/bat mitzvah, a child’s parents are considered responsible for their child’s actions. After this age, children bear their own responsibility for Jewish ritual law, tradition, and ethics and are able to participate in all areas of Jewish community life (Bar and Bat Mitzvah, 2012). Some Christian denominations equate Christian baptism with bar/bat mitzvah. Many denominations believe that baptism should only be administered to those individuals who have reached what is generally termed as an age of accountability, when the child has matured to the point that they have become morally responsible and are able to profess their faith in Jesus. Consequently, a child who has not reached the age of accountability is not capable of sinning, and thus not guilty of sin. Only after a child has become morally accountable is a child able to commit actual sins; that is when they become guilty of sin. Dr. Steve Lemke, Provost of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary and Professor of Philosophy and Ethics, wrote the following:

It is believer’s baptism, however, that provides the most significant reason to affirm the “age of accountability.” Believer’s baptism is a core belief of Baptists (there’s a reason that we are called Baptists!). The early Baptists were called “Anabaptists” because they believed that the infant baptism they had received was unscriptural, and they were baptized again upon their profession of faith in Christ. The denial of infant baptism has been a defining issue for Baptists throughout their history… Baptist confessions tend not to use the term “original sin” (it is in none of the versions of the Baptist Faith and Message), and two early Baptist confessions explicitly deny it. Baptists do believe that we children of Adam “inherit a nature and an environment inclined toward sin,” but it is not until we become “transgressors” ourselves that we come under guilt and condemnation (Baptist Faith and Message, Article 3). So while we believe in an inherited sin nature, we do not believe in inherited guilt. It is the belief in inherited guilt that leads those in the Reformed tradition toward the necessity for infant baptism (Lemke, 2010).

Baptism is thus likened to a rite of passage into moral accountability for denominations who believe similarly, not unlike the Jewish practice of bar/bat mitzvah. Scripture does compare baptism to an ancient practice of Judaism. Baptism is not, however, compared to bar/bat mitzvah in the Bible; it is likened to the practice of circumcision. St. Paul, in the passage from Colossians quoted above, calls baptism, “the circumcision of Christ.” In good Lutheran fashion I ask, “What does this mean?” To understand what St. Paul means by his comparison, we have to know a little bit about circumcision as it is presented in the Old Testament.

And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant (Genesis 17:9-14).

Today in the United States circumcision is performed routinely in hospitals when a male child is born. The practice has little to do with religious faith, and is heavily debated between those who support the practice for medical and hygienic reasons, and those who decry the practice as mutilation and an infringement on individual liberty. The purpose of circumcision as instituted by God in the book of Genesis, however, was to be a mark of his covenant with Abraham. God had promised to send a savior to redeem mankind after the Fall, and he promised that savior would be the seed of Abraham. By the removal of the foreskin, males received a visible sign of this promise that God would send a Savior, born of a woman. No Hebrew male could live a day without being reminded of the promise God had made long before, and every conjugal act between a husband and wife would illustrate the hope that God was working to restore creation and redeem all people (Engelbrecht, 2009). As a pledge, or sign, of the covenant, circumcision pointed to something greater than merely the act itself. The Word – the promise of God – not the mere removal of flesh from the body, was the chief thing in circumcision (Engelbrecht, 2009).

St. Paul is correct in correlating baptism with Old Testament circumcision. As a covenant sign, circumcision physically established the covenant and pointed to what God was doing in order to redeem us to himself. In Christ, however, the purpose of the covenant with Abraham (i.e. to be a blessing to all the families of the earth) was fulfilled. The new covenant is established with a different kind of circumcision – baptism (Engelbrecht, 2009).

As the Bible sees it, baptism is not primarily a sign of repentance and faith on the part of the baptized. It is not a sign of anything that we do at all. It is a covenant sign (like circumcision, but without blood-shedding), and therefore a sign of the work of God on our behalf which precedes and makes possible our own responsive movement (Harrison, Bromiley, & Henry, 1999).

Certainly, based on what the Bible tells us about the nature of circumcision, and St. Paul’s correlation of circumcision with baptism, one is certainly justified in concluding that there is a Biblical basis for baptizing infants. This rite was performed on infants eight days old. It would be odd to refer to Baptism as the “circumcision of Christ” if Baptism of infants was to be forbidden while circumcision was given almost exclusively to infants. However, this is by no means the only reasoning for infant baptism. Babies, even before they are born as evidenced in the case of John the Baptist, are capable of faith by the working of the Holy Spirit. The work of God’s Holy Spirit is not limited by age, or anything else. The Holy Spirit works when and where he wills.

For he [John the Baptist] will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb…When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. And she cried out with a loud voice and said, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And how has it happened to me, that the mother of my Lord would come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy'" (Luke 1: 15, 41-44).

Children clearly have a part in God’s kingdom, and are not merely some sort of amoral being until they reach a nebulous “age of accountability”. Being born in the flesh, children have a sinful human nature. Along with that corrupt nature comes the inclination and desire to flee from God, and they therefore need the forgiveness that Christ offers in baptism, just as an unregenerate adult does. Scripture tells us that all people are sinful from the time of their birth[1]. St. Paul tells us in Romans 3: 23-24 that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. Christ distributes this grace to us in the sacrament of baptism, by the working of the Holy Spirit, and makes it possible for us to respond to him, though feebly[2]. In this way baptism is not unlike the defibrillator used by paramedics on a person whose heart has stopped beating; such a person is technically dead, and is powerless to make themselves alive again. Someone – a paramedic – must do something to them without their help to get their heart beating again. St. Paul tells us that we are dead in our transgressions[3]. Through baptism, God takes us who were dead in our transgressions, and makes us alive in Christ.

Additionally, there are several reports in scripture where people bring their children to Christ to have him touch and bless them. Jesus warns against the danger of offending against little ones that believe in him, and in the same context says that to be Christians we have not to become adults but to become as children (Harrison, Bromiley, & Henry, 1999). One such passage is in the Gospel of St. Mark:

People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them (Mark 10: 13-16).

St. Luke also writes:

People were also bringing babies to Jesus to have him touch them (Luke 18:15).

On the contrary, there is a long tradition in the church of baptizing children, derived from Scripture, dating back to apostolic times. Infant Baptism was common practice in the early church. Scripture lends support to this when it reports that the Apostles baptized entire families – some of which, at least, would normally include children[4]. When entire families, and all indeed who belonged to them were baptized, it is probable that if there were a number of children in these families, the Apostles did not exclude them. More importantly, the Apostles could refer Jesus’ command to “let the little children come to me,” to the rite of circumcision from the Old Testament. The fathers of the early church certainly debated the subject of infant baptism. However, the volume of writings in favor of infant baptism far outweighs those in opposition to the practice, from the second century to the time of the Apostolic Constitutions:

He came to save all persons by means of Himself – all, I say, who through Him are born again to God – infants, children, boys, youth, and old men[5]…Even to the greatest sinners and to those who have sinned much against God, when they subsequently believe, remission of sins is granted. Nobody is hindered from baptism and from grace. How much more should we shrink from hindering an infant. For he, being lately born, has not sinned – other than, in being born after the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of the ancient death at its earliest birth. For this reason, he more easily approaches the reception of the forgiveness of sins. For to him are remitted – not his own sins – but the sins of another. Therefore, dearest brother, this was our opinion in council that no one should be hindered by us from baptism and from the grace of God[6]…Baptize your infants also and bring them up in the nurture and admonition of God. For He says, “Allow the little children to come unto me and do not forbid them[7],” (Bercot, 1998).

Baptism is not just plain water, but it is the water included in God’s command and combined with God’s word (Luther, 1986). Through baptism, God receives people into fellowship with himself. Babies are to be baptized because they are included in the Savior’s command to baptize all nations[8]. And, like all of mankind, a baby is, by nature, an object of wrath, prior to regeneration through faith in Christ[9]. Thanks be to God that he has provided for mankind this means of grace by which he works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare[10].

Works Cited

Bar and Bat Mitzvah. (2012, April 27). Retrieved April 27, 2012, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_and_Bat_Mitzvah

Bercot, D. W. (Ed.). (1998). A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs. Peabody, Massachusetts, USA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.

Engelbrecht, E. A. (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible, English Standard Version. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Harrison, E. F., Bromiley, G. W., & Henry, C. F. (Eds.). (1999). Wycliffe Dictionary of Theology. Peabody, Massachusetts, USA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.

Lemke, D. S. (2010, July 26). Age of Accountability. Retrieved April 26, 2012, from Southern Baptist in NC: http://rebekah1.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/age-of-accountability/

Luther, D. M. (1986). Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House.

End Notes

[1] Psalm 51:5

[2] 1 Corinthians 6:11

[3] Ephesians 2:5

[4] Acts 16:15, 33

[5] Irenaeus (c. 180, E/W), 1.391

[6] Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.354

[7] Apostolic Constitutions (compiled c. 390, E), 7.457

[8] Matthew 28:19

[9] Ephesians 2:3

[10] Acts 2:38; 22:16; Romans 6:3, 5; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 1:13-14; Mark 16:16; 1 Peter 3:21; Titus 3:5

Can Infants Believe? Thoughts on Infant Baptism



Presentation of the infant Jesus at the Temple.



We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may have new life (Romans 6:4).

Some who teach that there is no merit in baptism other than being a symbolic act use this parable to illustrate their point:

A certain man thought that by being immersed he could find salvation. A friend of his had quite a time explaining to him that it was not so. But this man insisted that, as water could purify the body, so water consecrated by a minister or priest would purify the soul. Finally, to demonstrate that baptism did not mean regeneration, the friend decided upon an object lesson.

“Here,” he said. “I take an ink bottle, cork it tight, put a string round the neck, and drag it through the river. How long will it take to clean out the inside?” The answer was obvious, “You will never in the world clean it out that way.” We must understand once and for all that no outward act will ever cleanse us within. Repentance is an act that takes place within us, while baptism is an outward act that demonstrates to the world what has already happened in our hearts. Thus, neither John the Baptist nor anyone else in the New Testament speaks of “repentance of baptism” but of “baptism of repentance.” Baptism depends upon and is caused by repentance and not vice versa. It does not make sense for the unrepentant to be baptized.

Continuing with this line of reasoning, baptism is merely a symbolic act. It cannot save an adult, let alone an infant, who cannot profess its faith. However, Holy Scripture paints a different picture for us. While infant baptism is not expressly mentioned in Scripture, it is supported by several passages in the New Testament. Further, as for the idea that children and infants cannot have faith in Christ until they reach an “age of accountability”, Scripture shows us that this is clearly untrue, and that infants are capable of receiving God’s blessings:

For he [John the Baptist] will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb…When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. And she cried out with a loud voice and said, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And how has it happened to me, that the mother of my Lord would come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy'" (Luke 1: 14, 41-44).

There are several reports in scripture where people bring their children to Christ to have him touch and bless them. One such passage is in the Gospel of St. Mark:

People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them (Mark 10: 13-16).

Our Lord clearly indicates that children have a part in the kingdom of God. St. Luke also gives us some insight into this event as well in his Gospel, by identifying the age group of some of the children that were brought to Jesus. St. Luke writes:

People were also bringing babies to Jesus to have him touch them (Luke 18:15).

Again, children clearly have a part in God’s kingdom. Not only that, being born in the flesh, children have a sinful human nature, and need the forgiveness that Christ offers in baptism. Scripture tells us that all people are sinful from the time of their birth. “…for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus,” St. Paul tells us in Romans 3: 23-24. Christ distributes this grace to us in the sacrament of baptism. The psalmist also tells us:

Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me (Psalm 51:5).

Those that would argue that children are not sinners but are righteous and innocent, and that as long as they have not achieved the use of reason they will be saved in this innocence without baptism, not only reject the idea of original sin, but also teach contrary to the Word of God.

On the contrary, there is a long tradition in the church of baptizing children, derived from Scripture, dating back to apostolic times. Infant Baptism was common practice in the early church. Scripture lends support to this when it reports that the Apostles baptized entire families – some of which, at least, would normally include children. One example is the conversion of Lydia in Acts:

When she [Lydia] and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. “If you consider me a believer in the Lord,” she said, “come and stay at my house.” And she persuaded us (Acts 16:15).

Again in Acts we are told:

At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his family were baptized (Acts 16:33).

When entire families, and all indeed who belonged to them were baptized, it is probable that if there were a number of children in these families, the Apostles did not exclude them. Not only that, the Apostles could refer Jesus’ command to “let the little children come to me,” to the rite of circumcision from the Old Testament. This rite of initiation was performed on infants eight days old. It would be odd to refer to Baptism as the “circumcision of Christ” if Baptism of infants was to be forbidden while circumcision was given almost exclusively to infants.

In Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with Him in Baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead (Colossians 2:11-12).

Baptism is a counterpart of sorts to Old Testament circumcision. Circumcision was a sign of God’s covenant, establishing his people[1]. After having been circumcised, no Hebrew male could live a day without being reminded of God’s promise to send a savior. It was a physical sign connected to a spiritual reality by the promise of God. A baby did not choose to be circumcised; it was administered on the eighth day after birth. In Christ, God’s promise to bless all people through Abraham has been fulfilled[2]. The new covenant has now been established with a new circumcision, one made without hands – baptism.

In the story of the ink bottle, one must suppose that the ink bottle that is stopped tightly with a cork represents man, and the ink contained within represents the stain of sin. The story is correct that no amount of water could wash the ink out as long as the stopper remained in place. However, the author overlooks two important things: First, the ink bottle cannot remove its own stopper. Some outside force must do that. Man is powerless to come to God of his own decision[3]. On the contrary, we are all called by the Gospel, and God creates faith in us by the power of the Holy Spirit. He distributes the gift of salvation to us that Christ won on the cross through baptism – in effect, removing the “stopper” of our sinful human nature and washing away the ink stain of our original sin.

Second, the water of baptism is not simply water, but, in the words of Martin Luther, “the word of God in and with the water,” that does these things. Without God’s word, Luther says, the water is plain water and no baptism. However, with the word of God it is a baptism, that is, a life giving water, rich in grace and a washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit:

He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying (Titus 3: 5-8).

Thanks be to God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, for baptism, which works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.

End Notes

[1] Genesis 17:9


[2] Genesis 12:3


[3] 1 Corinthians 2:14; Romans 8:7; Ephesians 2:8-9