The Reformed Churches Confess Infant Baptism

Some years back I published a book review in the pages of Modern Reformation magazine. Some responded with a letter to the editor complaining that I had distinguished between the Reformed churches and the Baptist churches. My revised response is below. § . . . Continue reading →

Did The Covenant Of Grace Begin In The New Covenant?

One frequently reads that the only real differences between Particular Baptists and the Reformed is over baptism. That claim, however, misses some fundamental differences. Baptists withhold the rite of covenant initiation from the children of believers on the ground that the New . . . Continue reading →

What Advantage Has The Jew? Much In Every Way.

A correspondent to the HB writes to ask, “According to Paul, who are Abraham’s children?” In one way or another, I get this question frequently. Most American evangelicals have been taught some version of Dispensational theology or are otherwise influenced by it . . . Continue reading →

Turretin Answers Objections To Infant Baptism (9)

XXVI. What is said by some (“Infants are baptized in the faith of their parents”) does not mean that what is in adults is imputed to infants or answers for infants; both because each one lives by his own faith and because . . . Continue reading →

Turretin Answers Objections To Infant Baptism (8)

XXI. Baptism (with respect to true believers) seals saving grace because it is connected with the internal baptism of the Spirit. But with respect to hypocrites, it does not have the accompanying grace of the Spirit, but is only a badge of . . . Continue reading →

Turretin Answers Objections To Infant Baptism (7)

XVIII. The cause of infant baptism is not the actual faith of infants, of which they are no more capable than of that instruction by which the disciples of Christ are taught (Mt. 28:19). But it is both the universal command to . . . Continue reading →

Turretin Answers Objections To Infant Baptism (6)

XII. There was no need that a particular precept concerning the baptism of infants should be given because it was known to the disciples that infants were circumcised. It therefore sufficed that there was a general command to baptize all nations, under . . . Continue reading →

Turretin Answers Objections To Infant Baptism (5)

XI. (7) Because the fathers acknowledged the necessity of infant baptism and approved its propriety by their practice. Justin Martyr mentions it (“Quaestiones et Responsiones ad Orthodoxos,” Q. 56 in Opera quae feruntur omnia [ed. J.C.T. de Otto, 1881], v. 3, Pt. . . . Continue reading →

Circumcision Was Always About The Necessity Of Regeneration

HB reader Allan writes, The NT apostolic doctrine is that OT circumcision of the flesh is replaced by NT circumcision of the heart. I have not found them saying it is replaced by baptism. Allan, Circumcision was always a sign of what . . . Continue reading →

Turretin Answers Objections To Infant Baptism (4)

IX. (5) Because the children of believers are holy; therefore they ought to be baptized. For since they have the thing signified, they cannot and ought not to be deprived of the sign (Acts 10:47). “The unbelieving wife,” says the apostle, “is . . . Continue reading →

Turretin Answers Objections Against Infant Baptism (2)

VI. To no purpose is the reply: (1) “Hence it would follow that the Lord’s Supper should also be administered to infants because the thing signified belongs to them.” Although the same thing is signified in both, still there is a difference . . . Continue reading →