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 →
Paedobaptism
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 (3)
VII. (3) By parity, the necessity of baptism is the same as that of circumcision. Now circumcision was to be administered to infants according to the command of God. Therefore also infant baptism. The truth of the major is proved (a) because . . . 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 →
Turretin Answers Objections Against Infant Baptism (1)
IV. Nor ought it to be objected that Christ puts instruction before baptism and so speaks of adults, who can be instructed, and not of infants (“teach [μαθητεύσατε],” he says). Although Christ placed teaching before baptism, this must be referred to the . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 119: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (14)
This series has really been about how to interpret Scripture. Christians study the same Bible, but we often read it differently. Sometimes we begin with different assumptions about the nature of things and authority. These different methods and starting points lead to . . . Continue reading →
Hodge: Abraham Was In A Spiritual, Gracious Covenant
Although the Church existed from the beginning, it was, before the calling of Abraham, for the most part in a state of dispersion. Too little is recorded of it, prior to that event, to give us definite knowledge of its nature and . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 118: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (13)
With this episode now we dive into the question of baptism itself. So far we have been setting the stage because, from the historic, confessional Reformed point of view, the debate about infant baptism is really a debate about how to understand . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 116: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (12)
We are just about ready to immerse ourselves, as it were, in the question of baptism but we have at least one more thing to discuss before we get to baptism and that is this: what is baptism? In the Reformed tradition, . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 115: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (11)
In this episode we see that the benefits of the New Covenant are the benefits of the covenant of grace. There are some who see a strong discontinuity between the promises made to Abraham and the new covenant promised Jeremiah 31. There . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 114: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (10)
In the last episode, in this episode and in the next, we’re looking at what Scripture says about the new covenant. We’ve looked at what Jeremiah 31:31-34 actually says, how Paul interprets it, and now we want to turn our attention to . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 111: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (7)
This is episode 7 of our series: I will be a God to You and to Your Children. For the last two episodes we have been thinking about what is temporary and what is permanent in the history of redemption. We have . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 110: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (6)
This is episode 6 of our series: I will be a God to You and to Your Children. Last time we began looking at how types and shadows help us sort out what, in the history of redemption, is temporary and what . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 108: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (4)
This is part 4 of the series: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children. Last time we considered whether it’s right to speak of a “covenant of grace.” We saw that, from the very beginning of redemptive history, . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 107: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (3)
Last time we looked at some of the challenges we face in learning how to interpret Scripture properly and how the Ancient Christian Churches and the Reformed churches read the Scriptures, with Christ at the center. One way to understand this unity . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 106: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (2)
This is part 2 of the series: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children. We’re talking about how to read the Scriptures, about what Scripture says about the covenant of grace, its administration, and baptism. One of the . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 105: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children (1)
One of the most frequent topics and questions for discussion on the Heidelblog has been this: Who should be baptized and why? To anticipate an objection: some will say that the Heidelcast should not be addressing this subject because it causes needless . . . Continue reading →
Zwingli On Sacramentarians And Infant Baptism (1529)
Others, like the sacramentarians, (those are justly called sacramentarians, who attribute to the sacraments what they do not contain, and by high-sounding but false and made-up promises, lead men away from simple trust in the one God to belief in the power . . . Continue reading →