Monday, January 16, 2006know what you stand against...
In his great book Chosen by God, which was instrumental in my "conversion" to Calvinism, R.C. Sproul relates a story from his friend John Gerstner. The story takes place at a Presbyterian church where the baptism of infants were to take place. Dr. Gerstner explained to an elder of the church that the purpose of infant baptism was one "of washing away the sin of innocent babies".
You see, Dr. Gerstner, R.C. Sproul, J.I. Packer and many other Reformed authors view baptism as the New Testament equivalent of circumcision. They believe that it is a sign of the New Covenant. This view is nothing new, Calvin and most of the early reformers professed this view of baptism. Covenant/Amillenial theology, the Doctrines of Grace, and Infant Baptism are the three major doctrines that form what is commonly called "Reformed Theology".
Considering all this, dear readers, I have a question for you all. Most prominent Calvinists also profess infant baptism, they are "Reformed". R.C. Sproul in a book on the Doctrines of Grace makes sure to mention the practice of infant baptism as a biblical practice. John Calvin himself, the man from which the label Calvinist came from believed in infant baptism.
Can a Calvinist (one who believes in the 5 Doctrines of Grace), reject infant baptism and still be consistent in his/her theology? Or is he/she living with contradictions?
My 0.02$ on this soon...