From The Australian Free Presbyterian: July, 1953.

BEFORE we enter into the consideration of the objections of the antipaedobaptists to the Sacrament of Baptism being administered to infants of believing parents, we desire it to be clearly understood that we recognise as fellow-Christians all who trust in Christ for their salvation, but maintain that their Christian profession is imperfect in proportion as they depart from the doctrines of Holy Scripture. While drastic means may be necessary to expose error, such means should not be used to measure our Christian affection to the household of faith.

The Sacrament of Baptism administered to infants of believing parents is vigorously rejected by the antipaedobaptists (pedo, meaning infant). The Reformed Churches are charged with "perpetuating a lie." Dr. T. T. Shields, of the Independent Baptist Church of Canada, condemns such reformers as John Calvin and John Knox, for carrying the "curse of infant baptism" into the Reformed Church. Such strong language is born of ignorance, and is maintained by a misrepresentation of the Holy Scriptures; and, while it is the common boast of the antipaedobaptists that they believe the Bible to be the very Word of God, they repudiate its instruction by remaining silent on those Scriptures that do not support their own peculiar ideas. In support of the above charge, we shall consider some of the objections raised by the antipaedobaptists.

The antipaedobaptists object to the rite of Baptism being administered to children, because they are incapable of conscious experience, and therefore cannot exercise faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. We would ask the following question: Seeing that faith is the recognition of Christ as Saviour and Lord, and that "faith is the gift of God," why cannot infants recognise Christ as Lord and Saviour?

We are told that the whole question is unreasonable, as the child is incapable of conscious experience. We are not dealing with human reason, but Divine revelation. We are interested in what God has revealed and not what the antipaedobaptist thinks or the conclusions of human reason; therefore, we are not prepared to substitute the reasonings of the antipaedobaptists for the Inspired Word of God. "Nothing is more senseless than the attempt to modify the results of the inspiration of Jehovah in conformity with human reason." (Hodge.)

The Holy Scripture reveals emphatically and conclusively that an infant is capable of recognising Christ as Saviour and Lord. If we turn to 1st Chapter of Luke's Gospel, we find the unborn John recognised his yet unborn Lord and Saviour. "When Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb," and Elizabeth, being "filled with the Holy Ghost," said, "the babe leaped for joy."

The antipaedobaptists inform us that such a thing is impossible; as the unborn John was incapable of conscious experience. But the Holy Spirit declares that the recognition actually occurred, and we are prepared to accept the Word of God rather than the reasoning of men. We believe and are persuaded that all things are possible with God. It should be remembered that the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit is hidden from human observation (John 3: 8.) The Angel of the Lord, speaking to Zacharias concerning John the Baptist, said, "and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost; even from his mother's womb." (Luke 1: 15.) In the light of this text alone, the proselyting activities of the antipaedobaptists stand condemned so far as the above objection is concerned, that "infants of believing parents should be refused the rights of membership in the Church of Jesus Christ because they are incapable of conscious experience."

In the 2nd Book of Samuel, 12th Chapter, we have an account of the death of David's infant son, and in the 23rd Verse the words of David are recorded. "But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me." If David is to be reunited with his son, it must be in heaven, and his infant son could only enter into heaven by the sacrificial death of Christ, and the regeneration by the Holy Spirit. David, speaking by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, makes it quite emphatic that he would go to be with his son. The antipaedobaptists forbid David's son from passing through the gates into the City of God, because he was "incapable of conscious experience."

Infants, as well as adults, need to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit before the gift of God, which is eternal life, can be realised. Paul, writing to the Romans, says, "Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression." The reference to "those who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression" is to infants. To quote Dr. Chalmers on the text: "Death reigned even over infants who were incapable of sinning as Adam did when the appetite prevailed in its contest with the sense of known duty, and with the fear of known consequences." The text makes it clear that infants as well as adults are wholly dependent upon the sufficiency of the sacrificial death of Christ for salvation; for "death reigned over them."

The antipaedobaptists must reject the clear statement of God's Word if they lay the charge of actual sin against infants. Infants cannot be Covenant Breakers. When God makes known the Covenant of Grace through His servant, Peter, saying, "The Promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." (Acts 2: 39), it is abundantly clear that the children of believing parents are embraced in the promise, and infants present on the occasion of Peter's sermon were undoubtedly baptised with their parents and received into the membership of the Church.

The favourite text of the antipaedobaptists is Mark 16: 16: "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved"; and the usual course of their argument is that infants are incapable of conscious experience, therefore they are incapable of believing, and should not be baptised; as believing is essential to baptism. But, as usual, they remain silent on the remaining part of the text, which reads: "but he that believeth not shall be damned"; thus, according to the reasoning of the antipaedobaptists, all children dying in infancy are damned. To quote the Rev. Malcolm MacKay: "Now let us turn the reasoning of the baptists upon themselves. They say, infants cannot believe, therefore they must not be baptised, but the verse continues, 'he that believeth not shall be damned.' Infants cannot believe, therefore they shall be damned."

This is indeed a pernicious doctrine, for which there is not the slightest evidence in Holy Writ; it is purely a human invention. According to this doctrine, God is dependent upon the child reaching the state of conscious experience before He can save the child; thus making God subject to the individual's mental development; and the antipaedobaptists, on this ground, refuse children membership in the Church of Jesus Christ.

The sacrificial death of Christ has made provision for all the little children that will adorn the streets of New Jerusalem; those who died in infancy and had not "sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," even as David declared concerning his own son.

The Lord Jesus Christ confirms all that has been said concerning the regeneration of little children. Our Lord was "much displeased" with His disciples when they sought to hinder those who brought the little children to Him, and said, "Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of God." When the little infants were brought to Christ, it implies faith on the part of the parents that brought them. Our Lord did not preach to the little children; He did not wait until they made a profession of faith, but He received them, "And He took them up in His arms, and put His hands upon them, and blessed them." (Mark 10: 16.) The blessing of Christ is regeneration. Christ not only received the little children as members of His Church, but declared, "Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein." The Lord anticipates the objection of the antipaedobaptists, on the ground that a little child should not be received into the membership of the Church of Christ, because the infant is incapable of conscious experience; as in Luke 18: 15, the Greek word used is "Brephe" meaning "Little Infant."

For further Scriptural evidence against the antipaedobaptists' objection that an infant should not be received into the membership of the Church because the infant is incapable of conscious experience, we would direct our readers' attention to Isaac, whose regeneration was assured while the aged Sarah laughed within herself. For God said unto Abraham: "In Isaac shall thy seed be called." And Paul states that, "Isaac was the son of promise." (Gal. 4: 23.) To Jacob, whom Rebekah knew was the favoured of the Lord, before he was born, "the elder shall serve the younger." (Gen. 25: 23.) To Joseph, and the revelation made known to him while he was yet a child. (Gen. 37.) To Moses, hid for three months by his parents, by faith. (Heb. 11: 23.) To Samuel, whose regeneration was assured while his mother yet prayed to God for a son. "And Eli answered and said, go in peace, and the God of Israel grant thee thy petition that thou hast asked of Him." The Inspired Word informs us that "Samuel ministered before the Lord, being a child." "And the child Samuel grew on, and was in favour both with the Lord and also with men." (Ist Samuel 2: 26.) To John the Baptist, who was "filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb." (Luke 1: 15.)

The Sacrament of Baptism is the sign and seal of membership in Christ's body, which is the Church; and little children embraced in the Covenant Promise of God are entitled to the sign and seal of the Covenant. It is not only unjust, but a violation of trust, on the part of believing parents (whose children come within the Covenant Promise) to deny their children the status of membership in Christ's Church on earth; such an act must be accompanied with great spiritual loss to the parents and their children, regardless of how devoted the parents may be, their children are, by the attitude of the parents, left with the impression that they are outside the Church of the Living God and therefore strangers and foreigners to the Covenant of Promise. To leave such an impression in the mind of a child is contrary to the Spirit of Christ, who said, "Suffer little children to come unto Me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of God."

We feel that sufficient has been said, and sufficient references to the Holy Scriptures given, that those who have held the objection that infants must be refused the sign and seal of the Covenant in Baptism, on the ground that such infants are incapable of conscious experience, must withdraw their objection or stand opposed to the Inspired Word of God.