Three views on Baptism

Recently (like four days ago) I submitted an assignment for my class on the different views of baptism. Some friends have asked to read it so I thought I would post it here:

                 Baptism and the Lord’s Supper remain a vital part of every Christian denomination. However, baptism remains one of the most controversial and practical doctrines. Defining baptism is important to a correct understanding of the sacrament and the theological implications of this doctrine. The three most popular views of baptism are baptismal regeneration, baptism as a sign and seal of the covenant, and baptism as a token of salvation. Adherents to baptism as a means of saving grace include traditional Catholics and Lutherans. Baptismal regeneration is the belief that God uses baptism as a way to impart saving grace (Erickson 1998, 1100). Through water baptism a sinner is bought from death to life. When infants are baptized in the Lutheran church, they possess an unconscious faith. Their argument focuses on faith not requiring power and self-consciousness for belief (Erickson 1998, 1001). They believe  baptism relates to ones view of salvation. Doctrinal issues such as original sin (Romans 3:23, 5:12-21) and justification are crucial in this discussion. Ephesians 2: 1-4 explicitly states that humans are dead in their sin. Just as a dead person cannot respond, neither can a spiritually dead person. Scripture does not teach that baptism removes the effects of original sin (neither does prevenient grace). The New Testament authors teach that justification comes from the death of Jesus, through faith in Christ alone not through water baptism (Romans 5:6-11).

                

The second major view of baptism believes baptism is a sign and seal of the covenant. This position is held by the traditional Reformed and Presbyterian churches. Theologians and scholars who hold to this view of baptism believe it is the act where individuals are bought into covenant family (Erickson 1998, 1102). Proponents of this view link the covenant relationship between God and the nation of Israel to believers in the New Covenant era. Circumcision is now replaced by baptism as evidence Christians are the real people of God. The Bible does teach that baptism replaces circumcision in the New Covenant era (Col 2: 11-14); however, the baptism referred to is regeneration or spiritual baptism not water baptism. A changed life or new birth is now the visible evidence of God’s people. The emphasis of this method is infant baptism. Again, their argument of infant baptism can be traced back to the sign of the covenant in Genesis 17:10-11. “Baptism has been substituted for circumcision as the initiatory rite into the covenant” (Erickson 1998. 1103). Proponents of baptism as the seal of the covenant refer to verses such as Acts 16:31-33 as biblical proof. However, the Bible does not explicitly teach infants should be baptized to receive the benefits of the covenant. There is no example of an infant baptized in Scripture.

                

This stance views baptism as an outward symbol of inward change in the believer.  Those that hold to this view of baptism are typically Baptist. In order to receive baptism a person must show signs of conversion which are repentance of sin and spiritual fruit (Erickson 1998, 1106). After responding to the Gospel, a person would then receive water baptism as a symbol of belief (Romans 6:1-4). According to this view, infants would not receive baptism. Scripture references to support their stance include Matthew 3:7-8, 28:18-20 and Acts 2:37-41. While the mode of baptism is not specifically taught in Scripture, the majority who practice this view baptize using the mode of immersion.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Book House, 1998.