What is the case for believer's baptism? I posted the arguments in favor of infant baptism a while back and I said then, that in time, I would attempt to take the side of those who advocate what has been dubbed "believers baptism." I don't think the term believers baptism is a good one. So I will recant of my usage. From here on out I will refer to it as the Baptist position in contrast to the Paedobaptist position.
What is the conviction of those who hold to a baptist position?
- Baptism is a sign of the death, burial, and Resurrection of Christ. It pictures outwardly what has taken place inwardly on behalf of the new convert (Rom. 6:3-4; Col. 2:12). It is assumed that those who are baptized have "Put on Christ (Gal. 3:27)." With this said, it is argued that baptism by immersion is the best practice and should be the only practice of baptism. The Greek word seems to carry the idea of full immersion.
- As we comb the New Testament in search of a biblical answer what we see is those who make a believable profession of faith are typically the ones baptized.
- Baptism is a visible entrance into the true church.
- Quoting Dr. Wayne Grudem from his book Systematic Theology, he says, "In the New Testament church, the only question that matters is whether one has saving faith and has been spiritually incorporated into the body of Christ, the true Church...The means of entrance into the church is voluntary, spiritual, and internal. One becomes a member of the true church by being born again and by having saving faith, not by physical birth."
In my next post I will focus on "shooting down" the position of the Paedobaptist. Will it hold up under fire? We'll see.