Baby baptism

Reformed theologians may believe in the baby baptism. They may prove this using the birth covenant idea and by saying that not much has changed between the old and new covenant. Evangelicals, on the other hand, may disagree.

"NOT MUCH HAS CHANGED"

Reformed theologians may quote Acts 2:39 in the New Testament. They could use this as an example to show not much has changed in the New Testament. Acts 2:39 says: "The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call."

Evangelicals may dispute this. They may say that this verse does not mean that in the new covenant God goes to work in the same way as in the old covenant.

Instead, they would argue that the promise of Acts 2 is about something else. According to them, Acts 2:33 needs to be read in the proper context.

Rather, it is about the promise of the Holy Spirit. And that Acts 2:38 is also about the promise of the Holy Spirit. The filling with the Holy Spirit. The people saw tongues as of fire and they started to speak in other tongues.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED THERE?

Verse 6 says that people heard the noise and came to see what was happening. And they each heard each other speaking in their own language. And then Petrus started speaking to them.

He said, "That which you see and hear is the promise; the filling; or the baptism of in the Holy Spirit." The reformed world would not agree that the Holy Spirit is a completely different subject than the baptism in water or the conversion.

Reformed theologians, on the other hand, would say that this text proves their point. The promise of the baptism in the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues applies to little babies who have to get baptised.

Evangelicals may argue that this is not valid however, because this is a text about the Holy Spirit and the filling and other tongues. This practice is in any case almost or entirely missing from reformed churches.

Evangelicals may argue that the lens of an automatic birth covenant causes one to interpret this text incorrectly.

That this promise does not have anything to do with the establishment of a covenant as God did with Abraham. But that that promise is exclusively and only connected to what is happening there in that chapter.

👍 👎 👊 ✊ 🤛 🤜
I OFTEN POST ABOUT MARITIME SHIPPING, POLITICS, AND LANGUAGES. UPVOTE, RESTEEM, COMMENT, AND/OR FOLLOW ME IF YOU LIKE THIS TYPE OF CONTENT!
👍 👎 👊 ✊ 🤛 🤜