Why We Left Lutheranism--Infant Baptism
Aug 17, 2001 -
© Claude A. Guild & John L. Hoh, Jr.
Lutherans teach baptism takes the place of circumcision in the Old Testament. "In the Old Testament, circumcision was the sacrament of initiation. It was administered to the boy babies when they were eight days of age. If God could make a covenant with a baby in the Old Testament, certainly He can and does do the same thing in this new dispensation. Accordingly, we conclude that since baptism has taken the place of circumcision, babies should be baptized" (What Lutherans Believe, p. 141). This like a lot of other vital issues isn't a question of what God could and should do, but what He has willed to do! If God didn't legislate baptism in the place of circumcision we act without divine authority when we baptize babies. This question has never been answered by Lutheran ministers: If baptism takes the place of circumcision, and they say it does, only boy babies were circumcised; why do the Lutherans baptize the girl babies? This has long been a point of contention between Lutherans and the Reformed. Should babies be baptized? What is the essence of baptism? Again, a careful study of the text is in order.
The copyright of the article Why We Left Lutheranism--Infant Baptism in Lutheranism is owned by Claude A. Guild & John L. Hoh, Jr.. Permission to republish Why We Left Lutheranism--Infant Baptism in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
Articles in this Topic
Discussions in this Topic
|