Forty Short Homilies on Infant Baptism

By Phillip Kayser

There are many lengthy books on baptism, but very few brief introductions to the subject. Since each chapter of this book is a transcript of a short baptism homily delivered by Pastor Kayser at his church, this book provides forty brief introductions to the subject of baptism. Because these were all preached before the same congregation, they tend to build upon each other and complement each other, but each homily is self-contained.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Biblical Blueprints
• Release date: Sep 22, 2018
• ISBN: 9780359108107

Book preview

Notes

1. Homily 1 - Galatians 3:26-4:2

Please stand for the reading of God’s Word from Galatians chapter 3. I will be reading a smaller section from a long argument that the apostle Paul gives on why we and our children are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, and on the merits of Christ alone. Beginning to read at Galatians 3:26.

For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father.

You may be seated. Before I dig into chapter 4:1-2, I want to briefly mention six very important points of information that the apostle has already given in this chapter. I won’t try to prove them; I will just list them. Those six points are:

First, we are justified by faith alone apart from our works just as Abram was.

Second, that just as Abraham became heir of God’s promises by faith, believers today become heir of God’s promises made to Abraham by faith. There is no difference there.

Third, verses 26-29 make it clear that only heirs can be baptized and the promises are only made to heirs.

Fourth, every one of God’s promises made to Abraham was made to Abraham and His seed, and Paul makes the point that the Abrahamic covenant continues to give promises to believers and their seed. It wouldn’t be the Abrahamic covenant if the seed were excluded.

Fifth, verses 15-18 makes clear that nothing added to the Abrahamic covenant by Moses or any covenant afterwards can abrogate the principle of salvation by faith apart from works. This means that just as Abraham couldn’t be justified by faith plus circumcision, we can’t be justified by faith plus baptism, or faith plus anything. Neither circumcision nor baptism justifies an adult or a baby.

Sixth, the paragraph we read this morning deals with who may be baptized in the Abrahamic covenant. Verses 26-29 indicate that all believers may be baptized, whether they are Jews or Gentiles, slaves or free, males or females, and chapter 3:29-4:2 indicates that the children of each of those believers are also heirs and therefore may be baptized.

And I won’t try to argue any of those points. I’m going to assume that you already believe in infant baptism. I just want to look at seven phrases in chapter 4:1-2 that specifically apply to [name of baby girl].

First, God still has a plan for our children. The word for child in verse 1 is νήπιος, and refers to a child who is ignorant or who cannot speak yet. The dictionary says that it refers to beings ranging from fetal status to puberty, though usually it just refers to a very young child (BDAG). We can praise the Lord that children still have a place in God’s plan. Isaiah 40:11 says of God’s relation to the church of the New Covenant era, He will feed his flock like a shepherd; he will gather the lambs in his arms, and carry them in his bosom, and gently lead the mother sheep. And that’s exactly what Jesus did. Jesus took the little children and infants in His arms and said, for of such is the kingdom of heaven. This makes sense since the Abrahamic covenant was to believers and their children. [Name of baby girl] has a special place in God’s plan.

Second, she is said to be an heir. This is picking up the language of chapter 3:29, which says of believers, And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. You can only be an heir if in some way Christ claims you. This again shows that there has been no change in the status of the children of believers. God continues to give promises to them; promises which they must claim as they grow up. He continues to claim them in some way. Christ has a claim on little Willa, and if she is an heir, then she has a claim on Christ.

Third, [Name of baby girl] is said to not differ at all from a slave until she comes of age. In the modern world we tend to think poorly of the concept of slaves. But slaves under Abraham were given special family status. They were fed, clothed, protected, and provided for. But there is a sense in which their future is directed by the believing parents. The children didn’t make all of the choices right away. [Names of mother and father] are making many choices for [name of baby girl], and this morning they are making a choice of bringing her to the Lord. Will she make a choice of her own in the future? Obviously yes. But she is not left in limbo in the meantime. God owns [name of baby girl].

The next phrase says, though he is master of all. When the elect are under age, they have a destiny of being sons and daughters, but they may not yet understand that. And if you look at the whole purpose of guardians and stewards in the larger context of the Mosaic economy being a guardian or steward to lead us to Christ and to lead us to faith, this is one of [names of mother and father] chief responsibilities – to lead [Name of baby girl] to Christ and into her inheritance and into maturity.

The next phrase is, "but are under guardians [ἐπίτροπος,]" [Names of mother and father] have entered a responsibility of being guardians of [Name of baby girl] before the Lord. They are to care for her, instruct her, and raise her in the nurture of the Lord. I think it is awesome that God makes a provision of guardianship for babies.

The next phrase is "and stewards [οἰκὀνόμος] A steward was a trustee of something that belongs to another. Joseph was the steward of all that Potiphar owned. Well, if the children of believers are a stewardship trust, that means that God owns that child and [names of father and mother] will be accountable to God for how they raise that child. In Luke 12:42 Jesus asks, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his master will make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of food in due season?" The summary answer to that question is given by Spicq, who says that a steward must be

… hard-working, zealous, competent, circumspect. ‘What is required of stewards is that they be found faithful,’ worthy of the master’s confidence.¹

This is one of the reasons we have parents take vows to follow through on their commitment when they bring their child to the covenant. The baptism is the acknowledgment that the Abrahamic covenant continues to be to believers and their seed and an acknowledgment that they are accountable to Him.

And the last phrase says, until the time appointed by the father. And in context, the time of appointment appears to be the time when the child self-consciously makes profession of faith and enters into the privileges of full sonship. Only God knows that date. So with that encouragement, I will ask [Names of mother and father] to bring [name of baby girl] up to acknowledge that they embrace their responsibilities in the Abrahamic covenant.

2. Homily 2 - Luke 1:59-66

Introduction - connection of baptism to circumcision

Joel and Cheri’s son, Ethan, will be baptized this morning. If Ethan had been born before the cross of Christ had wiped away all blood ceremonies, I would be performing a circumcision on him. I tell you what - I’m glad we are living in the time of the new covenant! Jesus was the final sacrifice, and the only thing that remains from the Old Testament initiatory sign is baptism. Baptism takes the place of circumcision as the sign of the covenant. And I have a two-page chart in my notes here of 21 things that the Bible ascribes to both baptism and circumcision, with 88 supporting Scriptures.² Baptism entirely replaces the other and has exactly the same meaning as the other. I won’t cover those points, but the chart gives Scriptures that show that both circumcision and baptism are a sign and seal of the covenant of grace; both initiate people into the covenant; both symbolize regeneration, both point to the need for justification by faith; both point to cleansing from defilement; both oblige the recipients to die to the world and to walk in newness of life. John Calvin said that any argument that could be brought against infant baptism could be brought against infant circumcision. They signify and seal the same things. I won’t cover all twenty-one points, but I just say this much as background to Luke 1, where I want to take my baptism meditation. I am assuming the truth of this chart that baptism and circumcision signify and seal exactly the same things.

Meditation

John was receiving the sign of circumcision in Luke 1, and since the meaning of circumcision and baptism are the same, I think we can learn a lot from this text. First, circumcision was not just applied to believing adults (like Abraham), but it was also applied to their children. Verse 59 says, So it was, on the eighth day, that they came to circumcise the child. All the way back to Genesis 17 God commanded the sign of the covenant to be applied to infants on the eighth day and said that those who were not circumcised would be cut off from the covenant and its privileges and protections. The early church understood this connection. That’s why all the way up to AD 253³ many (if not most) in the church appear to have baptized children on the eighth day after birth, because that was the day infants were circumcised in Old Testament times. Thus, Fidus (who was the moderator of a large presbytery) wrote a circular in AD 250 to all the churches in his Presbytery saying that Baptism should be delayed until the eighth day after a child was born on the analogy of circumcision. Apparently some people preferred to have their child baptized on Sunday and had good theological reasons for why in the New Covenant, Sunday was called the eighth day, so they appealed the decision to the Council of Carthage. At the Council of Carthage in AD 253, it was settled that babies could be baptized on Sunday even if it was earlier or later than the eighth day, and they gave several reasons. But they too argued that they were faithfully showing the connection to circumcision.

But I find it significant that there is no evidence that anyone objected to infant baptism. In fact, almost a hundred years earlier, elders from other presbyteries – like Justyn Martyr, Aristides, and Clement of Alexandria spoke of baptism as an apostolic practice. Numerous church fathers in the second and third centuries equated baptism with circumcision. So it is no wonder that you see infant baptism everywhere. Irenaeus (who was taught by Polycarp, John’s disciple) applied baptism to infants and little ones and children and youths and older persons, and he wrote that in AD 180. Origen said, the church has a tradition from the apostles to give baptism even to infants. So all over the church you see people practicing infant baptism as a replacement of circumcision. Hippolytus said the same in AD 215. Etc., etc. The point is, the early church never stopped including children in the covenant, and the first church council at which any controversy was raised over baptism was in AD 253, and it was only on which day the sign should be applied to the infant. Infant baptism was universally practiced; Sunday was treated as equivalent to the eighth day.

Second, the same verse says that they were planning to name this child when it was circumcised. The father usually named the child, but in this case, the father couldn’t talk, so the mother gave the father’s previous wishes. When they asked the father if that was so, he wrote on a tablet in verse 63, His name is John. He named this child. This practice explains why during the first fifteen hundred years of church history, parents named their children at baptism. This was a carry-over from circumcision.

Third, this circumcision did not save John. Luke 1:15 tells us that John was filled with the Holy Spirit long before he was circumcised. It says, He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb. So John was already saved before he was circumcised and Christ didn’t need to be saved when He was circumcised. Don’t ever think that circumcision in the Old Testament or baptism in the New Testament saves our children. It’s the sign of the covenant. Only Spirit baptism saves, and that can come before, during, or after water baptism.

But fourth, don’t ever think that this sign is unimportant. It is a sign and a seal of God’s grace. When the sign of the covenant was applied to John, Zacharias referred to God’s oath which He swore to our father Abraham (v. 73). God didn’t just give a sign; He gave an oath that He would fulfill what the sign signified. In other words, it was a seal or a pledge that God would fulfill what He promised. That’s why Romans 4:11 called circumcision a sign and seal. A seal is a pledge. You see, at the heart of every covenant is God’s promise, I will be a God to you and to your children after you. That’s God’s covenant oath. When we baptize our children, we take vows to raise our children up in the fear and nurture of God (that’s an indispensable part of the covenant according to Genesis 18:19). But God is also making an oath that He will bless our nurture of these children. And if Ethan is not already saved, God will honor Joel and Cherie’s faith by saving Ethan at some point in the future. It’s God’s oath of the covenant. Take comfort in the fact that baptism is a seal or pledge just like circumcision was.

A fifth thing we see in John’s circumcision is given in Luke 1:50, which says, His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation… as He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his children forever. That is dealing with covenant succession. To be part of the covenant was to have God claim your children and your children’s children. Since you give all that you are and have to God when you enter the covenant, it makes sense that you would give your children to God. He owns them; He claims them, and then God gives them back as a stewardship trust. In Ezekiel 16 He speaks of your sons and your daughters, whom you bore to Me, and then calls them My children (Ezek. 16:20-21) Yes, they are your sons and daughters in a sense, but they also belong to God. Isaiah 40 says that God not only owns the adult believing sheep who are in His flock, but He also claims their