Genesis Vol 3.pdf - College Press

8 1 ’
GENESIS ‘
the case, cannot belong to the churck; that is, infants and
irresponsibles generally, and in all prpbability the elect of
prior Dispensations. (Cf. Luke 17:21, Mark 10:24, Matt.
18:3, Mark 10:15, Luke 18:l
11:4, 5, 7, 8-16, etc.)
(4) Other objections to t
following the Old Covenant pat
contradicts New Testament teac
of baptism (1 Pet. 3:21, Rom.
teaching of the New Testament
is more than a physical act. It t
unconverted, unregenerated persons;
would make of their Christianity
observances. It ignores altogether
of choice. Finally, it tends to oblitetate the distinction be-
tween the church and the world, and the distinction be-
tween church and state as well. How many professing
“Christian” parents use the practice of christening pretty
largely for the credentials by which birth certification can
be established? Moreover, so-called “infant dedication” is
misleading: the popular tendency, so great is the general
ignorance of the Bible, is to identify it with infant sprinkl-
ing. If the act is simply a dedication, why use water in
the observance of it?
To summarize: the equating of Christian baptism with
spiritual circumcision is one 6f the most egregious fallacies
that has ever been perpetrated on the Christian world. We
repeat that baptism is an act of faith, “the appeal of a good
conscience toward God” (1 Pet. 3:21)-0r it is nothing.
Spiritual circumcision is the excision of the body of the
guilt of sin by the entrance of the Spirit into the human
heart to take possession of it and thus to make it, little
rtaker of the divine nature and meet for the
the saints in light (2 Pet. 1:4, Col. 1:12,
Heb. 9:ll).
290