Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

PaterFamilias Today

Home
Evangelical
Theological Foundations of the Family: Infant Baptism

Theological Foundations of the Family: Infant Baptism

Last updated on: April 7, 2017 at 8:45 am by C. R. Wiley

Theological Foundations of the Family: Infant Baptism 2017-04-07T08:45:32-04:00 C. R. Wiley

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Largely it is axiomatic among libertarians that human institutions are fictions and only individuals are real.

It is used as a check to the the overweening ambitions of our social engineers. To keep those people from grinding us all down to a lowest common denominator, or turning us into cogs in machinery of the Total State, we must reduce the really real to the social atom we call the individual.

But this is a false choice because the libertarians and the social engineers share a common presupposition. Each believes that nature lacks a normative structure: things don’t come with purposes. We give the world its meaning.

But that must be wrong for the simple reason we are not really atoms at all. We’re social creatures by nature. We come with hooks and barbs and we cling.

Aristotle called us political animals. He didn’t mean we’re those creatures you run into on line who look with bloodshot eyes at their news feeds and spew out status updates and tweets in a never failing stream about the very, very latest thing that Trump did.

What he meant is human beings live in ordered communities. Anything else is would either make us gods or beasts.

This puts Baptists in a tough spot, because in the Christian world they are our libertarians. They pretty much think we’re all Adam freshly formed from the ground (except for the original sin thing) and we’re only duty bound by gratitude to God himself (if we so choose to be, oddly). If they didn’t think this way they’d baptize their babies.

Infant baptism is predicated on the truth that the cords that bind families together exist naturally and are there before we even know what it means to be an individual. You could say they’re more real in a way than individuals can ever hope to be. They make us who we are.

That may be heresy in the American religion, but when it comes to Christianity it is the way it has always been. And this is due to the fact that this is also the way Jews have looked at things in their own faith, and recall, Christians according to Paul have been grafted into Israel. What distinguishes Christians from Jews is not their understanding of what it means to be an individual. What distinguishes them is whether or not Jesus is the Messiah. For Jews the most important thing is being in Abraham, that makes you an heir of the Covenant promises. But Christians believe that Jesus is the true child of promise an the rightful heir of all the promises made to Abraham. Therefore being in Christ makes you Abraham’s heir.

The thing to consider when it comes to baptism is this: did those Jews and Christians know something we have forgotten? If you can accept that they did, not only will you look at infant baptism favorably, you will understand the Bible better. (You’ll also begin to understand why the whole modern obsession liberation is dangerous.)

As readers of this blog know, I’ve been working my way through Joseph Atkinson’s, Biblical and Theological Foundations of the Family. Concerning the matter addressed above, here are a few excepts as they apply to baptism.

The manner in which Abraham functioned in the New Testament is once again reflective of the Semitic understanding of corporate personality which is foundational to Hebrew anthropology. Each family, tribe, or nation had its originating point in a single father to whom was given the covenant. All that sprung from Abraham is organically connected to him….

But we can also see how deeply this concept of corporate personality and its emphasis on organic unity continues to inform other realities in the New Covenant. The highest expression of this is found in the complete identification of the believer with Christ. (p.220)

Again, Atkinson dealing here with the libertarianism of the west explicitly;

The human person is not an autonomous, self determining entity, and neither is the family. The idea that a profound experience such as conversion to Christ could only affect an individual without affecting those with whom the person is ontologically connected (i.e. his family) is not possible within the Semitic mindset, which is also operating within the early Church. (p.225)

The correlation between circumcision (the mark of the Old Covenant) and baptism (the mark of the New) is a standard argument used by advocates of infant baptism. But Christian libertarians seldom find it persuasive largely because they assume that John the Baptist was a libertarian. But he wasn’t–and such a creature did not exist in the Church until recently.

For a paterfamilias in the first century, whether Jew or Greek, the idea that a man’s household didn’t convert when he did would have been unthinkable. Here’s Atkinson quoting Joachim Jeremias,

…when we consider family solidarity resting upon the authoritative influence of the head of the family it is scarcely conceivable that the baptism of a ‘household’ did not include all its members. (p.251)

And further, (this time Atkinson in his own voice):

…it would be virtually impossible for first century Jews to reject baptism of their children out of some regard for the autonomous rights or a novel belief in individualistic salvation. This would run counter to the Jewish experience of the covenant. (p.251)

Interpreting the Bible

Theology of the Family

Infant Baptism

Libertarians

Social Atomism

Previous Post

March 31, 2017

Honest Work in a Virtual World, Thoughts on Working with Your Hands

Next Post

April 11, 2017 The Way of Men: Nietzsche or Aristotle?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Advising a Daughter Aristotle Art Atheism Author and Speaking Appearances Beauty Building Working Houses C R Wiley Children Community Creativity Cultural Apologetics Fatherhood Fiction Fidelity in marriage Film Freedom Gravitas H. P. Lovecraft Happiness Household Economy Infant Baptism Inklings Interpreting the Bible Interviews Jack Donovan Liturgy Localism Man of the House Manliness Martial Virtue Medieval Cosmology Metaphysics Mortimus Clay NecronomiCon New Left New Testament Household Codes Nietzsche Nominalism/Realism Politics Poverty Preaching Productive Property Reaching men Science Self-Sufficiency Side Hustles Social Ethics Social Security Spiritual Disciplines Sublime Techno-gnosticism The Pastor's Survival Guide Theology of the Family Tradition Uncategorized Virtue Weird Fiction

Select a Month February 2019 November 2018 October 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was Miriam?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Moses' daughter Pharaoh's wife Moses' wife Moses' sister

Books by This Author Books by PaterFamilias Today

See All Titles »

Books by C. R. Wiley

The Purloined Boy (The Weirdling Cycle #1)

C. R. Wiley

Man of the House: A Handbook for Building a Shelter That Will Last in a World That Is Falling Apart

C. R. Wiley