The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum The divide between the credo and paedo Reformed

Reformation Monk,

I would argue politely that in Acts there's no evidence that infants are in the households. There are always qualifiers in Acts such that it's ones believing that are baptized. And if you believe maids should be baptized, then I wonder if all PB accept this. It's easier to consult Biblical criterion to know who's a believer than it is to figure out who's in the PB's view of the new covenant. It would depend on each PB's criterion. Alister Begg defines it as being "part of the bennefits of the church". But if the church's mailman is an atheist and the mailman's infant comes to the potluck can it be baptized?

And I'll repeat what I said earlier: "What I've also found that's fascinating to me is that all PB are CB, at least when it comes to deciding what adults should be baptized. Also, all of the Biblical examples used by PB as to why a non-believer might be part of the covenant is an example with an adult, not an infant. Yet, both of these approaches conflict with each other, and conflict with the PB position."

Cameron