[Print] | [PDF] | [Email]

Church history provides a compelling argument in favor of infant baptism, but not in the usual way. The argument is not that there is evidence of the practice of infant baptism throughout church history (though there is). The argument is rather that the shape of church history is more compatible with paedobaptist than with credobaptist beliefs.

That is: The church did not appear in history in fully mature form; it is still far from fully mature. Were the infant churches of the apostolic age Christian churches? Did the troubled Corinthian congregation count as a Christian communion? Galatia? We should say Yes, since Paul treated these churches as churches.

Infant churches are Christian churches, immature and inadequate though they may be. Ergo….

posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, July 29, 2010 at 8:19 am

Permission is given to use material on this site, provided the source is cited, blog entries are republished in full, and the author is notified in advance.

« Previous Post | Next Post »
« Previous post in category | Next post in category »

Theology - Liturgical: Infant Baptism and Church History

« Previous Post | Next Post » « Previous post in category | Next post in category »

Theology - Liturgical: Infant Baptism and Church History

« Previous Post | Next Post »
« Previous post in category | Next post in category »