In his commentary on the Harmony of the Gospels, Calvin states; "Infants are renewed by the Spirit of God, according to the capacity of their age, till that power which was concealed within them grows by degrees, and becomes fully manifest at the proper time"(2). It seems, according to Calvin, that Christ is implying an underlying age of accountability where children are protected by God until they are able to comprehend such matters as sin, repentance, Christ's substitutionary death, etc... But is Calvin making too much out of this passage...I believe so.
Now, I do believe that children are saved until a certain age when God will hold them accountable, and as far as what that age is...i have no idea, and in fact, believe that nobody knows exactly what that age is except God Himself. This is a subject that the Bible is not extremely explicit on. To show my hand, I hold onto the teaching underlying the narrative of 2 Samuel 12:23 where David says that he will someday go to his son who had recently died. I believe that this subtly shows that children are in God's care until a certain age. Again...what is that age? Alvin Reid says "there is no set age of accountability", nor "there is no singular biblical passage that clearly elaborates this concept" (3).
So...what is Jesus talking about in Luke 18? I believe to answer this question, we must study the passage in the larger scope of the chapter. If we believe that scripture is truly divinely inspired (2 Tim. 3), then we must also believe that God had His hand in the placement of biblical books, chapters, and passages. Therefore, in studying the Word, we must be quick to not isolate a specific text for study. For example, many, many people do this with the Parable of the Lost Son, yet as Al Mohler remarkably demonstrated in a sermon on Luke 15, the Parable is not to be read on its own, but as a continual response of Christ to the Pharisees and their hardness of heart as seen in verses 1-3. In the same way, look at what our passage of study is surrounded by.
Luke 18:1-8 God's mercy shown to a poor widow
Luke 18:9-14 God's mercy shown to a repentant tax collector
Luke 18:15-17 (our passage) God's mercy shown to infants
Luke 18:18-30 God's mercy refused to one in great power/ wealth. (please don't read too much into this)
Do you see the similarities? The majority of this chapter shows that the mercy of our Lord is given to the low, the humble, and the utterly helpless! William Hendriksen agrees, stating; "The meaning is: the only possible way to enter the kingdom is by receiving it readily and trustfully as a chlld accepts a gift. A child is not too proud to accept a gift! (4). What a wonderful testimony to the Sovereignty of our Lord, who chooses not the proud, arrogant, or powerful, or super-religious, but the ones that are not designated as the "cream of the crop." A child, especially an infant, is totally, 100% dependant on their parents for everything. In means of salvation, we are likewise 100% dependant on our Heavenly Father, who gives grace to the humble.
In conclusion, it is my belief that this passage should not be used as a means infant baptism, for it is a very shallow one at that, but instead as Jesus' teaching through demonstration on His goodness and control of Salvation!
Footnotes:
(1) John Calvin. Calvin's Commentaries- Vol. XVI p. 390.
(2) Ibid.
(3) Alvin Reid. Introduction to Evangelism. p.245.
(4)William Hendriksen. New Testament Commentary- Luke. p.830.
3 comments:
Good post, I agree completely. I think that this passage speaks to humility and faith more than anything. Any attempts to justify this for infant baptism seems to be an attempt to read the text in light of the doctrine rather than taking the doctrine from the text.
As an interesting sidenote, I heard Ravi Zacharias (I think) once mention that in issues such as the age of accountability, God not only inspired what is included in the text but also what is NOT in the text. For example, imagine that there was a text that said that the age of accountability is twelve (1 Opinions 4:12). Imagine the stories throughout history of people abusing such a text and killing children before they reach the age of accountability in the name of Christ. Even without a specific age of accountability, this has been taken to such an extreme with abortion, with many pro-choice Christians justifying the stance by saying that the baby will be able to go straight to heaven anyways and avoid the pains of this world. Pretty scary...
You are right in identifying the theme of Luke 18 as humility - that the humble shall be exalted, for being brought low by the knowledge of one's depravity before God, so then Christ serves to raise them in His righteousness.
After a discussion with a conservative Presbyterian to other day on the text, we agree on the issue of believer's baptism, and that it is of a horizontal relationship, the public identification of the convert with Christ before the church to walk and abide in Him; the Presbyterian view of infant baptism, they hold, is of a vertical relationship, God's promise covenanted with the parents of the child that the promise of God in Christ is 'for them, for their children, and for their children's children' to all generations. And it is true that God is faithful to His covenant promises - see Abrahamic, Noahic, Davidic, etc. (all fulfilled through Christ) and look carefully at Peter's use of the "promise" in relation to baptism in Acts 2:38-39. This stands as their argument.
Calvin's argument from this text is a bit different, however, for he argues from the intention of Christ in blessing and praying for the children, and that he would not have done so lest He had first purified them and expected His prayers to be answered; where Calvin may assume to much is what Christ actually prayed, for as in John 17 we are told what He prayed, here we are not.
As for the age of accountability, I am curious as to it and the issue of original sin, and the absolute lack of any conclusive biblical evidence promoting such an age; perhaps, at least for now, I would stand with Owen, that the destination of the lost, regardless of age is differentiated by the new birth alone (John 3:3, 5), that "unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." But as for children who die in infancy, Owen would offer that up to two things; first, the unconditional election of God's grace, and, secondly, the promise of God towards believing parents - showing steadfast love and faithfulness "to the thousandth generation" (Exodus 34:6-7b in comparison to His promise to unbelivers in 7c-e). This is why you are right, my friend, in writing of David and His child who died in infancy, but I would add that that may have been due to the faith of David, and what do we make of the death of Pharoah's children and the children of Egypt, when in the plague God makes a clear distinction between the children of Egypt and those of His chosen people Israel, whom He covers and saves for His name's sake.
Good post!
Good sir, have I said previously how exciting your space looks...you are a pro...would you consider hooking me up...lol! Love ya, and very proud of you, I love the site
Post a Comment