I understand wanting this.

I really don’t get becoming convinced of this. https://twitter.com/phule59/status/1315434932265799680

As an objective-credo, I agree that baptism is a mark the church places on you as the New Testament fulfillment of circumcision.

But here’s the thing...the physical sign of circumcision corresponds to a physical infant in a shadow covenant, not the covenant of spirit and truth.

So what kind of person should receive the spiritual circumcision of a spiritual covenant? Could it be...a spiritual infant?

Now, some folks say “sure; and infants do, in fact, believe!”

If this could be demonstrated from Scripture, we’d be in good shape.

However, while we have John the Baptist leaping for joy as an infant, the means of knowing salvation *given to the church* are confession and good works.

Neither are clear in babies and we have no special baby-discernment strategy.

The closest I can get is something like “if a parent is in right standing with the church, then they must be instructing their children in the way they should go; if they so instruct, their children will not depart from it; if they don’t depart from it, they will convert”

That’s not a great argument because it *really* stretches Proverbs. But at least it links the pieces together.

Then you have the “actually the church is not just for Christians but for everyone”

That’s...complex but I don’t get how baptism makes the cut here.

Yeah, sure have a “member celebration” for babies and newcomers and whoever. But baptism is a sacred *power* to be used for God’s intention: marking His People.

Don’t confess and believe, bearing fruit in keeping with repentance? Not one of God’s people.

Anyway, I wish I could believe this because it would allow me to fully embrace my PCA-ness.

But for now: alas.