My studies in Scripture have raised sincere doubts in my mind as to the correctness of the traditional Lutheran interpretation of Matt. 28:19, John 3:5, Titus 3:5 etc. as they relate to infant baptism. I am open to any comments which fellow Lutherans may have to offer concerning the following thoughts:

 In interpreting Matt. 28:19 to support infant baptism the phrase, “teach all nations, baptizing them” is key. We assume that the word ‘them’ refers back to all nations! Christ is therefore understood as telling us to baptize all nations. It is then argued that infants are included in all nations. However consider another possibility. What if the word ‘them’ refers not to all nations but to those who are taught? Since infants cannot be taught this interpretation would exclude infant baptism. Since we have two proposed interpretations of Matt. 28:19 let us look to Scripture to see which interpretation it indicates as being correct.

 Looking to Mark’s account of this same statement we read, “Go ye unto all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mark 16:15,16) As I see it this passage clearly supports the second interpretation of Matt. 28:19, the idea that only those who being taught believe, are to be baptized.

 This interpretation is also supported by Paul’s statement, “Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the gospel.” 1 Cor. 1:17 And by Phillip’s statement “if thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest.” (Acts 8:37)

 In interpreting John 3:5, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” We interpret the word ‘water’ in this passage to refer to baptism. True, baptism is the only interpretation supported by what Scripture says elsewhere. However, we also assume that Christ is referring to the rite of baptism. Since John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance we could understand Christ’s reference to water or baptism as a reference to repentance rather than to the rite itself. We could also understand Christ’ s reference to the Spirit as a reference to faith which the Spirit works in our heart. Following this interpretation we would understand Christ to be saying, “Except a man receive eternal life through repentance and faith, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” This interpretation is in full accord with the analogy of faith. (Rom. 12:6)

 In interpreting Titus 3:5, “according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost” it is assumed that the word ‘washing’ refers to baptism. Now while ‘baptism’ is one possible interpretation of the word, ‘washing’ it is not the only interpretation which has Scriptural support. The word ‘washing’ could also be understood to refer to that spiritual washing or cleansing effected by the forgiveness of sins. It is the cleansing of forgiveness that makes us just in the sight of God giving us new life in Christ (regeneration.) The word ‘wash’ is used to denote the cleansing of forgiveness in Psalm 51:2. Rev. 1:5, Rev. 7:4, and 1 Cor. 6:11.

 The fact that the Greek word ‘baptizo’ is not used in Titus 3:5 indicates to me that forgiveness rather than baptism was the idea which God intended to convey. However, even if we allow the word ‘washing’ to be understood as a reference to baptism it does not follow that baptism produces regeneration. The word ‘of’ (see Titus 3:5) in the Greek indicates a washing connected with regeneration not a washing which produces regeneration. It is by God’s mercy that we are born again. If God offers us His mercy in connection with baptism, that mercy must be received by faith. (Rom. 5:2) And faith comes only by hearing. (Rom 10:17) It is by the Word of God alone that we are regenerated or born again. (1 Peter 1:23) And the Word of God is not some mystical power residing in the words by which Christ instituted baptism. Rather it is that Word which is preached, the offer of forgiveness to all who will believe and be baptized. (1 Peter 1:25)

 All of the other passages of Scripture which are appealed to in support of infant baptism are just as questionable as the three just examined.

 Acts 2:38 tells us that baptism is for the forgiveness of sin. However, that forgiveness must be received by faith. (Rom. 5:2) Forgiveness does not come simply by the performance of a rite apart from faith. (Heb. 11:6) And faith comes only by hearing. (Rom 10:17) We are forgiven for the sake of Christ, not for the sake of baptism. God has simply connected baptism with His offer of forgiveness in order to assure those who earnestly desire forgiveness that they have it.

 True, Christ urged that little children be brought unto Him. (Luke 18:15,16) However, He never baptized them.

 True, the apostles sometimes baptized entire families. (Acts 16:33, 1 Cor. 1:16) However, this fact should never be interpreted to contradict such statements of Scripture as, “Christ sent me not to baptize” (1 Cor 1:17) or “if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” (Acts 8:37)

Sincerely
Gary Ray Branscome