Paedofaith, Rich Lusk

Here are some conclusions/questions...

The author concludes that babies of covenant families are given faith by God. He is "happily agnostic" when it comes to the salvation of babies that die in unbeliving families.

If we are saved by faith, it would follow that babies have some sort of faith. If they do not have faith, then how are they saved?

If babies have faith, but can fall away, what does that do for perseverence?

I'm fairly new to Reformed theology and I know that baptism does not save. However, Lusk seems to say that baptism is more than a symbol, it is more like the (my words) door through which salvation comes.

How does one relate baptism to salvation?

If baptism is a symbol, and not a vehicle, why baptize infants before they understand the symbolism?

Here is a tough one. I spent years outside the church. Looking back, I can pinpoint a moment when my relationship with God became very real. Given it is possible that is the moment I "got saved" - are the babies that I lost before that moment saved or lost?

Share Button

One thought on “Paedofaith, Rich Lusk

  1. I have stopped trying to identify a "moment" when I and others are saved. Seems to only lead to questions and subjective speculations. I find it more helpful to consider the matter from God's perspective - I have been saved since He decreed in eternity past to save me. In that perspective it is much easier to see how baptism can be somehow mysteriously a means of grace and efficacious in some sense, yet not being the thing that "saves" me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments links could be nofollow free.