15<\/strong>. and her household<\/em> ] Of a like baptizing of a household see below ( Act 16:33<\/em><\/span>), and also cp. Act 11:14<\/span>. We are not justified in concluding from these passages that infants were baptized. “Household” might mean slaves and freedwomen.<\/p>\n and abide there<\/em> ] Like the two disciples who followed Jesus (Joh 1:38<\/span>) Lydia was anxious to have the teachers, whose lessons she found so suited to the needs of her opened heart, near unto her.<\/p>\n she constrained us<\/em> ] Used only by St Luke in N. T. here and Luk 24:29<\/span> of the two disciples at Emmaus. The force used was that of a prayer which would hear no “Nay.”<\/p>\n And when she was baptized – <\/B>Apparently without any delay. Compare Act 2:41<\/span>; Act 8:38<\/span>. It was usual to be baptized immediately on believing.<\/P> And her household – <\/B>Greek: her house <\/SPAN><\/span> ho oikos autes, her family. No mention is made of their having believed, and the case is one that affords a strong presumptive proof that this was an instance of household or infant baptism. Because:<\/P> (1) Her believing is particularly mentioned.<\/P> (2) It is not intimated that they believed.<\/P> (3) It is manifestly implied that they were baptized because she believed. It was the offering of her family to the Lord. It is just such an account as would now be given of a household or family that were baptized upon the faith of the parent.<\/P> If ye have judged me to be faithful – <\/B>If you deem me a Christian or a believer.<\/P> And she constrained us – <\/B>She urged us. This was an instance of great hospitality, and also an evidence of her desire for further instruction in the doctrines of religion.<\/P> <\/p>\n Act 16:15<\/span><\/p>\n She was baptized and her household.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n Infant baptism<\/strong><\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>At first sight their position seems to be a strong one, when they say, Where is there any command for it? In reply to this it is only necessary to say that Christians consider many things as most important for the support of which no such authority can be claimed. Where is it written, Thus saith the Lord, Christians must observe the day of the Saviours resurrection? or, Thus saith the Lord, Women must receive the Communion? or, Thus saith the Lord, Christian people must have family prayer, and establish Sunday Schools, and support missionary societies?<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>It is also urged that no one ought to be baptized who does not believe, and that as infants are incapable of believing, so also they are improper subjects of baptism (Mar 16:16<\/span>). The unfairness of such a conclusion may be shown in various ways.<\/p>\n (1)<\/strong> Take the apostles injunction, If <\/em>any will not work, neither shall he eat (2Th 3:10<\/span>). Does St. Paul mean to extend this to infants, or the sick or the aged? Plainly not. He is only speaking of those who are capable of working. And so, too, our Saviours language in regard to the subjects of baptism should be applied to none but those who can exercise faith, and who enjoy the privilege of being taught their duty. The ease of infants is in no way connected with these passages.<\/p>\n (2)<\/strong> Again, if this verse proves that infants ought not to be baptized, it proves also that they cannot be saved. I need hardly say that the plain and undoubted sense of the passage repels so monstrous a conclusion. Our Lord was announcing that the door of entrance to His kingdom was now thrown open to all who chose to come in; and He sets forth belief and baptism as two distinct conditions of salvation. Adults, who are capable of belief, are expected to bring this qualification; but it is not looked for in infants, who cannot exercise faith. Baptism is a solemn form of adoption into Gods family–the Church. So much for the popular objections against the practice of infant baptism.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>We claim that it is right and proper to baptize infants, because they are naturally included in the broad commission which our blessed Lord gave to His apostles (Mat 28:19<\/span>). Suppose the proper authorities in this country should issue a command that a census be made: who would be included in it? Would it merely embrace the adults, or would it give an account of the number of children also? And so, when our Saviour sends forth His servants to bring all nations into covenant with their Creator and Redeemer, the most natural construction of the commission makes it include both old and young. To expect that in promulgating His covenant He would make mention of infancy or adult years would be an absurdity. The physical and the personal has nothing at all to do with the spiritual covenant.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>That our Lord regards with favour the bringing of little children into covenant with Him is seen from the fact that He showed such kindness towards them during His sojourn upon earth (Mat 19:13<\/span>; Luk 18:15<\/span>; Mar 10:13-16<\/span>). The phrase, Kingdom of God, means the Church. And does not every word in the passage just quoted go to prove that our Saviour regarded little children as fit subjects for His kingdom? Hermas, who wrote during the apostolic age, remarks: All infants are valued by the Lord, and esteemed first of all.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>We are obliged to believe that children are entitled to the privilege of holy baptism, because they are distinctly included in the promises (Act 2:38-39<\/span>). The Jews who heard these words of St. Peters had always been accustomed to have their children enjoy the privileges of Church membership; and if it had been his purpose to tell them that this rule must now be changed, this was a very curious way of doing it! And slow progress Christianity would have made had it closed its doors more completely than Judaism had done!<\/p>\n 4. <\/strong>The apostles baptized whole households. Not long after the baptism of Lydias household, that of the jailor was baptized (Act 16:31-32<\/span>). Here is an item from St. Pauls own journal–I baptized the household of Stephanas (1Co 1:16<\/span>). The Syriac version of the New Testament, which was completed early in the second century, renders the verse concerning Lydia and her household as the baptism of Lydia and her children. And so, too, in the case of the jailor and his household, and the household of Stephanas.<\/p>\n 5. <\/strong>Even those most opposed to infant baptism agree that when these little innocents die they are fit to be received into heaven. And if fit for the Church triumphant, why not for the Church militant?<\/p>\n 6. <\/strong>Note the resemblance which infant baptism bears to circumcision. By this rite, children, when eight days old, all unconscious of what was done for them, were brought into covenant with God. When, in the course of Divine Providence, the seal of circumcision was changed to that of baptism, the Christian sacrament sanctioned all that the Jewish rite would have secured, had it continued to be observed. The conclusion follows, therefore, most naturally, that as children were made members of Gods Church under the old dispensation, they are entitled to the same privilege under the new.<\/p>\n 7. <\/strong>We enter our protest against those who oppose infant baptism, and we insist that it is a practice in accordance with Gods will, because it is nowhere forbidden. Does the Word of God command that children shall be shut out from His kingdom? And when we remember that nineteen-twentieths of the Christian world practise infant baptism, is it likely that the one-twentieth can be right?<\/p>\n 8. <\/strong>It was practised in the Church from the days of the apostles, for a period of nearly fifteen hundred years, without a dissenting voice. The only question in regard to infant baptism which ever arose in the early ages of Christianity was whether, as baptism had taken the place of circumcision, it should be put off to the eighth day. (J. N. Norton, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Family religion<\/strong><\/p>\n The gospel fulfils its noblest mission in hallowing the general relations of family life. On the first introduction of Christianity to Europe, whole families are gathered into the fold. Lydia and her household, the jailer and all belonging to him, are baptized into Christ. Henceforth the worship of households plays an important part in the Divine economy of the Church. As in primeval days the patriarch was the recognised priest of his clan, so in the Christian Church the father of the house is the Divinely appointed centre of religious life to his own family. The family religion is the true starting point, the surest foundation, of the religion of cities, nations, and empires. The Church in the house of Philemon grows into the Church of Colossae (Phm 1:2<\/span>); the Church in the house of Nymphas becomes the Church of Laodicea (Col 4:15<\/span>); the Church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla loses itself in the Churches of Ephesus and Rome (1Co 16:19<\/span>; Rom 16:5<\/span>). (Bp. Lightfoot.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Come into my house and abide there<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The origin of Christian hospitality<\/strong><\/p>\n We have here the first example of that Christian hospitality which was so emphatically enjoined and so lovingly practised in the apostolic Church (Heb 13:2<\/span>; 1Ti 5:10<\/span>). The frequent mention of the hosts who gave shelter to the apostles (Rom 16:23<\/span>, etc.<\/em>) reminds us that they led a life of hardship and poverty, and were the followers of Him for whom there was no room in the inn. The Lord had said to His apostles that when they entered into a city, they were to seek out those who were worthy, and with them to abide. The search at Philippi was not difficult. Lydia invited them, and admitted of no refusal, and their peace was on that house. Thus the gospel obtained a home in Europe. (Dean Howson.<\/em>)<\/p>\n Verse 15<\/span>. If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord<\/B><\/I>] The meaning seems to be this: If my present reception of the Gospel of Christ be a proof to you that I have been faithful to the Lord, in the light previously imparted, and that I am as likely to be faithful to this new grace<\/I> as I have been to that already received, and, consequently, not likely by light or fickle conduct to bring any discredit on this Divine work, come into my house,<\/I> and abide there<\/I>. It is wrong to suppose that this woman had not received a measure of the light of God before<\/I> this time.<\/P> <\/P> And she constrained us.<\/B><\/I>] She used such entreaties and persuasions that at last they consented to lodge there.<\/P><\/p>\n And her household; when Lydia had right to baptism, by reason of her faith in Jesus Christ, all her family, whom she could undertake to bring up in the knowledge of Christ, were admitted to that ordinance also; as all the servants, and such others as were born in his house, or bought with his money, were circumcised with Abraham, Gen 17:12<\/span>,13<\/span>. Now the gospel does not contract in any respect, but enlarges, the privileges of believers in all things. And if they might under the law have their children and servants admitted into a covenant with God, (which could not but rejoice religious parents and masters, who value the relation they and theirs have to God, above all earthly things), surely under the gospel none of our families are excluded, unless they wilfully exclude themselves. <\/P> She constrained us; as the two disciples that were going to Emmaus constrained our Saviour, Luk 24:29<\/span>, with all earnest entreaties and loving violence. <\/P> <\/p>\n 15. And when . . . baptized . . .and her household<\/B>probably without much delay. The mention ofbaptism here for the first time in connection with the labors ofPaul, while it was doubtless performed on all his former converts,indicates a special importance in this first European baptism. Herealso is the first mention of a Christian household.<\/I> Whether itincluded children, also in that case baptized, is not explicitlystated; but the presumption, as in other cases of household baptism,is that it did. Yet the question of infant baptism must be determinedon other grounds; and such incidental allusions form only part of thehistorical materials for ascertaining the practice of the Church. <\/P> she besought <\/B>us,<\/B><\/I>saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord<\/B>theLord Jesus; that is, “By the faith on Him which ye haverecognized in me by baptism.” There is a beautiful modesty inthe expression. <\/P> And she constrained us<\/B>Theword seems to imply that they were reluctant, but were overborne.<\/P><\/p>\n And when she was baptized<\/strong>,…. In water, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, according to the commission of Christ, by the apostle, or some one of his companions; by whom she was instructed into the nature and use of this ordinance; and very likely it was performed in that river, by the side of which the oratory stood, where they were assembled:<\/p>\n and her household<\/strong>; they were baptized also, being converted at the same time; these seem to be her menial servants, who came along with her from her native place upon business, and who attended on her; accordingly the Ethiopic version renders it, “and she was baptized with all her men”; and these were believers, and are called “the brethren”, Ac 16:40<\/span> hence this passage will by no means serve the cause of infant baptism: whether Lydia was a maid, a wife, or widow, cannot be said; it looks, however, as if she had no husband now, since she is mentioned as a trader herself; and whether she had any children or not, is not certain, nor can it be concluded from this clause, for there are many households that have no children; and if she had young children, it is not likely she should bring them with her to such a distant place, whither she was come upon trade and business: the pleaders for infant baptism must prove that she had children; that these were her household, or part of her household here spoken of; and that they were baptized; or this instance will be of no service to their cause:<\/p>\n she besought us, saying, if ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord<\/strong>; this she said, not as doubting whether they had so judged of her, but as supposing it, and taking it for granted, that they had; wherefore she reasons upon it, and argues from it; and the sense is this, that seeing the apostle and his company had judged her to be a believer in Christ, by admitting her to the ordinance of baptism; and she had shown her faithfulness to him, by submitting to it, according to his will; therefore she earnestly entreated them to take up their residence at her house, whilst at Philippi: saying,<\/p>\n come into my house, and abide there<\/strong>; her faith soon worked by love; and by the fruits of righteousness which followed upon it, it appeared to be true and genuine: and she constrained us; Paul and Silas, and Timothy and Luke, and whoever else were in company; she not only invited them, but obliged them to go with her; she would take no denial, and by her arguments, entreaties, and importunity, as it were forced them, and prevailed upon them to go with her.<\/p>\n And when she was baptized <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). First aorist passive indicative of <\/SPAN><\/span>. The river Gangites was handy for the ordinance and she had now been converted and was ready to make this public declaration of her faith in Jesus Christ.<\/P> And her household <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Who constituted her “household”? The term <\/SPAN><\/span>, originally means the building as below, “into my house” and then it includes the inmates of a house. There is nothing here to show whether Lydia’s “household” went beyond “the women” employed by her who like her had heard the preaching of Paul and had believed. “Possibly Euodia and Syntyche and the other women, Phil 4:2<\/span>; Phil 4:3<\/span>, may have been included in the family of Lydia, who may have employed many slaves and freed women in her trade” (Knowling). “This statement cannot be claimed as any argument for infant baptism, since the Greek word may mean her servants or her work-people” (Furneaux). In the household baptisms (Cornelius, Lydia, the jailor, Crispus) one sees “infants” or not according to his predilections or preferences.<\/P> If ye have judged me <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true (<\/SPAN><\/span> and the indicative, here perfect active of <\/SPAN><\/span>). She had confessed her faith and submitted to baptism as proof that she was “faithful to the Lord” ( <\/SPAN><\/span>), believing on the Lord. “If she was fit for that, surely she was fit to be their hostess” (Furneaux). And Paul and his party had clearly no comfortable place to stay while in Philippi. The ancient hotels or inns were abominable. Evidently Paul demurred for there were four of them and he did not wish to sacrifice his independence or be a burden even to a woman of wealth.<\/P> And she constrained us <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Effective first aorist middle of <\/SPAN><\/span>, late word, in the N.T. only here and Lu 24:29<\/span>. Some moral force (<\/SPAN><\/span>) or hospitable persuasion was required (cf. 1Sa 28:23<\/span>), but Lydia had her way as women usually do. So he accepted Lydia’s hospitality in Philippi, though he worked for his own living in Thessalonica (2Th 3:8<\/span>) and elsewhere (2Co 11:9<\/span>). So far only women have been won to Christ in Philippi. The use of “us” shows that Luke was not a householder in Philippi. <\/P> <\/p>\n Constrained [] <\/SPAN><\/span>. Only here and Luk 24:29<\/span>, on which see note. The constraint was from ardent gratitude.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And when she was baptized,”<\/strong> (hos de ebaptisthe) “And when she had been baptized,” in response to Paul’s preaching, who taught only that responsible believers should be baptized, never infants, or the irresponsible, Rom 1:14-16<\/span>; Rom 10:9-10<\/span>; Rom 10:13<\/span>; Act 16:31<\/span>; Act 20:21<\/span>; Gal 3:26<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “And her household,”<\/strong> (kai ho oikos autes) “As well as her household,” her responsible family members and household servants, those capable of hearing and giving responsible obedience to the gospel call to salvation and service, (which Paul preached) those who had accompanied her in her move to Philippi.<\/p>\n 3) “She besought us, saying,”<\/strong> (parekalesen legousa) “She appealed to us, repeatedly saying,” desiring fellowship with Paul, Silas, Luke and their witnessing missionary colleagues, Joh 13:34-35<\/span>, appealing for them to be guests in her home, a genuine expression of hospitality, as taught Rom 12:13<\/span>; 1Ti 5:10<\/span>; 3Jn 1:5<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “if ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord,”<\/strong> (ei kekrikate me pisten to kurio einai) “if you all have decided me to be (that I am) faithful to or toward the Lord,” in my commitment and appeal to my family (household), to commit themselves to Christ and His service, that I am sincere, honest, earnest, 1Co 3:9<\/span>.<\/p>\n 5) “Come into my house and abide there.”<\/strong> (eiselthontes eis ton oikon mou menete) “Be willing to come into my home of your own accord and stay a little while,” accept my hospitality. Giving and sharing is one very basic evidence of sincerity and of Love, Joh 3:16<\/span>; Act 20:35<\/span>; Heb 13:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n 6) “And she constrained us.”<\/strong> (kai parebiasato hemas) “And she urged us,” earnestly appealed to us to come and share her hospitality and our testimony for a time with her and her household, as the Philippian jailer also did later, Act 16:34<\/span>; as the Emmaus disciples did their Lord after His resurrection, Luk 24:29<\/span>.<\/p>\n − <\/p>\n 15. When she was baptized. Hereby it appeareth how effectually God wrought in Lydia even in a short moment. For it is not to be doubted but that she received and embraced the faith of Christ sincerely, and gave him her name, before Paul would admit her unto baptism. This was a token of mere readiness; also, her holy zeal and godliness do therein show themselves, in that she doth also consecrate her family to God. And, surely, all the godly ought to have this desire, to have those who are under them to be partakers of the same faith. For he is unworthy to be numbered among the children of God, and to be a ruler over others, whosoever is desirous to reign and rule in his own house over his wife, children, servants, and maids, and will cause them to give no place to Christ. Therefore, let every one of the faithful study to govern and order his house so, that it may be an image of the Church. I grant that Lydia had not in her hand the hearts of all those which were of her household, that she might turn unto Christ whomsoever she would; − (190) but the Lord did bless her godly desire, so that she had her household obedient. The godly (as we have already said) must endeavor, with might and main, to drive from their houses all manner of superstition; secondly, that they have not profane families, but that they keep them under the fear of the Lord. So Abraham, the father of the faithful, was commanded to circumcise all his servants with him; and he is commanded for the care he had to govern his house, and to instruct his family. Furthermore, if this duty be required at the hands of the householder, much more of a prince, that he suffer not so much as in him lieth the name of God to be profaned in his realm. − <\/p>\n She besought them, saying. This hath the force of an adjuration, when she saith, if ye have judged me faithful; as if she should say, I beseech you by that faith which you have approved by baptism, that ye refuse not to lodge with me; and Lydia did by such an earnest desire testify how entirely she loved the gospel. Nevertheless, it is not to be doubted but that the Lord gave her such an affection, to the end Paul might be the more encouraged to proceed, not only because he saw that he was liberally and courteously entertained, but also because he might thereby judge of the fruit of his doctrine. Therefore, this was not the woman’s inviting only, but also God’s to keep Paul and his company there, to which end that tendeth also that Lydia enforced them, as if God did lay hand upon them, and stay them in the woman’s person. <\/p>\n (190) − <\/p>\n “<\/p>\n Suo arbitrio,” at her own will. <\/p>\n (15) And when she was baptized, and her household.<\/strong>It does not follow from St. Lukes condensed narrative that all this took place on the same day. The statement that her household were baptised has often been urged as evidence that infant baptism was the practice of the apostolic age. It must be admitted, however, that this is to read a great deal between the lines, and the utmost that can be said is that the language of the writer does not exclude infants. The practice itself rests on firmer grounds than a precarious induction from a few ambiguous passages. (See Notes on Mat. 19:13-15<\/span>.) In this instance, moreover, there is no evidence that she had children, or even that she was married. The household may well have consisted of female slaves and freed-women whom she employed, and who made up her familia.<\/em> It follows, almost as a necessary inference, that many of these also were previously proselytes. For such as these, Judaism had been a schoolmaster, leading them to Christ. (See Gal. 3:24<\/span>.) We may think of Euodias and Syntyche, and the other women who laboured in the gospel (Php. 4:2-3<\/span>), as having been, probably, among them. The names of the first two occur frequently in the inscriptions of the Columbaria<\/em> of this period, now in the Vatican and Lateran Museums, the Borghese Gardens, and elsewhere, as belonging to women of the slave or libertin<\/em> class.<\/p>\n She besought us.<\/strong>Up to this time the teachers, four in number, had been, we must believe, living in a lodging and maintaining themselves, as usual, by labourSt. Paul as a tentmaker, St. Luke, probably, as a physician. Now the large-hearted hospitality of Lydia (the offer implies a certain measure of wealth, as, indeed, did her occupation, which required a considerable capital) led her to receive them as her guests. They did not readily abandon the independent position which their former practice secured them, and only yield to the kind constraint to which they were exposed.<\/p>\n If ye have judged.<\/strong>The words contain a modest, almost a pathetic, appeal to the fact that the preachers had recognised her faith by admitting her to baptism. If she was fit for that, was she unfit to be their hostess?<\/p>\n 15<\/strong>. <\/strong> And her household<\/strong> There are too many instances of household baptism following forthwith upon the faith of the householder not to justify the belief that it was just such a consequence in the family as circumcision would have been in case of an induction into Judaism. Dr. Schaff well argues, quoting the well-known passages: “ Act 10:2<\/span>; Act 10:44-48<\/span>; Act 16:15<\/span>; Act 16:30-33<\/span>; Act 18:8<\/span>; 1Co 1:16 ; 1Co 16:15<\/span>. In none of these places, it is said, are children expressly mentioned, and the families concerned might possibly have consisted entirely of adults. But this is, even in itself, exceedingly improbable, since we have here, not one case only, but five, and these given merely as examples, whence we may readily infer that there were many others. A glance at any neighbourhood will show that families without children are the exceptions, not the rule. But, besides, it is hardly conceivable that all the adult sons and daughters in these five cases so quickly determined on going over with their parents to a despised and persecuted religious society; whereas, if we suppose the children to have been still young, and therefore entirely under paternal authority, the matter presents no difficulty at all.”<\/p>\n Come<\/strong> With perfect Christian purity she invites these holy men, while remaining, to sojourn at her house; <\/em> that, free of charge, they may propagate the Gospel among its inhabitants.<\/p>\n ‘And when she was baptised, and her household, she besought us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there.” And she constrained us.’<\/p>\n ‘And when she was baptised.’ From the very beginning there had never been any doubt that she would be. Her every look and response had revealed it.<\/p>\n She was clearly well-to-do, as her trade suggested, and having a number of servants and slaves, who no doubt joined with her at the place of prayer, she and her household were baptised, possibly that very day in the river by which they had prayed so often. Then she begged him and his party, if he was satisfied with the genuineness of her faith, to come to her house as honoured guests to stay there while they were in Philippi. Hospitality was a regular feature of ancient life for inns were not abundant, and were often only rough and ready. It was not therefore unusual for well-chaperoned wealthy woman to offer hospitality. He yielded to her persuasion. No doubt he remembered the Lord’s words concerning searching out those who were worthy (Mat 10:11<\/span>). And thus for the remainder of their time in Philippi they stayed at the house of Lydia (Act 16:40<\/span>).<\/p>\n And unknown to her shortly would come through her doors a gnarled and middle-aged retired Roman centurion, the Philippian jailer, together with his household, and after him many another, both freedmen and slaves. She did not know it but her quiet life now was at an end, for her dreams were coming to fruition. Here were the beginnings of that flourishing church which would later receive from Paul his ‘Letter to the Philippians’.<\/p>\n Attempts are often made to connect her with people mentioned in that letter, (e.g Euodia or Syntyche (Php 4:2<\/span>), or even the ‘true-yokefellow’ of Php 4:3<\/span>), but none with any sound foundation. By the time of the letter the church had expanded greatly, and she would be that much older, and even possibly dead. But her most important work had already been done, and none could take it away from her.<\/p>\n Act 16:15<\/span> . ] Of what members her family consisted, cannot be determined. This passage and Act 16:33<\/span> , with Act 18:8<\/span> and 1Co 1:16<\/span> , are appealed to in order to prove infant baptism<\/em> in the apostolic age, or at least to make it probable. “Quis credat, in tot familiis nullum fuisse infantem, et Judaeos circumcidendis, gentiles lustrandis illis assuetos non etiam obtulisse eos baptismo?” Bengel. See also Lange, apost. Zeitalt<\/em> . II. p. 504 ff. But on this question the following remarks are to be made: (1) If, in the Jewish and Gentile families which were converted to Christ, there were children, their baptism is to be assumed in those cases<\/em> , when they were so far advanced that they could and did confess their faith on Jesus as the Messiah; for this was the universal, absolutely necessary qualification for the reception of baptism; comp. also Act 16:31-33<\/span> ; Act 18:8<\/span> . (2) If, on the other hand, there were children still incapable of confessing, baptism could not be administered to those to whom that, which was the necessary presupposition of baptism for Christian sanctification, was still wanting. (3) Such young children, whose parents were Christians, rather fell under the point of view of 1Co 7:14<\/span> , according to which, in conformity with the view of the apostolic church, the children of Christians were no longer regarded as , but as , and that not on the footing of having received the character of holiness by baptism, but as having part in the Christian by their fellowship with their Christian parents. See on 1 Cor. l.c<\/em> . Besides, the circumcision of children must have been retained for a considerable time among the Jewish-Christians, according to Act 21:21<\/span> . Therefore (4) the baptism of the children of Christians<\/em> , of which no trace is found in the N.T. (not even in Eph 6:1<\/span> , in opposition to Hofmann, Schriftbew<\/em> . II. 2, p. 192), is not to be held as an apostolic ordinance (Origen, in ep. ad Rom<\/em> . lib. v.: “Ab apostolis traditione<\/em> accepit ecclesia”), as, indeed, it encountered early and long resistance; but it is an institution of the church<\/em> , [54] which gradually arose in post-apostolic times in connection with the development of ecclesiastical life (comp. Ehrenfeuchter, prakt. Theol<\/em> . I. p. 82 f.) and of doctrinal teaching, not certainly attested before Tertullian, and by him still decidedly opposed, and, although already defended by Cyprian, only becoming general after the time of Augustine in virtue of that connection. Yet, even apart from the ecclesiastical premiss of a stern doctrine of original sin and of the devil going beyond Scripture, from which even exorcism arose, the continued maintenance<\/em> of infant baptism, as the objective attribution of spiritually creative grace in virtue of the plan of salvation established for every individual in the fellowship of the church, is so much the more justified, as this objective attribution<\/em> takes place with a view to the future subjective appropriation<\/em> . And this subjective appropriation has so necessarily to emerge with the development of self-consciousness and of knowledge through faith, that in default thereof the church would have to recognise in the baptized no true members, but only membra mortua<\/em> . This relation of connection with creative grace, in so far as the church is its sphere of operation, is a theme which, in presence of the attacks of Baptists and Rationalists, must overstep [55] the domain of exegesis (Mat 18:14<\/span> ; Mar 10:13<\/span> ff.; Mat 28:19<\/span> ; Joh 3:6<\/span> ; Rom 6:3<\/span> f.; Col 2:12<\/span> ; Tit 3:5<\/span> ; 1Pe 3:21<\/span> [56] ), and be worked out in that of dogmatics, yet without the addition of confirmation as any sort of supplement to baptism.<\/p>\n ] if ye have judged<\/em> . This judgment was formed either tacitly or openly on the ground of the whole conduct of Lydia even before her baptism, the latter itself was a witness of it; hence the perfect<\/em> is here entirely in order (in opposition to Kuinoel, Heinrichs, and others), and is not to be taken for the present<\/em> .<\/p>\n , in the sense of , is here chosen with delicate modesty. Comp. Dissen, ad Dem. de cor<\/em> . p. 195.<\/p>\n . . ] that I am a believer in the Lord<\/em> (Christ), i.e<\/em> . giving faith to His word and His promise, which ye have proclaimed (Act 16:13-14<\/span> ). Comp. Act 16:34<\/span> ; Act 18:8<\/span> , where Bengel well remarks: “Ipse dominus Jesus testabatur per Paulum.”<\/p>\n ] Comp. Luk 24:29 ; 1Sa 28:23<\/span> . The use of this purposely-chosen strong word, constraining<\/em> , is not to be explained from the refusal at first of those requested (Chrysostom, Bengel, comp. Ewald), but from the vehement urgency of the feeling of gratitude.<\/p>\n [54] It is the most striking example of the recognition of historical tradition in the evangelical church. Comp. Holtzmann, Kanon u. Tradit<\/em> . p. 399 ff.<\/p>\n [55] Comp. Martensen, d. christl. Taufe u. d. baptist. Frage<\/em> , Gotha 1860, Exo 2<\/span> , and Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
I.<\/strong> <\/em><\/strong>Although from the earliest days infant baptism has been practised, there are some who deny its scriptural authority.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>Let us see, now, what can be said for it.<\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n