Infant Baptism, Further Implications, 3

3. Those of us who adhere to the practice of infant baptism are irresponsible and derelict in our covenant duties when we do not understand the scriptural basis for our practice and defend it as such.

It is frequently asserted that since there are well-meaning, devout Christians on both sides of the aisle with regard to this subject, then it must surely be an insignificant issue, not worthy of defending. I would like to submit to you that this is a coward's way of handling theological controversies. The truth is the truth and should be sought and defended by all who claim to love the Lord. The fact that Christians with opposing views can consider each other brothers and respect each other's devotion, loyalty, and commitment to Christ, does not preclude them from analyzing each other's positions and finding in them serious theological problems. Though we may be agreed that baptism is a secondary issue, we can never agree that it is not worth understanding and practicing aright. Consider the alternatives. The only way for this to not be an issue is if we reject the objective value of doctrine altogether. There is just no other way. Very few Christians are willing to go that far, at least on paper. If we are willing to say, as some ignorantly do, “It doesn't matter what you believe as long as you love Jesus,” then we have no business rejecting the errors of Mormons, Hindus, Buddhists or Muslims. Once you cease to say what is right, you lose the ability to say what is wrong.