“A lot of churches do a baby dedication. Where the mother and father agree that they will raise that child on the word of God.”

In response to a internal need for the credo baptist to be obedient to Gods covenant, some credo baptists rip this passage out of context relating to Hannah’s prayer to God. Proper hermeneutics reveals two things: 1) Hannah is submitting to leaving baby Samuel @ the temple for service w/ the Priests and 2) Hannah assuredly had the sign placed on baby Samuel on the eighth day. Dedication as Hannah’s did not obstruct the trees for the forest! They knew the importance of the Abrahamic covenant. The credo that submits to this type of thing in light of rebelling against the command to place the sign (Gen 17) is doubly deceived as if they would do a simple study on the passage they would see that it has nothing to do with the way it is being used in their cases. I have never seen one parent leave their child with the Pastor of their congregations after the ceremony! IMO, it is an internal need of each and every credo parent to feel that their child is somehow in Gods grace even though their theology contradicts the premise. The paedo however, has a hope and that hope based upon Gods promise and covenant.

The other thing is to consider that Hannah leaves her son, based on a Nazarite vow. The only persons allowed such privileges are those that are already ‘in covenant’ or covenant keeping peoples.