Infant Baptism and the Bible: Should Babies Be Baptized?

[Alabaster]

Dear Alabaster, A truthful answer has been found in the following pamphlet.
The question is: What does the Church that Jesus founded (Matthew 16:18) say about baptism? The Church tells us what the NT means. We do not as individuals say what the NT means. It is not up to us to decide what to believe. It is up to the Church, because it is not individual believers, but the Church, that is "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 St. Timothy 3:15). Therefore to reject Church tradition (2 Thess. 2:15) is to reject the NT. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington ... See (q.v., quid videtur): Hainsworth, Fr. John. (2005). INFANT BAPTISM: WHAT THE CHURCH BELIEVES. Conciliar Press Ministries, Inc., P.O. Box 76, Ben Lomond, CA 95005-0076 Conciliar Press - Home page Call or write for a free catalog.
I learned what I know about John 15:26 from Peter Gillquist and Conciliar Press (and a few years earlier from Wolgemuth & Hyatt Press in Brentwood, TN).

So, now you believe a pamphlet over the word of God?

I suggest you jot down all the Biblical references in my OP and look them up, pray about it and get back to us. Thanks.

 

[Alabaster]

Dear Alabaster, If Jesus Christ is your authority, what is the Church that Christ founded? What does Matthew 16:17 say about individualistic salvation? Scripture also says, "By one Spirit we are baptized into one Body (the Church)". Which body is the Body of Christ, the Church? If all one needs to know can be found by oneself alone with the Bible, why get together with other believers? Don't we need the support of some traditions that don't come from ourselves alone, but from other Christians? So who says Jesus Christ is not the authority of the Orthodox Church? That is precisely what St. Paul indicates, that the Church is "the pillar and ground of the truth". We wouldn't say this of ourselves as individual believers, but as souls called to come into the Body of Christ. It is only a matter of time. I must do this. Otherwise I just won't talk religion with anyone anymore. We need more than religion and private opinions. We need Jesus Christ. I must have Jesus in my whole life. In Erie PA Scott H.

How about moving this to another thread. You and I differ on what constitutes the Church of Jesus Christ, and that basic belief takes us to incompatible places.

If we have Jesus Christ living in and through us, that is all we need, for WE ARE THE CHURCH.

 

[Scotth1960]

So, now you believe a pamphlet over the word of God?

I suggest you jot down all the Biblical references in my OP and look them up, pray about it and get back to us. Thanks.

Dear Alabaster, Any person can declare himself/herself to be "the Church", but that does not necessarily make it so. Which Church is being referred to? The Church of the Duck? (Quack, quack!)
Sincerely, Scott R. Harrington PS Who says what the word of God is?

 

[Alabaster]

Dear Alabaster, Any person can declare himself/herself to be "the Church", but that does not necessarily make it so. Which Church is being referred to? The Church of the Duck? (Quack, quack!)
Sincerely, Scott R. Harrington PS Who says what the word of God is?

It does make it so. Every born again believer is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ. Mock away, Scott.

Jude 1:17-18 NKJV
But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: how they told you that there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts.

 

[Scotth1960]

S:

If you are trying to prove infant baptism from the Bible, you haven't succeeded.

The Ethiopian eunuch was baptised (the word means dip) because — and the Bible says it — 'there was much water there'.

You may not be of the same convictions as me.

But for you apparently to make out that I rather than you have strayed from early practice is not accurate.

Dear Farouk, Have you succeeded in proving from the Bible that the Bible says we are to form our Christian theology from the "Bible alone" (sola Scriptura)? Where in Scripture does it say truth is limited to one book, the Bible, and cannot be in oral tradition? In Erie PA Scott H.
PS Perhaps you need to rethink this and read 2 Thessalonians 2:15.

 

[Alabaster]

Dear Farouk, Have you succeeded in proving from the Bible that the Bible says we are to form our Christian theology from the "Bible alone" (sola Scriptura)? Where in Scripture does it say truth is limited to one book, the Bible, and cannot be in oral tradition? In Erie PA Scott H.
PS Perhaps you need to rethink this and read 2 Thessalonians 2:15.

Where does it say anywhere that God has provided His message to mankind in another book? To look elsewhere for His truth to mankind is another form of idolatry and unbelief.

The Scriptures were enough for Jesus---they are good enough for His people.

 

[Alabaster]

 

[Scotth1960]

Where does it say anywhere that God has provided His message to mankind in another book? To look elsewhere for His truth to mankind is another form of idolatry and unbelief.

The Scriptures were enough for Jesus---they are good enough for His people.

Dear Alabaster, Using the same Bible, or approximately the same Bible or Bibles, people reach contradictory conclusions. How can that be, if the Bible is so clear, it should produce the same results in understanding in all readers.
Does the Bible teach

pre tribulation rapture
mid tribulation rapture
post tribulation rapture
past tribulation in 70 AD
future coming of Jesus Christ
past coming of Jesus Christ in 70 AD (Ed Stevens, Bradford, PA)
double predestination (Calvinism)
single predestination (Lutheran, Anglican, Methodist, Catholic, Orthodox, etc.)
free will
no free will
Once saved always saved salvation cannot be lost
salvation can be lost
one Church
many churches
2 sacraments only
7 sacraments
7 ecumenical councils
21 ecumenical councils
pope of Rome over all Christians
no pope of Rome over all
Peter the rock
Peter not the rock
Christ the rock
the Bible alone
not the Bible alone, the Bible and church tradition
sola fide by faith alone
not by faith alone
virgin Mary had other children not ever virgin
virgin Mary had no other children ever virgin
immaculate conception of Mary
no immaculate conception of Mary
papal infallibility
no papal infallibility
Filioque And from the Son
no Filioque, from the Father alone, not "and from the Son"
infallible Church
no infallible Church
person born again without baptism
person born again in baptism
speaking in tongues required
no speaking in tongues required
dispensationalism 7 dispensations
covenant theology no dispensationalism
the Church is Israel now the Israel of God
the Jews will return to the land
no third return to the land of Jews predicted
1000 year millennium in future
no 1000 year millennium in future
1000 year milllennium is happening now
Do you BEGIN TO SEE what I mean? How can THE BIBLE teach all these many, contradictory things? Using the Bible alone, people conclude very different things from reading "Sola Scriptura". The Bible alone method does not produce UNITY in Christian doctrine.
Yet the NT teaches sound doctrine and demands it of all Christians.
In Erie PA Scott H.

 

[jasoncran]

Dear Alabaster, Using the same Bible, or approximately the same Bible or Bibles, people reach contradictory conclusions. How can that be, if the Bible is so clear, it should produce the same results in understanding in all readers.
Does the Bible teach

pre tribulation rapture
mid tribulation rapture
post tribulation rapture
past tribulation in 70 AD
future coming of Jesus Christ
past coming of Jesus Christ in 70 AD (Ed Stevens, Bradford, PA)
double predestination (Calvinism)
single predestination (Lutheran, Anglican, Methodist, Catholic, Orthodox, etc.)
free will
no free will
Once saved always saved salvation cannot be lost
salvation can be lost
one Church
many churches
2 sacraments only
7 sacraments
7 ecumenical councils
21 ecumenical councils
pope of Rome over all Christians
no pope of Rome over all
Peter the rock
Peter not the rock
Christ the rock
the Bible alone
not the Bible alone, the Bible and church tradition
sola fide by faith alone
not by faith alone
virgin Mary had other children not ever virgin
virgin Mary had no other children ever virgin
immaculate conception of Mary
no immaculate conception of Mary
papal infallibility
no papal infallibility
Filioque And from the Son
no Filioque, from the Father alone, not "and from the Son"
infallible Church
no infallible Church
person born again without baptism
person born again in baptism
speaking in tongues required
no speaking in tongues required
dispensationalism 7 dispensations
covenant theology no dispensationalism
the Church is Israel now the Israel of God
the Jews will return to the land
no third return to the land of Jews predicted
1000 year millennium in future
no 1000 year millennium in future
1000 year milllennium is happening now
Do you BEGIN TO SEE what I mean? How can THE BIBLE teach all these many, contradictory things? Using the Bible alone, people conclude very different things from reading "Sola Scriptura". The Bible alone method does not produce UNITY in Christian doctrine.
Yet the NT teaches sound doctrine and demands it of all Christians.
In Erie PA Scott H.

ok let me ask you this, have you ever been to all of the orthodox churches and know what they teach??

i know that even in the rcc there are variations
ie the charismatic catholics

 

[Scotth1960]

Again, this text simply does not say that one must hear and understand prior to obediencece, at least in versions that are not paraphrases, and therefore involve significant interpretive licence. From the NASB, a translation respected for its fidelity to the original greek:

No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me (A)draws him; and I will (B)raise him up on the last day. 45"It is written (C)in the prophets, '(D)AND THEY SHALL ALL BE (E)TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.

There is nothing in this text that requires "hearing and understanding" prior to belief.

I agree with you, DREW. There is "nothing in this text that requires "hearing and understanding" prior to belief in the Word of God, Christ. In Erie Scott H.

 

[Scotth1960]

ok let me ask you this, have you ever been to all of the orthodox churches and know what they teach??

i know that even in the rcc there are variations
ie the charismatic catholics

Dear jasoncran, I was questioning the Protestant assumption of sola scriptura. As for the orthodox churches, they all believe THE SAME THING. There are no major differences among them, maybe just differences of rite (liturgical practice) but no difference of DOCTRINE. They all teach the Council of 381 AD of 318 Orthodox fathers. In Erie Scott H.

 

[jasoncran]

Dear jasoncran, I was questioning the Protestant assumption of sola scriptura. As for the orthodox churches, they all believe THE SAME THING. There are no major differences among them, maybe just differences of rite (liturgical practice) but no difference of DOCTRINE. They all teach the Council of 381 AD of 318 Orthodox fathers. In Erie Scott H.

logically fallacy you cant be everywhere and know that for sure , the argument of no true scotsman cant be used.

i know for a fact that even in my church not all pentacostal agree with the pastor on all things.

why? i'm one of them. and i know that the rcc says the same thing and i know otherwise as i talk to the more liberal catholics and have seen it for myself and will look again.

 

[Alabaster]

I agree with you, DREW. There is "nothing in this text that requires "hearing and understanding" prior to belief in the Word of God, Christ. In Erie Scott H.

You cannot come to Christ without a measure of spiritual hearing and understanding. It is by revelation that we realize who Jesus really is.

Babies don't have the ability to comprehend their need for a Saviour, and God is OK with that!

 

[Scotth1960]

logically fallacy you cant be everywhere and know that for sure , the argument of no true scotsman cant be used.

i know for a fact that even in my church not all pentacostal agree with the pastor on all things.

why? i'm one of them. and i know that the rcc says the same thing and i know otherwise as i talk to the more liberal catholics and have seen it for myself and will look again.

Jasoncran, The argument cuts both ways. You can't be everywhere, and know that all the Orthodox churches do not believe and teach the same thing. Where there is heresy, they are excommunicated from the church. Then they are not Orthodox. We in the west, including me, are not Orthodox. For years I said "and the Son" and I did not know better. Then God showed me John 15:26 through an Orthodox Christian. I am not an expert on everything the Orthodox believe, but everything I read from them they all believe exactly the same thing. It is not impossible to believe that; if any Church has the Holy Spirit, then they will all believe the same doctrine, because the Holy Spirit teaches no false doctrine. In Erie PA Scott H.

 

[jasoncran]

Jasoncran, The argument cuts both ways. You can't be everywhere, and know that all the Orthodox churches do not believe and teach the same thing. Where there is heresy, they are excommunicated from the church. Then they are not Orthodox. We in the west, including me, are not Orthodox. For years I said "and the Son" and I did not know better. Then God showed me John 15:26 through an Orthodox Christian. I am not an expert on everything the Orthodox believe, but everything I read from them they all believe exactly the same thing. It is not impossible to believe that; if any Church has the Holy Spirit, then they will all believe the same doctrine, because the Holy Spirit teaches no false doctrine. In Erie PA Scott H.

thus my point if they arent in heresy or not excomunicated then by default if know that is accepted

that i'm sure happens.

one cant make everyone agree not even god forces men to do that , for if you believe that one then switch to reform theology.

just because the members arent open about there disgressions doesnt mean they dont disagree.

come on its like saying this.

in order to be a real scientist one must believe in evolution, if not you cant be a scientist.

 

[Alabaster]

if any Church has the Holy Spirit, then they will all believe the same doctrine, because the Holy Spirit teaches no false doctrine.

That is the key. A church must be in line with the word of God and needs to be a Spirit-filled and Spirit-led church.

 

[Scotth1960]

Some denominations baptize babies, but other groups teach that baptism is only for those who are old enough to make a personal choice based on their own faith and repentance. Does the Bible authorize infant baptism or does it teach personal responsibility and individual accountability? Are infants born guilty of original sin and inherited depravity? What does the gospel of Jesus Christ teach?


Introduction

Jesus clearly commanded people to be baptized (Matt. 28:18-20), yet there is much disagreement about who should be baptized.

Some religious groups baptize babies. But other people say that, before one is baptized, a person should be old enough to accept the responsibility to make his own decision whether or not to be baptized and to live the Christian life. That is, they teach individual responsibility and personal accountability. The purpose of this study is to learn what the Bible says about infant baptism.

We begin with an important basic principle: In order to participate in a religious practice with God's approval, we must find New Testament teaching authorizing that practice.

Everything we do in religion must be done by Jesus' authority (Col. 3:17). The Scriptures provide us to all good works (2 Tim. 3:16,17), so if a practice is not included in God's word, it must not be a good work. If a practice is not authorized in the New Testament, then it must be human in origin and therefore not pleasing to God (2 John 9; Gal. 1:6-9; Matt. 15:9; Prov. 14:12; etc.)

According to these Scriptures babies should be baptized only if we can find statements in the New Testament that show that God wants us to practice this. To prove infant baptism is unacceptable, we do not have to find a passage that expressly forbids the practice. Rather, if the Bible tells us specifically who to baptize, and if infants are not included in those instructions - i.e., if the gospel teaches individual responsibility and personal accountability - then the practice of baptizing babies should be abandoned.

Please consider the following Bible teaching:

Part I: Can Babies Meet the Conditions that Must Precede Baptism?

The Bible reveals that a person must do certain things before he can be baptized. If these things are not done, then the baptism would not be Scriptural. So we ask whether or not a baby can fulfill the Scriptural prerequisites of baptism.

Note that God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34,35; Rom. 2:11), so there are not two sets of prerequisites for baptism - one for babies and one for adults. Whatever the Bible requires of some people to be baptized, it requires the same of all people.

A. Before Baptism One Must Hear and Understand the Gospel.

Mark 16:15,16 - All who are baptized, must first have the gospel preached to them. But what good would be done by preaching to a baby?

John 6:44,45 - No one can come to Jesus without being taught from the Father. This does not just mean simply hearing sounds. One must "learn"; he must understand the meaning of what is being taught. Can babies do this (cf. 1 Cor. 14:20)?

Acts 2:36,41 - This example shows what it means for people to learn the gospel before they are baptized. The people were given evidence that Jesus is God's Son (v14-36). They were told that, on the basis of this evidence, they must "know assuredly" that Jesus is Lord and Christ (v36). Those who were baptized were those who gladly received this message (v41). Can babies hear and learn in this way?

B. Before Baptism One Must Believe the Gospel.

Mark 16:15,16 - Every creature who is baptized must first believe the gospel which they have been taught. Baptism is only for those who are capable of hearing and believing the gospel. No one is included in the command if they cannot first hear, understand, and believe the gospel. Can a baby do these things?

Galatians 3:26,27 - However many people are baptized, all of them must do so by faith. Everyone who is baptized must first understand the gospel well enough to believe it.

Acts 8:12 - When the people of Samaria gave heed to the gospel that was preached (v5,6), both men and women were baptized. When were they baptized? When they believed, not before. Can babies believe? If not, they should not be baptized until they do believe.

In all Bible examples of baptism, people were baptized only when they personally had full faith, based on their own understanding of the gospel. Never were they baptized on the basis of someone else's faith, such as their parents. No one else can believe for us, just like no one can be baptized for us.

Dear Alabaster, Kindly see my thread Infant baptism in Acts 11:13-14. Thank you. I believe this answers why some baptize infants and not "adults" only. All who can believe should be baptized. All who can receive should be baptized. Infants need Christ, too. In Erie PA Scott Harrington
PS Not only infants but also adults who believe in Christ need baptism.

 

[Alabaster]

Dear Alabaster, Kindly see my thread Infant baptism in Acts 11:13-14. Thank you. I believe this answers why some baptize infants and not "adults" only. All who can believe should be baptized. All who can receive should be baptized. Infants need Christ, too. In Erie PA Scott Harrington
PS Not only infants but also adults who believe in Christ need baptism.

If we do as God commands and raise our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, they will grow to love Him and receive Him for themselves, and follow through on the command of baptism. It is His promise.

You are wrong when you say, "All who can believe should be baptized", in that you add to scripture. Scripture doesn't teach us that.

All those who have believed and have received Jesus Christ as Saviour are eligible for baptism.

 

[Scotth1960]

If we do as God commands and raise our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, they will grow to love Him and receive Him for themselves, and follow through on the command of baptism. It is His promise.

You are wrong when you say, "All who can believe should be baptized", in that you add to scripture. Scripture doesn't teach us that.

All those who have believed and have received Jesus Christ as Saviour are eligible for baptism.

Dear Alabaster, You seem to be just assuming and believing that a baby cannot believe in Christ because the child does not or cannot speak for himself/herself.
That would make baptism based on a work and not on God's grace. Even with believers who can speak, it is still an act of grace. Why does its efficacy depend upon when it is administered? Where does Scripture say that? It does come down to whether or not infants should be excluded from the word "household" in Acts 11. It seems against the spirit of Christ's words, "Let the little children come unto Me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven".
Anyway, I think this whole discussion is rather theoretical. It all depends upon whether or not one has infant children. Why should one condemn those who have their children baptized? There is no verse of Scripture that says, "Condemn those who baptize infants". In Erie PA Scott Harrington

 

[Alabaster]

Dear Alabaster, You seem to be just assuming and believing that a baby cannot believe in Christ because the child does not or cannot speak for himself/herself.

He can't.

That would make baptism based on a work and not on God's grace. Even with believers who can speak, it is still an act of grace. Why does its efficacy depend upon when it is administered?

Because the Bible says so.

Where does Scripture say that? It does come down to whether or not infants should be excluded from the word "household" in Acts 11. It seems against the spirit of Christ's words, "Let the little children come unto Me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven".

Please, truly take in the OP, and feel free to make notes.

Anyway, I think this whole discussion is rather theoretical. It all depends upon whether or not one has infant children. Why should one condemn those who have their children baptized? There is no verse of Scripture that says, "Condemn those who baptize infants". In Erie PA Scott Harrington

There is nothing theoretical about it.

No one is condemning anyone. However, those who baptize their babies are performing a useless work of the flesh.