Why is there infant baptisim?

[Obadiah]

".... and he will change the laws and the days ..." (O.T. prophecy of what the enemy will do/did/does)
one of the best evidence other than Scripture(as if any is needed, though it's not) is that the roman group started it.

I see. So in your viewpoint, infant baptism is a way that Satan changed "the laws"? I'm not saying I agree with infant baptism, just questioning if there is really any scripture to support the idea that it actually came from Satan.

By the way, FYI, when you quote scripture a lot of us appreciate if you would include the chapter and verse reference, and if your quote is anything other than public domain publications such as the KJV, you also must include which translation it came from (NASB, RSV, etc.)

2.7: All Bible verses and passages must be referenced (NASB, NIV, etc.) unless it is public domain like the KJV, YLT, etc.

Info on copyrights here: http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/

 

[Stan1953]

There is nothing wrong with infant baptism if they feel led of the Spirit to do so. Like the act of circumcision under the law, infant baptism is simply a witness to the world that you are dedicating your child to God. This dedication is much more about the parents commitment and intent of how they intend to raise their child before the Lord, then it has anything to do with the infant being baptized what so ever.

Where Christians do error, is when they start to claim that infant baptism is a requirement that must be performed: they make it a law and then teach others to follow it. And they have taken what was and acceptable offering through Faith, and they have dishonored themselves, leaving Faith to follow after a commandment, where their offering is not acceptable because it came by works of obedience instead of FAITH.

That would be called "Christening", and would not be an issue IMO. Baptism is clearly spelled out in the NT as a means to repentance that infants cannot do.

 

[TOG]

There is nothing wrong with infant baptism if they feel led of the Spirit to do so. Like the act of circumcision under the law, infant baptism is simply a witness to the world that you are dedicating your child to God. This dedication is much more about the parents commitment and intent of how they intend to raise their child before the Lord, then it has anything to do with the infant being baptized what so ever.

Where Christians do error, is when they start to claim that infant baptism is a requirement that must be performed: they make it a law and then teach others to follow it. And they have taken what was and acceptable offering through Faith, and they have dishonored themselves, leaving Faith to follow after a commandment, where their offering is not acceptable because it came by works of obedience instead of FAITH.

Dedicating our children to God is not wrong. Using water in such a dedication ceremony isn't wrong. But the only infant baptisms I've been to were in the Lutheran church, and after sprinkling the baby with water, the pastor says that the child is now saved. That's wrong.

The TOG​

 

[His_nee (Jeff)]

who besides satan leads BELIEVERS astray? , starting as an angel of light in the garden, through Revelation until it is finished?
who tempted Yeshua,
sifted peter, and
provides (often/usually/always) 'fatal' alternatives to serving Yhwh ? (entertainment, profit-seeking, 'security'(stocks,bonds,retirement,x01k,ssi,disab,real?estate/flipping,gambling,'sports',WAR,drugs,'health'care)
i.e. (instead of Christ, anti-Christ, instead of Truth, opposed to Truth.

there's over 1100 warnings in Scripture, though they are/were warnings only to and in the mind (my,mine as I first learned) as i read, with a view (purpose?) to wooing me / us to seek Yhwh the Creator in Yeshua by faith, in grace! such a wonderful GIFT from God.

once delivered from sin and satan and the flesh and the world's power of control and influence, the warnings are not longer at all fearful to me but rather cause for rejoicing in full agreement with Father.

yes, a lot of church practices, doctrines, teachings and lives are far removed from God's Word and God's Life.
we have all grown up in a world inundated with what is false, and rarely if ever espousing what is true. our parents, grandparents, great grandparents, great great grandparents, .... all the way back to before 350a.d. have been lied to , and it is a true and great miracle of God's Grace in Yeshua that anyone is called, chosen, and saved.....

 

[His_nee (Jeff)]

I see Scripture as a whole, wonderful , complete, inspired and sent by God.
Individual verses have been used to 'prove' what is false more often than what is true. (i.e. not really a proof,
but 'as if' a proof when used for a purpose other than Yhwh's Purpose. )

I fully enjoy reading , listening to, and sharing God's Word at any and all times, and perhaps I will try changing the
way I post from posting what Scripture says to posting Scripture to see if that inspires or results in life and healing for the readers. Formerly, whenever/ often when Scripture verses were posted, I saw mostly arguments against it even using mis-translations and history and doctrines and other of man's methods as if all or any of those over-rode what Scripture says. (Like for example when people are raised or taught that infant baptism is somehow okay with God, ... ... I was raised Lutheran, 120%!, and it was a joyful simply miracle that when I heard the truth I was able to accept it instead of resist it! JOYFUL IN CHRIST ! )

 

[Obadiah]

who besides satan leads BELIEVERS astray?

A good point indeed. If it is indeed true that infant baptism is wrong in God's eyes I can see where it would have come from Satan. That pre-supposes it is wrong. I tend to believe it is wrong when it is used as a way to salvation instead of just a dedication ceremony, but admit that is my personal opinion based on studies and opinions of a number of theologians. I also realize there are theologians who believe differently than I do, so I realize I'm not omniscient and I could be wrong as well. We are told that "...God is not the author of confusion... (1 Cor 14:33)

 

[WIP]

Dedicating our children to God is not wrong. Using water in such a dedication ceremony isn't wrong. But the only infant baptisms I've been to were in the Lutheran church, and after sprinkling the baby with water, the pastor says that the child is now saved. That's wrong.

The TOG​

I don't recall ever hearing our Lutheran pastor make this statement during or after a baptism.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I don't recall ever hearing our Lutheran pastor make this statement during or after a baptism.

It couldn't be true, Lutherans simply do not believe that. This Pastor was either out of line, or TOG misheard.

 

[TOG]

I don't recall ever hearing our Lutheran pastor make this statement during or after a baptism.

There are a few variations of the liturgy. I have been to a few baptisms in a couple of different Lutheran churches, and something to that effect was said at all of them. Some churches may skip that part.

The TOG​

 

[Obadiah]

The Lutheran church is divided on a number of issues, actually forming at one time 3 separate "synods" which can be quite different from each other. I spent my teenage years in an "American Lutheran Church" synod and never heard anyone officially claim that infant baptism saves a child, but I did hear individual members talk about this. At the time there was also the "Lutheran Church in America" and the "Missouri Synod", and I'm not sure what their beliefs were on this. I do know that I was "baptized" as an infant in the American Lutheran Church and my mom seemed to believe that saved me. But individual church members are many times wrong about what their church doctrines say, so I don't know if that was really the belief of the Lutheran church I was baptized in or not. Later in life I accepted Christ and a while after that I was baptized by immersion in a Christian and Missionary Alliance church. I consider the later baptism to be my real one.

 

[Stan1953]

All I know for sure is that Lutherans, Catholics, Episcopalians, Methodists practise infant baptism and the others don't. There is a clear distinction between dedication and salvation. The former is done by the parents as I did with my four children. The latter can ONLY be effected by those who have the cognitive ability to know they are sinners and need Christ as their savior. I make no claim as to who and when God draws us but my daughter was saved and baptised when she was 12. Most believe that the age of accountability starts around 7 or 8. There may be exceptions to this rule, but there always are exceptions to any particular rule.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

It couldn't be true, Lutherans simply do not believe that. This Pastor was either out of line, or TOG misheard.

I'm going to retract this statement, I was mistaken.

I honestly had not heard this expressed by Lutherans before, but they are very close to Roman Catholicism on this particular doctrine.

Lutherans have what is called the Book of Concord which contains several confessions, one of which being the "Large Catechism." In it is contained a section on Baptism which I will quote.

"For as truly as I can say, No man has spun the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer out of his head, but they are revealed and given by God Himself, so also I can boast that Baptism is no human trifle, but instituted by God Himself, moreover, that it is most solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we cannot be saved, lest any one regard it as a trifling matter, like putting on a new red coat."

"Therefore state it most simply thus, that the power, work, profit, fruit, and end of Baptism is this, namely, to save. For no one is baptized in order that he may become a prince, but, as the words declare, that he be saved."

On Baptizing infants.

"That the Baptism of infants is pleasing to Christ is sufficiently proved from His own work, namely, that God sanctifies many of them who have been thus baptized, and has given them the Holy Ghost; and that there are yet many even to-day in whom we perceive that they have the Holy Ghost both because of their doctrine and life; as it is also given to us by the grace of God that we can explain the Scriptures and come to the knowledge of Christ, which is impossible without the Holy Ghost."

Basically it goes on to say that they pray for the the gift of faith to the child and when they grow up they will see if the baptism was properly received by the child or not. At least that is how I understood it.

Text taken from this link: http://bookofconcord.org/lc-6-baptism.php

 

[WIP]

I spent my teenage years in an "American Lutheran Church" synod and never heard anyone officially claim that infant baptism saves a child,

The ALC is the historical root of the church of my membership. We were assimilated into the ELCA when the ALC was merged with the LCA but we dissolved that association a few years ago and currently remain independent of any association.

I looked up the LCMS website and this is what they say about baptism.

The LCMS does not believe that Baptism is ABSOLUTELY necessary for salvation. All true
believers in the Old Testament era were saved without baptism. Mark 16:16 implies that it is
not the absence of Baptism that condemns a person but the absence of faith, and there are
clearly other ways of coming to faith by the power of the Holy Spirit (reading or hearing the
Word of God). Still, Baptism dare not be despised or willfully neglected, since it is explicitly
commanded by God and has His precious promises attached to it. It is not a mere “ritual” or
“symbol,” but a powerful means of grace by which God grants faith and the forgiveness of sins.

 

[Obadiah]

The ALC is the historical root of the church of my membership. We were assimilated into the ELCA when the ALC was merged with the LCA but we dissolved that association a few years ago and currently remain independent of any association.

I looked up the LCMS website and this is what they say about baptism.

That quote from the LCMS web site sounds a lot closer to what I was taught in the Lutheran church, and a lot closer to what I now believe. Maybe the ALC I was in as a teenager was closer to the LCMS than they would like to have admitted!

 

[Webb]

Please show the scripture that supports your viewpoint.

Thank you, I shall try to be brief. Any lexicon will reveal that our English word baptism is transliterated from the Koine Greek (meaning we had no word for it) and means a burial, to plunge, to dip, etc. Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12 says baptism is a burial. When Jesus was baptized He "went up straightway out of the water", Matt.3:16. One does not come up "out of the water" in sprinkling or pouring. In Acts 8:26-40 when the man from Ethiopia was baptized "they went down both into the water" and "they were come up both out of the water". In so-called infant baptism one does not do this, and please note further the one performing the baptism also went down into and came up out of the water. One having had "infant baptism" and the person performing it does not do that. I personally know this as I at one time was sprinkled for baptism, but I did not do what the scripture taught.

Further, the scripture reveals that baptism is for the believer ( Mk.16:15,16; Matt.28:19,20; Acts 2:40,41; Acts 22:16, Acts 8:13 and 8:35-39 and Acts 18:8. The infant is incapable of believing.

The scripture further teaches that baptism is for those capable of repentance, Acts 2:38. The infant cannot do this.

It is the teaching of the scripture that baptism is also for the "remission of sins" (Acts 2:38) and (Acts 22:16) and it is baptism which puts us into Christ and into His death ( Rom.6:3,4 and Gal.3:27) thus where we appropriate His cleansing blood ( Rev.1:7 and Acts 22:16).

All of the above has been changed by man thus under the influence of Satan. Ephesians 6:4 reads there is but one baptism. In the garden God told our first parents that if they ate of the forbidden fruit, " thou shalt surely die" but Satan told them "thou shalt not surely die". He changed but one word -- and what chaos we have!

I shall be happy to enlarge on this.
God bless,
w

 

[Stan1953]

who besides satan leads BELIEVERS astray? , starting as an angel of light in the garden, through Revelation until it is finished?

Sadly this is a COMMON misconception. The scripture tell us that "he human heart is deceitfully wicked above all things", and " no man is good", so blaming the enemy for everything is not owning up to our own culpability. We sin, period. Regardless as to whether it is external temptation or own internal carnal nature. Apostasy is caused by our own lack of belief or commitment, it is not caused by temptation. We need to remember to ALWAYS give God the glory and never credit the enemy for anything.

 

[His_nee (Jeff)]

I STRONGLY AGREE with you not to give any type of credit or glory or any such thing to the devil or his cohorts in any way.

I am deeply saddened that multitudes are deceived whether by satan or by the flesh or by sin or by themselves,
not matter what the root of their deception and no matter what the continuation of it (as it is very much more popular than TRUTH is).

We are even strongly restricted on any and all media in the untied states(more in the rest of the world perhaps?) ,
and a lot of what used to be 'permitted'
to be published cannot even be found now, or not without great effort anyway.
And it is getting dramatically worse every day.

The two opposing forces, no matter what anyone wants to call them, God vs everything else,
are getting more and more different, separate, and
in a sense 'isolated' from each other ---- less mixing, less grey areas it seems.

Those who go along with the crowd still go along with the crowd, and more so -
those who are called out by God, are more and more purified by Him daily, with willing joyfulness on their (our) part,
as God accomplishes all that He set out to do, all that He said He would do in Christ Jesus our (and the only) Lord and Savior.

 

[thethinker]

I do not believe that infants are able to choose their faith as an infant. Parents can dedicate to raising their children in God"s way but, baptizing their children as infants is taking away God's beautiful gift of "Free will".

Wasn't God taking away the so called "beautiful gift of free will" when He commanded that 8 day old infants be circumcised? Why didn't God let the child grow up to decide for himself if he wanted to be a member of the covenant community?

 

[Stan1953]

Wasn't God taking away the so called "beautiful gift of free will" when He commanded that 8 day old infants be circumcised? Why didn't God let the child grow up to decide for himself if he wanted to be a member of the covenant community?

Don't confuse the OT law of external circumcision that identified a nation, to the God given free will we have under the NT.
Many in Israel in the OT were externally circumcised but never made the internal transition to the heart and faith.
Now in the NT that is all we have to do is have our heart circumcised by giving it to Jesus as our savior.
Infant circumcision today is simply a medical procedure with NO implications to faith or nation.

 

[His_nee (Jeff)]

Wasn't God taking away the so called "beautiful gift of free will" when He commanded that 8 day old infants be circumcised? Why didn't God let the child grow up to decide for himself if he wanted to be a member of the covenant community?

psalm 115:3 psalm 135:6

isaiah 45:9
romans 9:21