Infant Baptism and the Bible: Should Babies Be Baptized?

[whitney]

Again, there is no direct statement, or even an implication, that "faith" precedes baptism. You are, once more, reading that in.


Once again, there is no actual case here. No one is denying that we need to repent. But, yet again, there is no actual necessity to read this statement as requiring that baptism can only happen after a person has repented. You are "reading in" a temporal sequence that is not there. Yes, the text is "open" to such a reading, but it is also open to reading with no temporal ordering. If my wife instructs me "wash the car and take out the trash", is she instructing me to do these two things in a particular order.

No she is not - one has to read that in.


You have not made the case yet.

The case I am trying to make, Drew, is that anyone can be baptized, of course if the parents want their infant to be baptized, then it will be so for that baby. Yet baptism doesn't save, an infant will go to heaven regardless if they are baptized or not, they are innocent.
We can baptize all the infants in the entire world and as adults, they still can either be saved or not. Salvation does not come from baptism, we must have faith in Christ and repent of our sins.
Can we agree on this?

 

[whitney]

Ok folks; let’s look at this topic using just the facts.


Fact: It is clear that the Bible does not teach the "age of reason" and most of you grudgingly admit it.

Fact: It is also clear that the Bible does not say that anyone not having reached an “age of reason†shouldn't be baptized.

Fact: It is crystal clear that the Bible explicitly declares that WHOLE households were baptized.

Fact: The early Church practiced baptizing infants, not keeping them from Christ.


Now that we have looked at the facts surrounding infant baptism, let’s see if I can get you to consider something. The Church understands the facts about infant baptism, even if you don’t. Some here, and you know who you are, have your minds made up about what the Church is, but, there is a problem with what you believe in that regard: It doesn’t match Christian history, but ignoring history and following the beat of your own drum is more important than facing the truth. The Christian truth is that the Church came before the New Testament. Is there anyone here that doesn’t know that? I know that fact is hard to accept because it does not fit with your personal interpretations. Try to learn your Christian history and try not to worship the book that the Church wrote. Worship God; listen to Christ as he teaches you through the Church that he established explicitly for your benefit. Teaching is an important tool the Church uses to save souls.

There is only one Church, not tens of thousands. All other ecclesiastical groups are splinters of schism, teaching their own brand of Christianity. Let Christ’s Church explain HER book. When Christ’s visible presence was taken from us, Jesus did not leave us orphans. He promised to remain with us until the end of time; he sent us his Spirit. By communicating his Spirit, Christ mystically constitutes as his body those brothers of his who are called TOGETHER from every nation. The Church is gathered around Christ; she is united in him, in his body. Three aspects of the Church as the Body of Christ are the UNITY of all her members with each other as a result of their union with Christ; Christ as head of the Body; and the Church as bride of Christ. The Church is how Christ remains with us until the end of time. Ecclesiastical groups come and go, but the Church remains.

So perhaps some should quit trying to act like they understand every aspect of the Church’s book. You are too far removed, you can’t fully understand without the explanations from the book’s compiler and caretaker, the Church. It is arrogant to think that without any other sources, a person can understand every aspect of the Bible. Keep in mind 2 John 3:16.

So then, why doesn't it resonate with some of you, that having tens of thousands different "churches", all interpreting the Bible differently, isn't a good thing for obvious reasons? Why do some of you, without knowing the history of the Christian faith, think your personal interpretation is correct when you haven't even read the extra-biblical writings of the Church? You have your own personal version so burned into your mind that when you read in the New Testament that entire households were baptized; it means nothing to you. When you are presented with the writings of the earliest Christians that tell you flat-out, that the Church baptizes babies, it means nothing to you. When you look at the history of your own denomination, and see that it was started by some guy with a difference of opinion than that of his former pastor; it means nothing to you. When you trace the roots of your denomination and find out that the guy who didn’t agree with his pastor started your group a mere two or three hundred years ago, sometimes a mere decade ago, it means nothing?

So I ask, how can the facts concerning baptism be discussed intelligently when some have the book of the Church pulled over their heads like blinders so as to never being able to look to the left or right in order to read what the Church and the earliest Christians wrote concerning what the Church is, and how it interprets her book in regards to infant baptism and a host of other issues.

Now please go back to the top of this post and reread the only real facts we have concerning the baptism of persons younger than the so called “age of reasoningâ€.

Can we use some common sense about "age of reasoning"? What does that mean to you? Can a baby reason?

 

[Drew]

The case I am trying to make, Drew, is that anyone can be baptized, of course if the parents want their infant to be baptized, then it will be so for that baby. Yet baptism doesn't save, an infant will go to heaven regardless if they are baptized or not, they are innocent.
We can baptize all the infants in the entire world and as adults, they still can either be saved or not. Salvation does not come from baptism, we must have faith in Christ and repent of our sins.
Can we agree on this?

I appreciate where you are coming from and I used to hold the view you appear to hold. However, I believe I am coming to believe that physical baptism does indeed play a role in "salvation", even though I fully believe it is not strictly necessary. I will try to explain what I mean by all this in future posts.

I come from the "protestant" tradition but have been surprised to see how Paul really views baptism - I believe he sees it as much more vital than the protestant tradition does. Hopefully, I will explain later.

 

[stovebolts]

I believe the answer is yes, and I need to tighten some arguments I have developed in the past about this. I have thought about the Romans 6 text in the past and have some material on this - I need some time to re-examine and tweak it.

How does an infant participate in 1 Peter 3:21 You've got me curios now.

Thanks!

 

[whitney]

I appreciate where you are coming from and I used to hold the view you appear to hold. However, I believe I am coming to believe that physical baptism does indeed play a role in "salvation", even though I fully believe it is not strictly necessary. I will try to explain what I mean by all this in future posts.

I come from the "protestant" tradition but have been surprised to see how Paul really views baptism - I believe he sees it as much more vital than the protestant tradition does. Hopefully, I will explain later.

I do know what you are talking about because we are supposed to be baptized, BUT it doesn't mean we really are saved because we FIRST have to have faith in Christ and repent of our sins.

Looking forward to hearing more on your viewpoint.

 

[francisdesales]

Hello A-Christian, I agree with Jeff's opinion that I believe that scripture points towards believer's baptism. With that being said, I believe even some of the early Church disagrees with you and supported believers baptism. Justin Martyr, who was from the Church in Rome, in A.D. 155 in his "First Apology", wrote AGAINST infant baptism. Irenaeus, in A.D.185 in his "Against Heresies", was obviously PRO infant baptism. Tertullian, in A.D. 210 in his "On Baptism, was also AGAINST infant baptism. By the third century infant baptism was as common as it is today. I'd like to see any other 2nd century literature that you can produce which are pro infant baptism. 2 of the 3 earliest pieces that I can find speak against infant baptism, though I am sure there must be others which are for and against. It appears to me that the early Church was divided as we are today. Your statement above should read--
Fact: the early Church also practiced believer's baptism

Westtexas

West,

I agree with the gist of your statement, although the specifics, I am not so sure about, esp. on Tertullian. I didn't know Justin made any reference to it. However, it does seem that infant baptism was not "universally" practiced within the Church until later. I would agree that it is not REQUIRED, but it certainly is a legitimate practice, and theological reasons have been given.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

The case I am trying to make, Drew, is that anyone can be baptized, of course if the parents want their infant to be baptized, then it will be so for that baby. Yet baptism doesn't save, an infant will go to heaven regardless if they are baptized or not, they are innocent.
We can baptize all the infants in the entire world and as adults, they still can either be saved or not. Salvation does not come from baptism, we must have faith in Christ and repent of our sins.
Can we agree on this?

You are improperly mixing up the multiple meanings of salvation.

Baptism saves us. From sin. It doesn't follow that we will remain saved for eternal life.

Regards

 

[Alabaster]

You are improperly mixing up the multiple meanings of salvation.

Baptism saves us. From sin. It doesn't follow that we will remain saved for eternal life.

Regards

You disregard the saving property of the blood of Jesus? No one has ever been saved by water.

Only by faith in Jesus Christ and His blood ransom for us can we be saved! Then as an act of obedience the newly saved person enters the waters of baptism, where one identifies with the death and resurrection of their Saviour and that salvation is sealed in the heavenlies.

 

[francisdesales]

You disregard the saving property if the blood of Jesus? No one has ever been saved by water.

Only by faith in Jesus Christ and His blood ransom for us can we be saved! Then as an act of obedience the newly saved person enters the waters of baptism, where one identifies with the death and resurrection of their Saviour and that salvation is sealed in the heavenlies.

Haven't I already said that the water of Baptism links us to that saving blood of Jesus Christ?

By faith, we become baptized into Christ's death. The act of faith is part of the act of baptism, the public proclamation of that faith...

Regards

 

[whitney]

You are improperly mixing up the multiple meanings of salvation.

Baptism saves us. From sin. It doesn't follow that we will remain saved for eternal life.

Regards

No, you are mixing them up, salvation is not a check list. I was baptized already so that's done, NOW I need to get faith, ok that's done, it's a process and baptism is part of the process but not until you KNOW why it's part of the process.

 

[francisdesales]

No, you are mixing them up, salvation is not a check list. I was baptized already so that's done, NOW I need to get faith, ok that's done, it's a process and baptism is part of the process but not until you KNOW why it's part of the process.

Oh boy. Where did I say that salvation is a check list? Anything but...

We are saved in the past - by forgiveness of sins through baptism.
We are being saved as our faith working in love displays that we are in Christ.
We will be saved for heaven, presuming that we hold out to the end and persevere in love.

Thus, there is a sense of already been saved, of being saved now, and of the hope that I will be saved for heaven. When you mix up those definitions (by thinking that because you were baptized, you are going to heaven without any other consideration), you misrepresent the Bible's discussion on the variety of meanings of "salvation"

Baptism is the culmination of that first step, our public proclamation of our faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, asking for repentance from sin. But it doesn't follow that we will remain in the Lord or be freed from future sin, much less, go to heaven.

Regards

 

[whitney]

Oh boy. Where did I say that salvation is a check list? Anything but...

We are saved in the past - by forgiveness of sins through baptism.
We are being saved as our faith working in love displays that we are in Christ.
We will be saved for heaven, presuming that we hold out to the end and persevere in love.

Thus, there is a sense of already been saved, of being saved now, and of the hope that I will be saved for heaven. When you mix up those definitions (by thinking that because you were baptized, you are going to heaven without any other consideration), you misrepresent the Bible's discussion on the variety of meanings of "salvation"

Baptism is the culmination of that first step, our public proclamation of our faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, asking for repentance from sin. But it doesn't follow that we will remain in the Lord or be freed from future sin, much less, go to heaven.

Regards

You made it sound like a checklist, you never actually said those words.
I agree with everything you just said, except for the first step being baptism.

What happens if a Catholic baby dies before it can be baptized? Where does he go?

 

[Tailgunner]

This is an interesting topic, and although I had done much reading and thinking on this before this thread, it was edifying to read through all these posts.

To my mind, scripture seems to give greater weight to believer's baptism. But I'd like to bring up something else here. There are two sacraments, or ordinances commanded by Jesus. One is baptism, and the other is the Lord's Supper, or communion, whichever you prefer to call it.

Jesus said of the Supper, "as often as you do this, remember Me". We do that as often as we do it. Some more than others.

Baptism, on the other hand, is a one time event. When parents decide to have their baby baptized, they have robbed the baby from experiencing a sacred and holy event in his life. Unless, like me, that person eventually rejects the notion of infant baptism for the useless gesture it really is.

The reasons it is useless have been well stated and Biblically supported here, so I won't belabor the point.

I also agree with the act of immersion as necessary. As one poster stated, they wouldn't baptize a baby because they might drown it. Baptism is a symbol that we have been buried with Christ, and when we are brought up out of the water, we are resurrected with Him. To substitute a clergyman's wet hand on your head for the act of immersion doesn't really cut it.

TG

 

[whitney]

This is an interesting topic, and although I had done much reading and thinking on this before this thread, it was edifying to read through all these posts.

To my mind, scripture seems to give greater weight to believer's baptism. But I'd like to bring up something else here. There are two sacraments, or ordinances commanded by Jesus. One is baptism, and the other is the Lord's Supper, or communion, whichever you prefer to call it.

Jesus said of the Supper, "as often as you do this, remember Me". We do that as often as we do it. Some more than others.

Baptism, on the other hand, is a one time event. When parents decide to have their baby baptized, they have robbed the baby from experiencing a sacred and holy event in his life. Unless, like me, that person eventually rejects the notion of infant baptism for the useless gesture it really is.

The reasons it is useless have been well stated and Biblically supported here, so I won't belabor the point.

I also agree with the act of immersion as necessary. As one poster stated, they wouldn't baptize a baby because they might drown it. Baptism is a symbol that we have been buried with Christ, and when we are brought up out of the water, we are resurrected with Him. To substitute a clergyman's wet hand on your head for the act of immersion doesn't really cut it.

TG

Very well said, TG.

 

[Alabaster]

This is an interesting topic, and although I had done much reading and thinking on this before this thread, it was edifying to read through all these posts.

To my mind, scripture seems to give greater weight to believer's baptism. But I'd like to bring up something else here. There are two sacraments, or ordinances commanded by Jesus. One is baptism, and the other is the Lord's Supper, or communion, whichever you prefer to call it.

Jesus said of the Supper, "as often as you do this, remember Me". We do that as often as we do it. Some more than others.

Baptism, on the other hand, is a one time event. When parents decide to have their baby baptized, they have robbed the baby from experiencing a sacred and holy event in his life. Unless, like me, that person eventually rejects the notion of infant baptism for the useless gesture it really is.

The reasons it is useless have been well stated and Biblically supported here, so I won't belabor the point.

I also agree with the act of immersion as necessary. As one poster stated, they wouldn't baptize a baby because they might drown it. Baptism is a symbol that we have been buried with Christ, and when we are brought up out of the water, we are resurrected with Him. To substitute a clergyman's wet hand on your head for the act of immersion doesn't really cut it.

TG

Two thumbs up!

 

[Scotth1960]

You disregard the saving property if the blood of Jesus? No one has ever been saved by water.

Only by faith in Jesus Christ and His blood ransom for us can we be saved! Then as an act of obedience the newly saved person enters the waters of baptism, where one identifies with the death and resurrection of their Saviour and that salvation is sealed in the heavenlies.

Dear Alabaster, These things are in the Scriptures: "Baptism, which corresponds to this, [that is, Noah in the ark saved among eight persons. v. 20] now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been
subjected to him" 1 Peter 3:21-22 ESV
"Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, and of instruction about washings [or baptisms], the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permits". Hebrews 6:1-3 ESV

Perhaps it will not be possible in this forum to get beyond instruction about baptisms (Heb. 6:2), but this we will all do, if God permits (Heb. 6:3).

In Erie Scott Harrington

 

[Alabaster]

Dear Alabaster, These things are in the Scriptures: "Baptism, which corresponds to this, [that is, Noah in the ark saved among eight persons. v. 20] now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been
subjected to him" 1 Peter 3:21-22 ESV
"Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, and of instruction about washings [or baptisms], the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permits". Hebrews 6:1-3 ESV

Perhaps it will not be possible in this forum to get beyond instruction about baptisms (Heb. 6:2), but this we will all do, if God permits (Heb. 6:3).

In Erie Scott Harrington

Correction:

1 Peter 3:19-21 NLT
19 So he went and preached to the spirits in prison—20 those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat. Only eight people were saved from drowning in that terrible flood. 21 And that water is a picture of baptism, which now saves you, not by removing dirt from your body, but as a response to God from a clean conscience. It is effective because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.


Nota bene: "AS A RESPONSE TO GOD FROM A CLEAN CONSCIENCE"

A saved person is qualified for water baptism. Period.

 

[Scotth1960]

Correction:

1 Peter 3:19-21 NLT
19 So he went and preached to the spirits in prison—20 those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat. Only eight people were saved from drowning in that terrible flood. 21 And that water is a picture of baptism, which now saves you, not by removing dirt from your body, but as a response to God from a clean conscience. It is effective because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.


Nota bene: "AS A RESPONSE TO GOD FROM A CLEAN CONSCIENCE"

A saved person is qualified for water baptism. Period.

Dear Alabaster, What is salvation? A finished event, or a journey? Sin was finished on the Cross, Christ said, "It is finished". As for its reception in repentant sinners, it is a journey. One must "endure unto the end" to be (finally) saved.
One can be saved before baptism. And then saved in baptism, And then saved after baptism. But one must repent every step of the way. Before, during, and after baptism. Repentance is not a one time decision for Christ, but a continual walking in the Spirit, that we fulfill not the lusts of the flesh.
In Erie PA Scott

 

[Alabaster]

Dear Alabaster, What is salvation? A finished event, or a journey? Sin was finished on the Cross, Christ said, "It is finished". As for its reception in repentant sinners, it is a journey. One must "endure unto the end" to be (finally) saved.
One can be saved before baptism. And then saved in baptism, And then saved after baptism. But one must repent every step of the way. Before, during, and after baptism. Repentance is not a one time decision for Christ, but a continual walking in the Spirit, that we fulfill not the lusts of the flesh.
In Erie PA Scott

False.

Salvation is a one-time, monumental event in one's life, and sanctification is the journey. Salvation is actually realized when complete sanctification takes place: when one passes on to the Kingdom from this life to eternal life .

 

[Scotth1960]

False.

Salvation is a one-time, monumental event in one's life, and sanctification is the journey. Salvation is actually realized when complete sanctification takes place: when one passes on to the Kingdom from this life to eternal life .

Dear Alabaster, Where in the NT do we find the words, "One-time, monumental event in one's life"? Just wondering where you are getting that teaching from.
In Erie PA Scott Harrington