INFANT BAPTISM CREATES PROBLEMS IN THE CC

[GodsGrace]

I was speaking to 2 of my Catholic born-again friends this morning.
We discuss theology sometimes, but I find their reasoning to be so flawed that
they don't even express what the CC teaches.

To make a long story short...
I've come to the conclusion that infant baptism is WRONG.

If it had remained as BEFORE Augustine...it would have been OK.
But since Augustine changed the reason for infant baptism...
there has been much confusion in the CC.

My question to you Don would be this:

IS EVERY BAPTIZED PERSON A MEMEBER OF THE CHURCH?
A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNION OF SAINTS?
A MEMEBER OF THE BODY OF CHRIST?

I'll await your reply before continuing.

donadams

 

[JLB]

I was speaking to 2 of my Catholic born-again friends this morning.
We discuss theology sometimes, but I find their reasoning to be so flawed that
they don't even express what the CC teaches.

To make a long story short...
I've come to the conclusion that infant baptism is WRONG.

If it had remained as BEFORE Augustine...it would have been OK.
But since Augustine changed the reason for infant baptism...
there has been much confusion in the CC.

My question to you Don would be this:

IS VERY BAPTIZED PERSON A MEMEBER OF THE CHURCH?
A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNION OF SAINTS?
A MEMEBER OF THE BODY OF CHRIST?

I'll await your reply before continuing.

Amen.

Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
Acts 8:35-37

• “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”

A person needs to believe in Jesus Christ if they are to be water baptized.


Infants do not have the ability to understand or believe.

 

[GodsGrace]

Amen.

Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
Acts 8:35-37

• “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”

A person needs to believe in Jesus Christ if they are to be water baptized.


Infants do not have the ability to understand or believe.

Infants were not baptized for salvation prior to the 5th century.
That would be before Augustine.

They were baptized to join the community of believers,
to have a blessing from God, The ECFs said: why should we deny children God's blessing?

I think they took baptism too far and went beyond what the NT taught....
But we have to remember that the Christians of that time were real Christians (I hate to use that term but here I must) and they intended to raise their children as Christians and believers in Jesus...these people went to their death because they were Christian. This is not true anymore and babies are being baptized for a different REASON.

Now this get complicated: Let me just say that Augustine changed the REASON why babies get baptized.
He taught that man is born totally depraved AND IN SIN....He taught that Adam's sin was IMPUTED to each of us.
This is wrong of course and even the CC does not teach that the sin of Adam is a personal sin on us individually.
If Don comes onboard I'll also discuss the CCC with him, but otherwise it's useless...I'd rather use just the bible.

So...now, my friend was saying that everyone that is baptized in in the BODY OF CHRIST!
And the conversation got very complicated...it lasted 2 hours.
My other friend was not sure and seemed to agree with me, but hesitantly.

Why this confusion?
Because of HOW the CC teaches baptism,,,,the terms they use,,,,the confusion it creates.

I hope you follow along.

 

[GodsGrace]

Amen.

Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
Acts 8:35-37

• “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”

A person needs to believe in Jesus Christ if they are to be water baptized.


Infants do not have the ability to understand or believe.

I also want to add that one of my priest friends told me that the church would like to change this practice but it gets too much push-back from the laity.

Well....who's in charge here?
The church
or the laity??

The CC is strong on the idea that IT is the authority...
so it should USE its authority!

donadams might want to comment on this too.

 

[jasonc]

Free the reformed very well do this .

most Calvinists and Lutherans do. the logic is that the baptism isn't for salvation but is akin to the mark of circumcision

 

[WIP]

In the Lutheran church baptism is a sacrament combining both the water and the Word and is one of the miraculous means of grace through which God creates and/or strengthens the gift of faith in a person’s heart.

In the Lutheran church, we believe baptism is commanded by God and is applicable at all life stages for Scripture speaks of whole households being baptized not specifically identifying a particular age or level of understanding for qualification.

Later, probably in one's teens in the case of infants or small children, after being instructed and brought up in the faith comes confirmation where the previously baptized believer publicly affirms that faith which they were unable to profess as an infant.

Lutherans do not hold confirmation to be a sacrament because nowhere in Scripture is it commanded or instituted by God, however, if my memory serves me correctly, the Catholic church does.

 

[Free]

Free the reformed very well do this .

most Calvinists and Lutherans do. the logic is that the baptism isn't for salvation but is akin to the mark of circumcision

Infant baptism is one thing I strongly am against. The PCA does infant baptism, but not Reformed Baptist, as far as I know, or maybe it's on a church-by-church basis.

Speaking only for PCA, they believe that baptism replaces circumcision as the sign of the covenant. The problem is that it is based on a failure to distinguish between the different natures of the two covenants, the first being based on nationality and ethnicity (physical), and the second being spiritual, based on belief in Christ and his atoning work.

Infant baptism has the potential negative consequence of making a person believe they are saved when they actually are not. And I think that is likely a main issue the CC and perhaps Orthodox have--too many think they are saved when they are not simply because of their baptism. Too a lesser extent, perhaps, that is also likely a problem in every church and denomination that practices infant baptism. Having said that, every church and denomination, for a variety of reasons (they had "first communion;" their parents were/are Christians; they go to church; etc.), has people in the pews that think they are Christian but are not.

It is worth noting the Didache, in talking about baptism (chapter 7), strongly suggests that it was believer's baptism in the early church and infant baptism was a later development:

"Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before."

https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html

Apart from all the above, I simply prefer believers' baptism as usually time is given for testimony, which is good for both the encouragement of the Church and to witness to unbelievers.

 

[jasonc]

Infant baptism is one thing I strongly am against. The PCA does infant baptism, but not Reformed Baptist, as far as I know, or maybe it's on a church-by-church basis.

Speaking only for PCA, they believe that baptism replaces circumcision as the sign of the covenant. The problem is that it is based on a failure to distinguish between the different natures of the two covenants, the first being based on nationality and ethnicity (physical), and the second being spiritual, based on belief in Christ and his atoning work.

Infant baptism has the potential negative consequence of making a person believe they are saved when they actually are not. And I think that is likely a main issue the CC and perhaps Orthodox have--too many think they are saved when they are not simply because of their baptism. Too a lesser extent, perhaps, that is also likely a problem in every church and denomination that practices infant baptism. Having said that, every church and denomination, for a variety of reasons (they had "first communion;" their parents were/are Christians; they go to church; etc.), has people in the pews that think they are Christian but are not.

It is worth noting the Didache, in talking about baptism (chapter 7), strongly suggests that it was believer's baptism in the early church and infant baptism was a later development:

"Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before."

https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html

Apart from all the above, I simply prefer believers' baptism as usually time is given for testimony, which is good for both the encouragement of the Church and to witness to unbelievers.

I dont agree with it just stating the fact

 

[GodsGrace]

In the Lutheran church baptism is a sacrament combining both the water and the Word and is one of the miraculous means of grace through which God creates and/or strengthens the gift of faith in a person’s heart.

In the Lutheran church, we believe baptism is commanded by God and is applicable at all life stages for Scripture speaks of whole households being baptized not specifically identifying a particular age or level of understanding for qualification.

Later, probably in one's teens in the case of infants or small children, after being instructed and brought up in the faith comes confirmation where the previously baptized believer publicly affirms that faith which they were unable to profess as an infant.

Lutherans do not hold confirmation to be a sacrament because nowhere in Scripture is it commanded or instituted by God, however, if my memory serves me correctly, the Catholic church does.

Yes. In the Catholic Church Confirmation, which is celebrated at about the 2nd year of middle school in most places, is for the reason you state above.

Not only is it a PUBLIC affirmation,,,but it's SUPPOSED to be an affirmation of one's faith. The kids become little soldiers to Jesus.

I taught catechism in the CC back before my husband got too sick and I had to leave it...but I went back to it last year and let me assure you that most kids that make their confirmation are little atheists. We're talking about approx. 12 year olds here.

The Confirmation priest last year is a personal friend of mine from before he decided to be a priest and he's as disturbed by this as I was (I had the confirmation kids). We decided to split the group up between those that were coming to me because their parents forced them to and those that really wanted to learn.

I got the ones that really wanted to learn. It was a better experience for both myself and the kids....but think of the other ones .... it mocks God.

The church is at a loss as to what to do.
It seems all of Europe is becoming more and more atheist.
Sometimes I tell my daughter we should move back to the South of the US
which is where we belong....but I fear it's too late now. She has a grown family.

I feel like I'm at home here...sorry if I've been so personal...it's not normal for me.

 

[GodsGrace]

Infant baptism is one thing I strongly am against. The PCA does infant baptism, but not Reformed Baptist, as far as I know, or maybe it's on a church-by-church basis.

Speaking only for PCA, they believe that baptism replaces circumcision as the sign of the covenant. The problem is that it is based on a failure to distinguish between the different natures of the two covenants, the first being based on nationality and ethnicity (physical), and the second being spiritual, based on belief in Christ and his atoning work.

Infant baptism has the potential negative consequence of making a person believe they are saved when they actually are not. And I think that is likely a main issue the CC and perhaps Orthodox have--too many think they are saved when they are not simply because of their baptism. Too a lesser extent, perhaps, that is also likely a problem in every church and denomination that practices infant baptism. Having said that, every church and denomination, for a variety of reasons (they had "first communion;" their parents were/are Christians; they go to church; etc.), has people in the pews that think they are Christian but are not.

It is worth noting the Didache, in talking about baptism (chapter 7), strongly suggests that it was believer's baptism in the early church and infant baptism was a later development:

"Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before."

https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html

Apart from all the above, I simply prefer believers' baptism as usually time is given for testimony, which is good for both the encouragement of the Church and to witness to unbelievers.

Agreed on all....
I just want to say re the Didache (for those reading along)...
is a very early church document...I do believe the date has been set at about 90AD ....
it used to be believed that it was from 70 to 120 AD...seems it's been narrowed down.

Anyway,,,the baptizing of babies came a little later on as a general practice...I'd say the early 2nd century.
Again...not for salvation.

I agree wholeheartedly that, yes, some believe baptism saves them for life...
It's a common misunderstanding in the CC because of how baptism is taught.

 

[jasonc]

if you do return avoid new york.

you may darken Florida

 

[WIP]

Yes. In the Catholic Church Confirmation, which is celebrated at about the 2nd year of middle school in most places, is for the reason you state above.

Not only is it a PUBLIC affirmation,,,but it's SUPPOSED to be an affirmation of one's faith. The kids become little soldiers to Jesus.

I taught catechism in the CC back before my husband got too sick and I had to leave it...but I went back to it last year and let me assure you that most kids that make their confirmation are little atheists. We're talking about approx. 12 year olds here.

The Confirmation priest last year is a personal friend of mine from before he decided to be a priest and he's as disturbed by this as I was (I had the confirmation kids). We decided to split the group up between those that were coming to me because their parents forced them to and those that really wanted to learn.

I got the ones that really wanted to learn. It was a better experience for both myself and the kids....but think of the other ones .... it mocks God.

The church is at a loss as to what to do.
It seems all of Europe is becoming more and more atheist.
Sometimes I tell my daughter we should move back to the South of the US
which is where we belong....but I fear it's too late now. She has a grown family.

I feel like I'm at home here...sorry if I've been so personal...it's not normal for me.

Yes, I provided you with what the Lutheran church teaches and what is expected. That said, I have also raised concerns about how seriously confirmands take confirmation. When I was leading the high school Sunday school kids, I tried to help them understand the serious nature of what confirmation is and that it is not just a rite of passage like graduation.

I cannot attest to the faith of any confirmand for that is between them and God but their actions and the support from parents seems to demonstrate a lack of understanding for in many cases it seems after confirmation, we don't see them in church regularly anymore, and I hold parents, the children, the Bible study teacher, and pastor responsible, which means I am partially responsible. As James 3:1 (ESV) says, "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness."

I see the same thing when it comes to godparents. In the Lutheran church, and I believe this is very similar in the Catholic church, the role of godparents is intended to help assure that the child grows up with a strong Christian upbringing, particularly if the parents fail or have died. Today, in our church, it seems to have evolved into an honorary role. People choose godparents that don't exemplify Christian living or aren't even Christian. They are chosen like a bridesmaid or groomsmen to fill an honorary position and that is all. It's sad for sure.

I can say the same thing with other denominations. Those that teach OSAS for example, don't take their salvation seriously and very often continue living lives that rarely reflect the light of Christ. It is why those of us from the outside see them as having a license to sin.

 

[WIP]

I agree wholeheartedly that, yes, some believe baptism saves them for life...
It's a common misunderstanding in the CC because of how baptism is taught.

This is one area in our Lutheran understanding where I really have questions and so far, I haven't been able to answer those questions. I find some aspects of our theology a little confusing when it comes to baptism.

 

[WIP]

By the way, GodsGrace, I haven't noticed you being online for a while. Good to hear from you again.

 

[GodsGrace]

This is one area in our Lutheran understanding where I really have questions and so far, I haven't been able to answer those questions. I find some aspects of our theology a little confusing when it comes to baptism.

Of course it's going to cause confusion!
Because baptism was meant for adults who believed.
JLB made a point of this in post no. 2

In Catholicism they teach that babies receive the Holy Spirit and Original Sin is washed away.
So how come the Holy Spirit is not helping these children to grow up as believers?

My Catholic friend practically ended up stating that all baptized persons are saved!
That would make the CC universalist in theology.

 

[GodsGrace]

So donadams ....
You gonna show up or what?

This thread is for you....
I'd like your input.

 

[donadams]

Amen.

Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
Acts 8:35-37

• “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”

A person needs to believe in Jesus Christ if they are to be water baptized.


Infants do not have the ability to understand or believe.

we may infer that for an adult to be baptized faith is required.

thks

 

[donadams]

we may infer that for an adult to be baptized faith is required.

thks

and that's dogma btw!

125. The justification of an adult is not possible without Faith.

 

[GodsGrace]

donadams

So...DON.....
are you going to reply to my post or not?

If not just say so because I'm here in Italy WAITING for you to reply.

Are you afraid to?
Do you NOT KNOW what the CC teaches?

If you prefer not to discuss...
PLEASE ADVISE.

However, as an overseer, you REALLY should.

Thanks.

 

[donadams]

Infants were not baptized for salvation prior to the 5th century.
That would be before Augustine.

They were baptized to join the community of believers,
to have a blessing from God, The ECFs said: why should we deny children God's blessing?

I think they took baptism too far and went beyond what the NT taught....
But we have to remember that the Christians of that time were real Christians (I hate to use that term but here I must) and they intended to raise their children as Christians and believers in Jesus...these people went to their death because they were Christian. This is not true anymore and babies are being baptized for a different REASON.

Now this get complicated: Let me just say that Augustine changed the REASON why babies get baptized.
He taught that man is born totally depraved AND IN SIN....He taught that Adam's sin was IMPUTED to each of us.
This is wrong of course and even the CC does not teach that the sin of Adam is a personal sin on us individually.
If Don comes onboard I'll also discuss the CCC with him, but otherwise it's useless...I'd rather use just the bible.

So...now, my friend was saying that everyone that is baptized in in the BODY OF CHRIST!
And the conversation got very complicated...it lasted 2 hours.
My other friend was not sure and seemed to agree with me, but hesitantly.

Why this confusion?
Because of HOW the CC teaches baptism,,,,the terms they use,,,,the confusion it creates.

I hope you follow along.

baptism for salvation is not right! baptism is the grace of Justification and all sin is washed away! acts 22:16

justification is part of the whole process of salvation

redemption
justification
sanctification
purification
glorification
all amount to salvation