Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Are you receiving an "error" mesage when posting?

    Chances are it went through, so check before douible posting.

    We hope to have the situtaion resolved soon, and Happy Thanksgiving to those in the US!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Ever read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?

    Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject

    https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

Infant Baptism

O

Orthodoxy

Guest
Infant Baptism

Another protestant myth.

The writings of the apostles that became the NT clearly teach us that they saw baptism as the sign of a New Covenant relationship with Christ. In baptism we are buried with Christ and raised with Him in the power of the Holy Spirit. Every covenant God has ever made with men has had its visible sign.

In the covenant with Israel the sign was circumcision. God did not just suggest to the Jews their infants be circumcised, He commanded that they be circumcised at the age of eight days! Protestants circumcised there children at birth for the most part. The Orthodox triple emerse a baby (in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) at eight days in baptism from my understanding if the parents or god parents are orthodox and approve.

In the New covenant this is baptism or “spiritual circumcisionâ€Â.

Why in God’s ineffable mercy and unfathomable love would He gladly bestow the blessing of the old covenant of the law upon jewish infants yet deny and refuse children of the new covenant initiation into His everlasting covenant of Grace?

Why does the protestant reformation insist Jesus turns away infants because they cannot "accept Jesus Christ as Lord" or "ask Jesus into their hearts" and "believe"?

Why has the protestant reformation dealt a damning blow to all infants when they cannot possible "believe" as required by the Protestant faith to "be saved"?

Read the words spoken by Peter again in Acts 2:38-39:

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto YOU, and to YOUR CHILDREN, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.

We must assume "your Children included children of all ages, including infants. Repentance and baptism are steps towards the ultimate goal of the reception of the Holy Spirit and finding the life of God within us.

One must ask if the Holy Spirit can dwell within an infant?

If yes then we are commanded to baptize our infants.

Acts 10 is plain that the Holy Spirit can indwell a person of what ever age without repentance and baptism. To the Apostles baptism and the Spirit’s presents are inseparable, like two acts of the same play. If the seal of the New Covenant (the Holy Spirit) is present in someone, the sign of that sealed covenant (baptism) must certainly be bestowed upon him whatever the age.

Do infants need to be saved?

Does God want an infant saved?

Did Christ die to save infants?

Let us ask our selves, can the Holy Spirit of God reside in infants and small children?

If an infant is saved without "believe" then is there another path to salvation called ignorance?

If an infant cannot accept the grace of God until the age of accountability, does this not violate the cry of “grace alone†saves?

If not then God’s Spirit must be placed on hold until a child can confess sins, repent and believe in Jesus Christ to save him. In this case it is not "grace alone" that saves but “human knowledge plus Grace†saves.

If a child must reach an age of understanding then is grace present yet salvation is not?

In Luke 18:16 Jesus declares the little children to be the true recipients of the Kingdom of God.

In Matthew 18:3 it states one must convert and become as a little child to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

It does not say, “Unless one become as an ADULT, you will by no means enter the Kingdomâ€Â!

How does Christ define conversion? To Him it means, “to become as a childâ€Â.

So, what does an infant and a small child need to do to be converted to the Christian faith? Nothing.

The child especially and infant has already reached the goal that the adult must attain through repentance. No one is more humble or submissive toward God than a little child. Thus according to Christ no one is more ideally suited for baptism and the spirit’s indwelling than an infant!

"Suffer the Children to come unto Me" Jesus Christ.

Woe to you who would deny an infant the Kingdom of God, for you hold the keys to Heaven yet will allow no one to enter, not even yourself.

In Love,

Orthodoxy
 
Woe to you who would deny an infant the Kingdom of God, for you hold the keys to Heaven yet will allow no one to enter, not even yourself.
I hold a more calvinistic view, but I don't think that God damns infants...there is no scripture on the subject. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I see no logical reason why God would condemn them.

I'm also not certain of infant baptism either, but I have heard both sides, and have basically came up with the same conclusion. If you think it is necessary to baptize your child do it, if not thats ok too. If God wants us to be "saved" and it requires baptism, then He isn't going to say, oops you didn't quite make it to your baptism so now your damned for eternity. If the child was baptized as a child and then wants to make a personal confession and be baptized again, then great too. I don't know if the first one was sufficient, but reproclaiming the lordship of your savior isn't a bad thing. (Not advocating the "recommited" people who are rebaptized every other week :-? )
 
In 1 Peter chapter 3, we are told that baptism saves us because it is the answer to a good conscience toward God. I don't think anyone here would dare argue that you can be a saved Christian while having a bad conscience toward God.

I didn't become aware of my surroundings until about age 2 or 3, let alone even recognize what my conscience was prior to that point in my life. I seriously doubt that I had a good conscience toward God as an infant, because I didn't even know what God was. For that matter, I've only begun to even understand who God is recently in my adult life.

Since baptism saves us based on our conscience toward God, what have we accomplished by wetting an infants head, when the infant has no idea what's even occurring, let alone demonstrating that he has a good conscience toward God? I don't understand how this is supposed to work since the infant has no understanding at all.

While we're on this subject, what happens to a newborn that dies in the delivery room without ever being baptized? Are we told if that child goes to heaven or hell?
 
I hold a more calvinistic view, but I don't think that God damns infants...there is no scripture on the subject. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I see no logical reason why God would condemn them.
I'm in aggrement with KnarfKS.

Wildfowler said:
... While we're on this subject, what happens to a newborn that dies in the delivery room without ever being baptized? Are we told if that child goes to heaven or hell?
Yes, this is a good question. I canonly assume from God's nature that He make provisions for this, as He does for those who die never hearing the Good News.

Another thing that comes to mind is, isn't baptism preceded by belief and repentance? Or is the order not important. I think it is.
 
KnarfKS

Thank you for your response.

I hold a more calvinistic view, but I don't think that God damns infants...there is no scripture on the subject. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I see no logical reason why God would condemn them.

I see, Calvin eh? Can you explain then why God has a different set of standards for infants than those of the age of accountability? It would appear then that God saves a baby even though said baby is still under the curse of Adam and cannot confess Jesus Christ as Lord as required by the protestant reformation to become a saved Christian. Is God playing farovites and some rules dont apply to certain people?

I'm also not certain of infant baptism either, but I have heard both sides, and have basically came up with the same conclusion. If you think it is necessary to baptize your child do it, if not thats ok too.

Can you imagine the Jews saying well if you want to circumcise your child into the Jewish faith thats cool if not thats cool too, we are all jews ya know, some just believe differently. I bet that would go over well with God.

If God wants us to be "saved" and it requires baptism, then He isn't going to say, oops you didn't quite make it to your baptism so now your damned for eternity.

Who said damned? I said under the protestant scheme a baby is saved without even accepting Jesus Christ. Is God saying to the baby sorry you did not say the magic words of acceptance, poof? Baptism is the initiation rite where one enters the Church and becomes a member of the family. How many organizations do people join where they can just claim membership and they are members? The Elks Club of America? The Lions Club? Nearly every club that is joined has an initiation rite attached yet God is not allowed this?

If the child was baptized as a child and then wants to make a personal confession and be baptized again, then great too. I don't know if the first one was sufficient, but reproclaiming the lordship of your savior isn't a bad thing. (Not advocating the "recommited" people who are rebaptized every other week :-? )

The bible says there is one body, The Church. There is one Baptism. This one baptism is found in the one Church and is not optional in regards to membership nor is it preformed over and over. Confession is the renewed baptism in the Church after ones initial enterance into the Body, no need to be re baptised.

The fact people try to enter the body of Christ by other means merely proves they attempt to enter in by another door other than Christ and His body. In my humble opinion.

In Christ,

Orthodoxy
 
Wildfowler

In 1 Peter chapter 3, we are told that baptism saves us because it is the answer to a good conscience toward God. I don't think anyone here would dare argue that you can be a saved Christian while having a bad conscience toward God.

Baptism saves. Glory to God! Baptism is obediance.

I didn't become aware of my surroundings until about age 2 or 3, let alone even recognize what my conscience was prior to that point in my life. I seriously doubt that I had a good conscience toward God as an infant, because I didn't even know what God was. For that matter, I've only begun to even understand who God is recently in my adult life.

You did not know your mom or dad either. You did not have to say yes to them to know them. Do we really think God says no to infants until they know Him better?

I think they instinctively know God and trust Him that is why we are to be like children. Children tend to instinctively trust their parents.

Since baptism saves us based on our conscience toward God, what have we accomplished by wetting an infants head, when the infant has no idea what's even occurring, let alone demonstrating that he has a good conscience toward God?

Obediance. We have demonstrated obediance to God in all things including saving our children.

I don't understand how this is supposed to work since the infant has no understanding at all.

Well it makes better sense that a child is only born with the sin potential of Adam. The wages of that sin is death. If the Child dies then he has paid the price. Surely then God has mercy by the resurrection of His Son. The gnostic leaning protestants will say the baby is evil from birth for all men have sinned, how can God save this child and have any fair justice towards the 8 year old that finally accepts Jesus at his parents guiding? Why is the baby saved and the 8 year old not up to the time of his acceptance speach, not?

While we're on this subject, what happens to a newborn that dies in the delivery room without ever being baptized?

See above. What happens in the protestant reformation? The Child goes straight to heaven without any confession of faith, no acceptance speach, nothing. How is this double standard set up by the reformation fair?

Are we told if that child goes to heaven or hell?

We are told God is merciful and long suffering with all men. Jesus said one must become like a child to enter the Kingdom of God. Certainly the Child has paid the wages and God's mercy will allow a Child to inherit the Kingdom baptised in the sea of tears cast forth by the saints.

In Christ,

Orthodoxy
 
Vic,

I hold a more calvinistic view, but I don't think that God damns infants...there is no scripture on the subject. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I see no logical reason why God would condemn them

I'm in aggrement with KnarfKS.

What happened to "all have sinned and fallen short"? Babies not included? What kind of double standard has God set up that a child before an age knowledgable enough to say an acceptance speach is damned but an infant is not? Are we now saying God saves everyone up to the acceptance speach then they are saved really for sure after that? Is not the accptance speach just another formal rite created by men to gain enterance into an exclusive club called the protestant reformation?



Wildfowler said:
... While we're on this subject, what happens to a newborn that dies in the delivery room without ever being baptized? Are we told if that child goes to heaven or hell?
Yes, this is a good question. I canonly assume from God's nature that He make provisions for this, as He does for those who die never hearing the Good News.

In the event of the man that Jesus told to come down from his tree, the man took Jesus home, repented, corrected his offenses and Jesus told him his whole house was redeemed. It would appear the "only those that believe are saved" is crumbling under the weight of its own error.


Another thing that comes to mind is, isn't baptism preceded by belief and repentance? Or is the order not important. I think it is.

In the Church one first confesses faith in the Holy Trinity, then one spits on the devil with repentance, then the initiate recieves the sacrement of baptism for the remission of sin and recieves the Holy Spirit by holy oil annoiting or chrismation. It is all one event in the initiation process of the Church. Repentance and Confession proceed baptism. Some matryrs never were baptised but in their own blood after confession of Jesus Christ unto death.

Since you think order is important what about order in the Church? Is not baptism important in the order of a Christians life?

Why are we told there is one baptism yet the Romans sprinkle, the Pentacostals baptism in the name of Jesus, others have one emersion into a pool of water, some reject any physical baptism for a gnostic "spiritual baptism into an "invisible church". For nearly 2000 years the Orthodox Church has triple emersion baptisms in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, baptism into the Holy Trinity.

Is there one baptism or not? if so why so many versions?

Orthodoxy
 
Orthodoxy said:
What happened to "all have sinned and fallen short"? Babies not included? What kind of double standard has God set up that a child before an age knowledgable enough to say an acceptance speach is damned but an infant is not? Are we now saying God saves everyone up to the acceptance speach then they are saved really for sure after that? Is not the accptance speach just another formal rite created by men to gain enterance into an exclusive club called the protestant reformation?
Five sentences, everyone of them ending in a question mark. I have no idea what your point is here.

Let me pose my own question... an infant is christened. Said child eventually grows up to be a atheist of the Matthew 12:31-32 kind. Is that person redeemed by his/her infant baptism?

I also asked earlier...

Another thing that comes to mind is, isn't baptism preceded by belief and repentance? Or is the order not important. I think it is.

No one addressed it. I am not asking anything to be argumentive. They are legitimate, fundamental questions. I expect honest answers, not be bombarded with questions designed to go round and round in a circle. Anyone that can honestly answer them can jump in.

You want to compose worthwhile threads? God bless you... go for it. But understand, starting a thread is not a licence to manipulate it or the ones posting in it.
 
Vic said:
Orthodoxy said:
What happened to "all have sinned and fallen short"? Babies not included? What kind of double standard has God set up that a child before an age knowledgable enough to say an acceptance speach is damned but an infant is not? Are we now saying God saves everyone up to the acceptance speach then they are saved really for sure after that? Is not the accptance speach just another formal rite created by men to gain enterance into an exclusive club called the protestant reformation?
Five sentences, everyone of them ending in a question mark. I have no idea what your point is here.

Let me pose my own question... an infant is christened. Said child eventually grows up to be a atheist of the Matthew 12:31-32 kind. Is that person redeemed by his/her infant baptism?
No.

Now what if this is an adult who is baptized, then later falls away (apostasizes) from Christ. Is that person redeemed by their adult baptism? Is that person redeemed by their earlier confession of faith?
 
Orthodox Christian said:
No.

Now what if this is an adult who is baptized, then later falls away (apostasizes) from Christ. Is that person redeemed by their adult baptism? Is that person redeemed by their earlier confession of faith?
James, I see osas in many passages but I also see where so called faith is really not faith at all. I struggle with this, but I am secure in the belief that the Lord is faithful to me and will keep me from any point of no return, for lack of a better way to say it.

"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen."

Ok, that's one question answered. 8-)

Thanks for using the term, "confession of faith". It sounds so much better than "acceptance speach", I mean speech. :fadein:
 
Vic said:
Orthodoxy said:
What happened to "all have sinned and fallen short"? Babies not included? What kind of double standard has God set up that a child before an age knowledgable enough to say an acceptance speach is damned but an infant is not? Are we now saying God saves everyone up to the acceptance speach then they are saved really for sure after that? Is not the accptance speach just another formal rite created by men to gain enterance into an exclusive club called the protestant reformation?

Five sentences, everyone of them ending in a question mark. I have no idea what your point is here.

You have no idea how to answer 5 simple questions? what part of the question mark dont you understand?

Here: Question 1 People claim "all have sinned and fallen short" of the glory of God yet it appears babies are not included in the all because God just saves babies without an acceptance of Jesus in ones heart speech. How can this be?

Question 2: It appears God has set up a double standard in that a baby cannot accept Jesus Christ to be saved yet God saves them anyway?

Question 3 with the above question it then begs the question if a baby is saved without the acceptance speech then is he saved after the speech and if so why does he need to say an acceptance speech if he is already saved as a baby? Saved as a baby yet needs to repent then says= an I accept Jesus prayer to be saved. Doesnt make sense to me.

Question 4: Is the "I accept Jesus in my heart" prayer of the protestant faith just another formal rite created by men to gain enterance into an exclusive club called the protestant reformation?

Why is this tradition of the protestant reformation any different than the Christian tradition of baptism?

[quote:c1ddf]Let me pose my own question... an infant is christened. Said child eventually grows up to be a atheist of the Matthew 12:31-32 kind. Is that person redeemed by his/her infant baptism?

Jesus answers with this "he that endures to the end, the same shall be saved". A baby baptised at birth enters the race at birth, what he does in the race is up to him, he can quit and lose his crown.

I also asked earlier...

[quote:c1ddf]Another thing that comes to mind is, isn't baptism preceded by belief and repentance? Or is the order not important. I think it is.

No one addressed it. I am not asking anything to be argumentive. They are legitimate, fundamental questions. I expect honest answers, not be bombarded with questions designed to go round and round in a circle. Anyone that can honestly answer them can jump in. [/quote:c1ddf]

I answered this question, but I guess you missed it. So I will try again. In the book of acts men repent and are baptised. The two are not seperatable but one compliments the other and visa versa. My question is why must one be exclusive of the other in your version of the Christian faith?

You want to compose worthwhile threads? God bless you... go for it. But understand, starting a thread is not a licence to manipulate it or the ones posting in it.
[/quote:c1ddf]

What? What manipulation are you accusing me of here Vic? Is my myth busting offending you? I am not asking anything to be argumentive. They are legitimate, fundamental questions. I expect honest answers, not be bombarded with questions designed to go round and round in a circle.

dosido

Orthodoxy
 
What? What manipulation are you accusing me of here Vic? Is my myth busting offending you? I am not asking anything to be argumentive. They are legitimate, fundamental questions. I expect honest answers, not be bombarded with questions designed to go round and round in a circle.
I wasn't accusing you of anything. It was a suggestion that you don't try manipulating the thread. How old are you? You practically repeated what I said verbatim. That's patronizing. I expect that from my 11 year old nephew, not a mature Christian.
 
Infant Baptism and the Bible:
Should Babies Be Baptized?
Infant baptism: Should babies be baptized or does the Bible teaching individual responsibility and personal accountabilty? What about original sin and inherited depravity?
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.

[See also Acts 8:36-39; 18:8; Rom. 1:16; 10:13-17.]
C. Before Baptism One Must Repent of Sins.

Acts 2:38 - Every person who is baptized ("every one of you") must first repent. Repentance is a change of mind - a decision to turn from sin and begin to live for God (cf. Matt. 21:28,29). This decision involves a commitment to put God first, and to live all our lives faithfully serving Him.

Note that the person who is baptized is the same person who must first repent. This is a personal choice. No one else can make this decision for us. Can a baby make this choice? (Note that we will see later that babies do not even have any sins to repent of.)

Some people claim that "children" in v39 means babies are included in those to whom this "promise" was made. But "children" simply means offspring, regardless of age (note Matt. 3:9; 10:21; 21:28; John 8:39). The "promise" here is for those who repent and are baptized (v38); but babies cannot repent, nor can they do other things required in the context (v36,40,41,42). The "promise" to the "children" was fulfilled when they were old enough to do what God requires, not while they were babies.

[See also 2 Cor. 7:10; Mk. 1:4,5.]
D. Before Baptism One Must Confess Christ.

Romans 10:9,10 - To be saved, one must believe in his heart and confess Christ with his mouth. How can a baby confess Christ when it cannot even speak?

Acts 8:35-39 - Here is an example of confession before baptism. The candidate for baptism must make an understandable statement, so that the one who does the baptizing knows they are baptizing someone who has faith. Babies cannot communicate regarding their faith in any understandable way, therefore it is not Scriptural to baptize them.

Churches that baptize babies often have a practice called "confirmation." People are baptized as babies, but later when they get old enough to understand and make their own choice about serving God, they are taught and are asked to publicly "confirm" their faith and their desire to live for God. The very existence of such a practice is an admission that the child did not understand, believe, and repent before he was baptized.

We have now learned four things which the Bible says every person must personally do before he can be baptized. God is no respecter of persons, so the plan is the same for everyone. Before anyone can be baptized, he must hear and understand the gospel, believe it, repent of sins, and confess Christ. Little babies cannot do any of these things. Therefore, the command to be baptized is not addressed to them. To baptize them anyway would be to act without God's authority. It would be doing something different from what God says must be done.
Part II. Can Babies Be Baptized
for the Right Reason?
A. Each Individual Is Responsible to Serve God from Proper Motives.

Romans 6:17,18 - To be freed from sin, one must obey from the heart the teaching delivered. This includes obedience in baptism (v3,4). God is pleased only when we serve Him from the willing choice of our own hearts. Our acts of service are valueless if someone else forces them upon us against our will or without our consent.

Acts 2:40,41 - People were commanded to be saved, and they responded by being baptized. Each individual personally made his own decision. No one else can obey God for us, and no one else can make that choice for us.

Other people may teach and encourage us to obey God, but they cannot decide for us whether or not we will obey. This includes obedience in baptism. Since a baby cannot possibly make this decision and cannot communicate any such decision to us, to baptize it anyway would violate God's law of personal responsibility.

[See also the notes below on Ezek. 18:20 and 2 Cor. 5:10. Cf. Rom. 2:28,29; 1 Pet. 1:22; 3:21; 2 Cor. 8:5; Rev. 22:17; Phil. 2:12; 1 Cor. 13:1-3.]
B. Each Person Should Be Baptized
for the Purpose of Receiving Forgiveness of Sins.

Again, since God is no respecter of persons, the purpose of baptism must be the same for all who are baptized. He did not give two different purposes, one for adults and another for babies. What are the proper purposes for which all must be baptized?

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved.

Acts 2:38 - Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.

Acts 22:16 - Be baptized and wash away your sins.

1 Peter 3:21 - Baptism also now saves us.

As shown above, our service to God pleases Him only if it is offered from the right motive and purpose. So the person who is baptized must do it for the purpose of being forgiven or saved from his sins.

Consider the Lord's Supper as an illustration. Even if a person does the right actions, but if his reasons are wrong, he displeases God (1 Cor. 11:23-29). Likewise, if a person is baptized, but if he does not do it to receive forgiveness of sins, then the baptism is not Scriptural. But a baby cannot understand the meaning of baptism, so how can he be baptized from a proper motive?

(See the links at the end of this study for further information about the purpose of baptism.)
C. A Baby Cannot Be Baptized to Receive
Forgiveness, because It Has No Sins to Be Forgiven.

Since baptism must be done for the purpose of receiving forgiveness of sins, a baby could Scripturally be baptized only if it was guilty of sins and needed forgiveness. But is a baby guilty of sin?
How could a baby become guilty of sin?

We become sinners when we transgress God's law (1 John 3:4; James 1:13-15; Isa. 59:1,2). But a baby cannot understand God's law, so how could it be held accountable for violating it?

Some people believe that babies need baptism because they have inherited guilt from Adam. But consider:

Ezekiel 18:20 - The child does not bear the iniquity of the father, but the wickedness of the wicked is upon himself. The only person held accountable for Adam's sin is Adam, not his descendants.

2 Corinthians 5:10 - Each one will be judged according to what he has done in the body, good or bad. This means no one will be condemned for Adam's sin, except Adam!

Note that this also confirms that no one will be justified because someone else decided to do good. Specifically babies are not held accountable for a parent's decision to have a child baptized. Each person will be judged for what he chooses to do, not for what others choose to do.

Further, the Bible says that Jesus was without sin (Heb. 2:14,17; 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 John 3:5). How could He have been without sin if babies inherit the guilt of Adam's sin?
If a baby is guilty of sin, what happens if it dies before it is baptized, or if its parents refuse to baptize it?

If babies are guilty of sin, if one dies without baptism, then wouldn't it follow that he is eternally lost? Almost no one will accept this conclusion, yet to deny the conclusion is to admit that babies really are not guilty of sin.

Further, since baptism is essential to salvation, if a baby is a sinner, then its salvation from sin must depend entirely on the actions of others. It must rely entirely on its parents to choose to baptize it. It has no choice in the matter, and cannot possibly influence its own destiny. This contradicts all the scriptures we have quoted showing that salvation is a matter of individual choice (2 Cor. 5:10; etc.).

Since salvation is a matter of individual choice, and since a baby cannot choose or express a choice to be baptized, we conclude that the baby is not lost to begin with. Therefore it does not need baptism.
What condition is a baby in?

Since we now know that babies have committed no sin and have inherited no sin, it follows that they must be innocent. Notice other Scriptures that confirm this conclusion:

Psalms 106:37,38; Jeremiah 19:4,5 - Babies sacrificed to idols were "innocent."

Hebrews 12:9 - God is the Father of our spirits, in contrast to human fathers (fathers of our flesh). Adam was a father of our flesh, but not of our spirit. God is the Father of our spirits. Would God give us sinful spirits? [Zech. 12:1; Ecc. 12:7]

Matthew 19:14; 18:3 - The kingdom is for those who are like little children. To enter the kingdom, we must be converted and become like little children. If children are sinners, would this not mean that we must be converted and become like little sinners?

Yet other passages show that to enter the kingdom we must become innocent or cleansed of sin (Col. 1:13,14). Therefore, becoming like little children must mean, among other things, that children are innocent.

But since Jesus said to let little children come to Him, some people say this means we should baptize babies so they can come to Him. But Jesus did not baptize the babies who came to Him. They came into His physical presence so He could touch them and pray for them (Matt. 19:13; Mark 10:13-16), not so He could baptize them. They were already acceptable to Him just as they were, without baptism.

A baby does not need forgiveness because he is not guilty. He is in a safe condition, not accountable for sin until he is old enough to be able to understand and accept the responsibility to obey God. Since baptism is for the remission of sins, and since a baby has no sins, it follows that babies do not need baptism.

Some people admit that babies have no sin, but they baptize them anyway as a "dedication" to encourage parents to train the child properly. But where does the Bible say this is the purpose of baptism? The purpose of baptism is to receive remission of sins. And furthermore, we have learned that no one can decide that another person will be dedicated to God. Each person must decide that for himself.

So no matter how you look at it, infant baptism perverts the purpose of baptism.
Part III. Can Babies Fulfill the Requirements
that Follow Baptism?

When a person is baptized, he is making a commitment to live all the rest of his life according to the Bible. He automatically and immediately becomes subject to certain responsibilities that the Bible requires of all baptized people. If a person is not able to accept these responsibilities, then he is simply not ready to be baptized.

Here are a few of the responsibilities that God requires of all people who are baptized. Can babies do these?
A. All Baptized People Should Exhort and
Encourage Other Christians.

1 Corinthians 12:13,25,26 - Note first that baptism makes people members of Jesus' body, which is the church (Eph. 1:22,23; 5:23). Some people baptize babies, but still do not consider them to be members of the church. God's word says that, when one has been Scripturally baptized, he is automatically in the church. Then all members in the church should care for, suffer with, and rejoice with other members. Can a baby do this? [cf. Heb. 10:22-25]

Ephesians 4:16 - In the body (the church) every joint and each part is to work to edify and build up the body. What work can babies do? None. Therefore, they should not be baptized into the body.
B. All Baptized People Should Worship God.

Acts 2:38-42,47 - Note again that, when people were baptized, the Lord added them to His church (v41,47). To baptize people and yet consider them not fully members of the church would be unscriptural. These baptized people then continued in the acts of worship named: breaking bread, prayer, the apostles' doctrine, etc. Can babies do this?

1 Corinthians 14:15-20 - Members of the church (this includes all baptized people - 1 Cor. 12:13) are to assemble with other Christians to sing, pray, and teach. All this should be done with understanding. But the Scripture expressly says that babies cannot do these things with the understanding that God requires (v20).

Notice the passage carefully: Members of the church should understand what is done in worship. Babies cannot understand. Therefore, babies should not be baptized into the church!

1 Corinthians 10:16,17; 11:23-29 - All members of the body (i.e., all people who are baptized - 12:13) should eat the bread and drink the cup in communion (10:16,17). Do churches that baptize babies have them partake of communion?

When members partake, they must remember Jesus' death and discern the meaning of it. If they eat without understanding, they eat and drink damnation to themselves (11:23-29). Can babies remember and discern this? If not, they should not partake. But all members of the body should partake, therefore babies should not be baptized into the body!

Clearly, God requires all members of the church to do things that babies cannot do. Therefore, the command to be baptized is not addressed to babies and does not include them.
C. Baptized People Should Put God First
in Their Lives.

Romans 6:3,4,11-18 - When people are baptized, they come into Christ and should walk in newness of life. They are made alive to God (newness of life), so they must not let sin reign in their bodies, but must use their members as instruments of righteousness. Obeying the gospel makes us free from sin and slaves to righteousness. But babies cannot make such choices and commitments. They should not be baptized until they are able to accept this responsibility from their own hearts.

Romans 12:1,2 - This passage is addressed to "brethren" - i.e., children of God, members of God's family, the church. But people become children of God, born again as brethren in the family, when by faith they are baptized (Rom. 6:3,4; Gal. 3:26,27; 1 Tim. 3:15). Such people should present their bodies as living sacrifices to God, not being conformed to the world. This commitment must be accepted by one who is baptized. Can babies make such a commitment?

1 Corinthians 15:58 - Brethren (i.e., people who became children of God at the point of baptism) should be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the Lord's work. One who cannot so abound, ought not to be baptized. Can babies abound in the Lord's work?

Matthew 28:19,20 - Baptized people should be taught to obey all Jesus' commands. This shows that it is not necessary, at the very point of baptism, for people to know all the specific commands they must obey after baptism. But they must be capable of learning and applying those commands. And they must have a heart willing to accept and obey everything Jesus says to do.

This is the commitment that a person makes when he repents and is baptized. No one should be baptized unless he has made such a commitment. A baby cannot do this, so he should not be baptized until he is old enough to choose for himself to do so.

Note carefully that we have learned what God says people must do before they can be baptized, during baptism (the proper purpose), and after baptism. And babies do not qualify in any of these areas. To baptize babies, then, would be to act by human authority without God's authority, thereby violating the will of God.
Part IV. Can Infant Baptism
Be Scripturally Defended?

Remember that practices displease God unless they are authorized in His word (see our introduction). We now know that the gospel clearly teaches conditions regarding baptism that babies cannot possibly meet. Yet some folks still claim that infant baptism is Scriptural. We have briefly answered several such efforts already. Let us notice some more.
A. Babies with Faith

Some people claim that babies can have faith, and therefore they should be baptized (note Matt. 18:6). But remember that denominations typically baptize babies as young as a few days or a few weeks old. Can anyone seriously believe that babies, at this age, can have the kind of faith the Bible requires before baptism?
Romans 10:13-17 - Faith comes by hearing God's word.

The only way anyone can have faith is by being taught God's word. Do churches that baptize babies teach them before baptizing them? Of course not. So they are baptizing people who have no faith.

They do, however, try to instill faith in these children later in life in "confirmation." Why is this necessary, if the child had faith and knowledge from infancy? The practices of these churches prove of themselves that they know babies do not have knowledge and faith.

And remember that 1 Cor. 14:20 expressly states that babies are not capable of having sufficient understanding to be baptized and be members of Jesus' church.
What about repenting and confessing?

We have shown that these are also required before baptism. Can babies do these? And remember that the confession must be understandable so that other people know the candidate has sufficient faith to be baptized.
And what about the responsibilities that are involved in church membership?

Can babies do these too? Remember, all baptized people are in the church and must learn to fulfill these duties. Even if babies had faith, that would only be part of what God requires. Other things are required, both before and after baptism, that babies cannot possibly accomplish.
Just suppose babies could believe. Logically, then, babies could also DISbelieve.

But the Bible says to baptize the ones that believe and not the ones that do not believe (Mark. 16:16; Acts 8:12,36,37; etc.). Do folks who practice infant baptism make a distinction between the babies that believe and those that don't? If so, how?

The Bible describes different degrees of faith (Heb. 10:39; cf. Jas. 2:19; John 12:42,43; Matt. 14:31). Children gradually grow in understanding and in faith, but they do not have "saving" faith, sufficient to be baptized, until they are old enough to repent, confess, and fully accept the responsibility of living the Christian life, as we have already studied.
B. Household Conversions

Some people refer to Bible examples where whole households were baptized. They claim that these households must have included babies, so infant baptism is authorized. But notice:
None of these examples actually say that babies were included.

Many households do not include babies or even small children. If the Bible does not mention babies, then to claim there were babies in the household would simply be an unproved assumption. The simple fact that households were converted proves nothing by itself. Unless these passages themselves show us that babies were included, then we must settle the issue on the basis of other passages on the subject.

We have cited clear, specific evidence that people who were baptized must always first hear, believe, repent, and confess, and that they must be baptized for the right reason, and that they must be able to accept the responsibilities of church membership. Babies can do none of these things. It is a misuse of Scripture to assume without proof that babies were included in the household conversions, in contradiction to this evidence.
The contexts of the household conversions actually imply those who were baptized included no babies.

Notice each of the Bible examples of household conversions:

Cornelius' household - Acts 10:1-11:18; 15:7-11

Peter taught these people that God is no respecter of persons (10:34). So whatever anyone in the household did to be baptized, all the rest must have done the same things. Peter did not give two sets of rules, one for babies and another for adults.

Notice some things that people in this household did that babies cannot do: all in the household feared God (10:2,35); all came together to hear and receive what God had commanded (10:33,44; 11:1,14); they heard and believed (15:7,9; 10:43), they repented (11:18), and they were told to work righteousness (10:35). No babies baptized here!

Furthermore, since God is no respecter of persons, we are not going to find any examples of conversion in which less was required of people than in the examples we have already studied. Some examples may give fewer details, but no one in any household was baptized without faith, repentance, confession, etc. If such a case existed, God would be a respecter of persons.

Lydia's household - Acts 16:13-15,40

In this case there is no reason to believe that Lydia was even married, let alone that she had little children. The Bible teaches that, if a woman has a husband, he should be the head of the household (Eph. 5:22-25). So whenever the Bible refers to the activity of a household, if the husband is included in that activity, if the wife is mentioned by name then the man is also mentioned. (Notice how the other household conversions demonstrate this. Genealogies also followed this rule.)

Since Lydia's household was baptized, the fact that no man is mentioned would imply that she was the head of the household. Her household may have included relatives, especially older relatives, and perhaps servants, but no husband is implied, let alone children.

Paul later "encouraged" those who were brethren (NKJV), including Lydia's house (v40). Did this include babies?

The Jailer's household - Acts 16:23-34

Before this household was baptized, Paul spoke the word to all in the house (v32), and they believed (v31,34). Again, babies can't do these things, so no babies were included in the number baptized here.

Stephanas' household - 1 Corinthians 1:16; 16:15

Again, what verse says there were babies in this household? Note that Stephanas' house ministered to the saints. Again, people who are baptized must be old enough to be active in God's work as members of the church. This does not include babies.

The household conversions do not disprove what we have learned elsewhere. Instead they harmonize with it. All who are baptized must do things that babies cannot do. Therefore, the command to be baptized does not include babies. When people baptize babies, they follow human authority, and they displease God.
Conclusion

Infant baptism is objectionable for several reasons.

First, infant baptism is an unauthorized change in God's pattern for baptism. God tells us whom to baptize. He tells the conditions people must meet in order to be baptized, but babies do not fit. To baptize babies is to act by human authority without divine authority.

Second, infant baptism leads people to believe they are saved when they are not. God requires people to be baptized for the remission of sins when they are old enough to make their own decision about the matter. But many people have been baptized as babies. Then, when they are old enough to be responsible for their conduct so they should be baptized, they refuse because they believe they have already done so. But their infant baptism was not Scriptural. So the person goes through his whole life never having been Scripturally baptized, and therefore he never has received forgiveness of his sins!

A final objection to infant baptism is that it is almost always done by sprinkling or pouring, not by immersion. But the Bible says that baptism is a burial (Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12). A person must go down into the water and come up out of it (Acts 8:38,39; Mark 1:9,10). Bible baptism requires much water (John 3:23). Infant baptism does not fit God's pattern on any of these points. The evidence clearly shows that Bible baptism is an immersion, not a sprinkling or pouring.

What should a person do if his baptism was not done the way the Bible teaches? He should realize that he simply has not yet obeyed God, and he needs to obey God by being baptized according to the Bible (Acts 19:1-6). If this is your need, we urge you to find a faithful local church belonging to Christ and be baptized Scripturally today!
 
Does everyone on this board agree that infants can be baptised without any oral confession of faith thus making them full members of the Church, saved as the protestants would put it?

If this is true then the age of accountability issue is over and baptism saves as the Scripture states.

The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1 Peter 3:21

I believe a saved person must mean one is a member of the Church for we know Christ gave Himself for His Church and is the savior of the Church. It is He that adds daily to His Church. Thus membership means salvation. Baptism is the "card of membership" shown at the door. Any other card is a counterfeit and that person is seeking to enter in another manner than that perscribed by Jesus Christ Himself.

Mark 16:15-16:

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.


Matthew 28:18:

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Here again Jesus transfers all the powers of heaven and earth given by His Father to the Church who is commanded to "teach" "believers" that have been "baptised" "all things" that He taught the Apostles. What more obvious instructions via holy traditions is needed but by the mouth of Jesus Christ Himself. How flippantly we disregard the men appointed with such a great task of building "the Church" on the earth.

What corperation in America could exist as a viable entity run like the chaos and confusion of the protestant reformation?

We are to believe the men and women after the apostles did not take this responsibility passed on to them by the words of the Apostles seriously, even unto death?

My point is baptism is the very "ritual" passed down through the ages that is one of many "traditions of God" that appears to be a "tradition of man" in the protestant reformation. Why is that?


Luke 19:1 Then Jesus entered and passed through Jericho. 2 Now behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus who was a chief tax collector, and he was rich. 3 And he sought to see who Jesus was, but could not because of the crowd, for he was of short stature. 4 So he ran ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see Him, for He was going to pass that way. 5 And when Jesus came to the place, He looked up and saw him,[a] and said to him, “Zacchaeus, make haste and come down, for today I must stay at your house.†6 So he made haste and came down, and received Him joyfully. 7 But when they saw it, they all complained, saying, “He has gone to be a guest with a man who is a sinner.â€Â
8 Then Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord, I give half of my goods to the poor; and if I have taken anything from anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold.â€Â
9 And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham; 10 for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.â€Â

The power of God forgives this man and everyone in his "house". In those days families of generations lived together. It would appear that this man by his faith alone saved his entire family line through repentance. One man's faith in repentance save his whole family. This example truely shoots in the foot any notion that a person must make a "confession of faith" that saves him for this one man saves many who may or may not have made the same confession.

Church traditions claims this man and his family were baptised. Apostle Peter appointed this man Bishop of Caesarea in Paletine. Tradition claims this man is the example given by Jesus as the "publican" in the prayer of the publican and pharisee. Pricked his heart apparently.

It would appear that baptism and repentance are two peas in a pod, they go hand in hand unto the salvation of men by the power of the Holy Trinity.

In Love,

Orthodoxy
 
Vic said:
What? What manipulation are you accusing me of here Vic? Is my myth busting offending you? I am not asking anything to be argumentive. They are legitimate, fundamental questions. I expect honest answers, not be bombarded with questions designed to go round and round in a circle.

[quote:6e623]I wasn't accusing you of anything.

but...


It was a suggestion that you don't try manipulating the thread.

How pray tell did I do that? Example please.


How old are you?

Old enough that you are young enough to go over my knee in years past. 48 sir.

You practically repeated what I said verbatim.

Yes. I cut and pasted it.

That's patronizing.

No, it is not. It is flattery because I totally agree. I am not asking anything to be argumentive. They are legitimate, fundamental questions. I expect honest answers, not be bombarded with questions designed to go round and round in a circle.

I feel the exact same way. Why wont you answer any of the questions I posed on this thread but attack the contents of my posts while not addressing the substance? It was a compliment to your statement by repeating it.

I expect that from my 11 year old nephew, not a mature Christian
[/quote:6e623]

Really. What would you call whining without answering direct questions?

Does your 11 year old nephew tie you in theological knots to the point of becoming accusitory, evasive and coy in your answers?

Now will you address anything in the thread's topic other than your opinion of me?

In Love,

Orthodoxy
 
Gosh I'm glad I was given a choice!!!!

Those poor poor kids to have 'salvation' thrust on them without it being their choice :sad

Lucky for me though, I see baptism as symbolic to the spiritual baptism at believe so even though a child might be dunked - it doesn't regenerate them like the HOly Spirit does...so I guess they'll have to be dunked again when they have DECIDED to choose Christ eh?
 
Merry Menagerie said:
Gosh I'm glad I was given a choice!!!!

Those poor poor kids to have 'salvation' thrust on them without it being their choice :sad

Lucky for me though, I see baptism as symbolic to the spiritual baptism at believe so even though a child might be dunked - it doesn't regenerate them like the HOly Spirit does...so I guess they'll have to be dunked again when they have DECIDED to choose Christ eh?

Those poor poor kids to have 'salvation' thrust on them without it being their choice :sad

It is good to know you agree baptism saved them all without those poor babies having to say an acceptance speech. Good to know you agree.

I see
I see
I see
I see

You agree with yourself and have total understanding within yourself through yourself and by yourself.

Fortunately the Church understands it as "we see".

Orthodoxy
 
Oh no they weren't saved - they just have salvation thrust on them against their will.

No where in the bible does it say to baptise children and to force salvation onto them.
 
Merry Menagerie said:
Oh no they weren't saved - they just have salvation thrust on them against their will.

No where in the bible does it say to baptise children and to force salvation onto them.

Thank you for your opinion. Thank God that is all it is, your opinion and not that of Jesus Christ.


Matthew 18

1At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?

2And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,

3And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

4Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

5And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.

6But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

7Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

8Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

9And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

10Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

11For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

12How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?

13And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.

14Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

I take Jesus Christ at His word and thank God the bible tells us what His word is so we dont need to trust people that would deny the Kingdom to a child.

In Christ,

Orthodoxy
 
How you get "force salvation on your children by baptising them so they dont' have a choice" from those scriptures will forever remain a mystery to me. They say nothing of the sort. But then I suppose we could twist scripture around to say anything we want can't we?
 
Back
Top