Evidence for God from Science

Many reject infant saying infants are too young and also state Jesus himself was not baptism until he was 30. So is infant baptism biblical

UsagiTsukino wrote:Many reject infant saying infants are too young and also state Jesus himself was not baptism until he was 30. So is infant baptism biblical

You can dedicate your child to God. We did this with Caleb but he will have to make his own choice oneday to be saved.

If infant baptism is good enough for the Catholic Church, it's good enough for me!*


*If anyone thinks I'm serious, let him be anathema.

Isn't the purpose Of baptism to show to others of the decision that has already been made in the person's heart? Bible teaches baptism by immersion.

And, yes, churches Do have a baby dedication service --the parents bring their child/ toddler/ baby up front of the church and the pastor shares the importance of parents / family members to raise / encourage the child in Godliness , etc. And, then, when the child or whatever age it takes place -- is responsible for their personal decision to accept Jesus Christ as their personal Savior.

Infant Baptism, for many Catholics, is like a safety guard. They're being baptised into the Church, and into Christ as such, on account of which they will be saved should they die.

I recall my mother-in-law was so worried about such for our firstborn, she asked if she might take her into the church to be baptised. Our response, well my response, "hell no". I'm not sure how my wife conveyed such.

We did however dedicate our kids (first two at least) to God with the church we attended. Our latter two (we have four kids), well, I've personally dedicated them -- such is just symbolic as I see matters that one really chooses to raise their children under Christ -- and that to me should be natural to any Christian parent.

I baptized my oldest child (when he was about eight). And I'm pretty sure it "took!"

I don't think it is strictly Biblical, but it's been extrapolated from the Bible that people who come to faith as adults have to be baptised as adults, but that babies with believing parents can be baptised immediately. I used to be pretty scornful about it years ago but someone pointed out to me the story of the jailer in Acts 16 - how he and his whole family were baptised. Of course though they could all have been old enough to understand. Then a Catholic mother (who was definitely Bible-believing, in other words evangelical-leaning) told me a few years ago how it was important to her to have her son baptised - they felt they were welcoming him into God's family.

It's something that I think is not necessary but not really wrong either.

Baptism symbolism the bring of one into the convent Of God, the community of the Church of God and community of believers, much like circumcision does to Jews.
Age is not relevant.
While infant baptism brings a child into the fold, the child must still make the "confirmation" of faith later.

PaulSacramento wrote:Baptism symbolism the bring of one into the convent Of God, the community of the Church of God and community of believers, much like circumcision does to Jews.
Age is not relevant.
While infant baptism brings a child into the fold, the child must still make the "confirmation" of faith later.

I've heard about confirmation in Catholicism - but I remember the sister of that Catholic lady I mentioned, who was going to a Baptist church rather than Catholic, saying that her confirmation went right over her head and she had no appreciation of it at all at the time. It seems to be traditional to do it at the age of 14 or so regardless of where the child is at spiritually, whereas believers' baptism is carried out at whatever age the person is ready for it.

Nicki wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Baptism symbolism the bring of one into the convent Of God, the community of the Church of God and community of believers, much like circumcision does to Jews.
Age is not relevant.
While infant baptism brings a child into the fold, the child must still make the "confirmation" of faith later.

I've heard about confirmation in Catholicism - but I remember the sister of that Catholic lady I mentioned, who was going to a Baptist church rather than Catholic, saying that her confirmation went right over her head and she had no appreciation of it at all at the time. It seems to be traditional to do it at the age of 14 or so regardless of where the child is at spiritually, whereas believers' baptism is carried out at whatever age the person is ready for it.

In a nutshell, and not all will agree, the baptism is like the circumcision and the confirmation is like the bar/batmitsvah.

Depends on what you think baptism does. Put more directly, is baptism a sacrament whereby sins (or original in in particular) are washed away/forgiven--that is, does baptism itself have an effect--or is it an external symbol of an already existing internal reality. If the former, then infant baptism is almost certainly biblical. Why deny a child the effect of the baptism (sins forgiven, unification with the body, etc)? If the latter, then infant baptism is almost certainly unbiblical, since there is no internal reality for the baptism to be signifying. On that view, to baptize a child would quite literally be to tell a lie, since you are claiming something of the child that has not happened.

Jac3510 wrote:Depends on what you think baptism does. Put more directly, is baptism a sacrament whereby sins (or original in in particular) are washed away/forgiven--that is, does baptism itself have an effect--or is it an external symbol of an already existing internal reality. If the former, then infant baptism is almost certainly biblical. Why deny a child the effect of the baptism (sins forgiven, unification with the body, etc)? If the latter, then infant baptism is almost certainly unbiblical, since there is no internal reality for the baptism to be signifying. On that view, to baptize a child would quite literally be to tell a lie, since you are claiming something of the child that has not happened.

Baptism is to show Outwardly that which has already taken place in the person Inwardly. When a person believes in his heart and confesses with his mouth -- salvation then takes place. Then comes the outward act of.

When our pastor has a baptisimal service as part of the regular church service -- he shares with the congregation that the baptismal water is simply Taylor city water. It's not holy or blessed or anything special.

If a church baptizes infants to safeguard them until later on. It's more for the parents than for the infant. Because only an older individual can understand right from wrong / as they are taught that. And can make a decision for themselves.

It puts more responsibility on the parents to teach their children.

crochet1949 wrote:Baptism is to show Outwardly that which has already taken place in the person Inwardly. When a person believes in his heart and confesses with his mouth -- salvation then takes place. Then comes the outward act of.

When our pastor has a baptisimal service as part of the regular church service -- he shares with the congregation that the baptismal water is simply Taylor city water. It's not holy or blessed or anything special.

On these points, you and I share a common theology.

If a church baptizes infants to safeguard them until later on. It's more for the parents than for the infant. Because only an older individual can understand right from wrong / as they are taught that. And can make a decision for themselves.

It puts more responsibility on the parents to teach their children.

But this isn't really a fair representation of the beliefs of those who baptize their children. For them, it's not merely "safeguard[ing] them until later" and still less is it "more for the parents." Their theology is that it is very much for the infant, that baptism itself (by the grace of God, of course) is what washes away original sin. Thus, if a child dies unbaptized, then they still die with the stain of original sin on their soul. That's the basis for the belief in Limbo. Now, the Catholic church allows the opinion that Limbo isn't where such children go after all, but it doesn't allow one to say that they know such children are in heaven. Catholicism permits one to say that they have hope that God has provided a way for unbaptized children to be forgiven of original sin even without baptism, but it quickly notes that if that is the case, such a way has not been revealed to the Church.

To be clear, I'm not saying the Catholic church is right or that you should accept that. I am saying that we need to be fair in understanding what their position is. They would object if we said that infant baptism is more for the parents than the children. And having said all that, since any Christian may baptize anyone else, it may very well be that you, personally, could be in a situation in which you were asked to baptize a dying child. And you may very well do so, given your beliefs, more for the parents than for the child. In fact, you might do that whether the child is dying or not, still believing it was more for the kid that for the adults. But even in that case, within the context of paedobaptistic theology, the act is sacramental, not merely symbolic, and itself works to effect a particular grace (the forgiveness of sin) in the life of the child.

Basically, a baby is innocent of pretty much anything. So for them, a baptism, or washing away of sins, is redundant.

But hey it's just sprinkling holy water on a baby's forehead. Some sleep right through it, like I did.

Hortator wrote:Basically, a baby is innocent of pretty much anything. So for them, a baptism, or washing away of sins, is redundant.

Of course, paedobaptists would say you are wrong on this. So they're going to answer the OP differently than you. That's the point I'm trying to make. If you think a baby is innocent of sin, then there's no necessity to baptize. But if a baby is born guilty of (original) sin, and if baptism washes away (original) sin--that is, if baptism is sacramental--then not only is baptizing a baby biblical, indeed, it is necessary and only an evil person would refuse an infant that grace.

I'm not a sacramentalist in my theology nor do I think babies are born guilty of original sin. And based on that, I don't think infant baptism is biblical. But I insist that we recognize the position of those who disagree with us on it.