What is the point of infant baptism?

[FireDragon76]

I'm fairly sure scripture uses the word "baptise" - to fully immerse. Anything else isn't really baptism, just as trimming any other body part or thing isn't really circumcision, however anyone wants to claim that it is.

The etymology of a word is not necessarily identical to what it denotes. For example, a butterfly is not made of butter.

 

[Neo_Frisk]

It uses it in a way to mean "to wash something in a way it is normatively washed."

This is from Google. It's not perfect, but it's right on this occasion.

"What does the word baptism mean in the Bible?
THE ORDINANCE OF WATER BAPTISM[edit] The word "Baptism" is a transliteration of the Greek word BAPTIZO which means to immerse. In Hebrew it is referred to as a MIKVEH - an immersion."

 

[Ttalkkugjil]

This is from Google. It's not perfect, but it's right on this occasion.

"What does the word baptism mean in the Bible?
THE ORDINANCE OF WATER BAPTISM[edit] The word "Baptism" is a transliteration of the Greek word BAPTIZO which means to immerse. In Hebrew it is referred to as a MIKVEH - an immersion."

I was unaware we had accepted Google as the be all and end all in theological definitions.

 

[Neo_Frisk]

I was unaware we had accepted Google as the be all and end all in theological definitions.

You'll find the original Greek means the same.

 

[Ttalkkugjil]

You'll find the original Greek means the same.

Do you imagine that the infants who were baptized in the book of Acts were immersed?

 

[FireDragon76]

Except for the fact that God is amazingly merciful. But His mercy cannot be quantified so as to let it be written down.

That still leaves parents and families with no concrete assurance. The point of our baptismal theology is that it is actual grace, not a hypothetical grace, for concrete persons, no matter what their intellectual capacity. As Luther said, if you are going to preach grace, preach a real grace, and not a hypothetical grace. If all you have is hypothetical grace, we might as well give the whole thing up.

 

[Neo_Frisk]

Do you imagine that the infants who were baptized in the book of Acts were immersed?

If infants were baptised in the book of Acts, most certainly. If infants were not immersed in the book of Acts, it would not state that they were baptised. Baptism, like most words, has a specific meaning. (I think you'll find Acts doesn't explicitly state that infants were baptised - this is an assumption made by pro-infant-baptism advocates).

 

[Dave-W]

That still leaves parents and families with no concrete assurance.

True. Because the bible itself gives no "concrete assurance."

Any assurance given beyond the written word is man made.

 

[Dave-W]

Do you imagine that the infants who were baptized in the book of Acts were immersed?

The English word "baptize" was invented by the translators of the King James bible. It was taken from the Greek Baptizo meaning to dip, plunge, immerse. Since immersion was NOT the practice of the Church of England in 1600, they Anglicized the word so native English speakers would have no prior definition and see the CoE was not following it.

 

[FireDragon76]

True. Because the bible itself gives no "concrete assurance."

If you really believe this, there is no point in even being a Christian, then. We might as well just find some other way to spend our time on a Sunday morning. I have no time for talk of a purely hypothetical salvation. There could be invisible, undetectable teapots circling Jupiter, but it makes no difference to my life or anybody else's.

 

[FenderTL5]

When you say you baptise your infants, do you fully immerse them in water...

yes.

 

[Neo_Frisk]

If you really believe this, there is no point in even being a Christian, then. We might as well just find some other way to spend our time on a Sunday morning.

I think you're taking the quote out of context. He was referring to the salvation of infants.

And it does depend on what one defines as concrete evidence. I find God's goodness, justice, and His special love for children, concrete evidence enough in that He would offer them a chance to believe in Him, prior to condemning them to Hell for eternity.

 

[Dave-W]

If you really believe this, there is no point in even being a Christian, then. We might as well just find some other way to spend our time on a Sunday morning.

Not true:

1 John 5:10
He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son.

We who believe have an internal witness that no one else can discern.

 

[Neo_Frisk]

yes.

If so, I can understand this justification for infant baptism - I believe it can be argued consistently. For myself, it seems quite risky, but I guess so did circumcision on the eighth day in the Old Testament.

 

[FireDragon76]

Not true:

1 John 5:10
He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son.

We who believe have an internal witness that no one else can discern.

So do Mormons.

 

[Dave-W]

So do Mormons.

That is not my fault.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think you're taking the quote out of context. He was referring to the salvation of infants.

And it does depend on what one defines as concrete evidence. I find God's goodness, justice, and His special love for children, concrete evidence enough in that He would offer them a chance to believe in Him, prior to condemning them to Hell for eternity.

My same criticism applies. If I can't find any assurance that God is merciful and gracious to me, there's no point in me bothering with Christianity in the first place. A truth in the abstract that has no application for me is just as good as philosophical speculation.

 

[FireDragon76]

That is not my fault.

Why should I believe you have this witness, and a Mormon doesn't?

Introducing radical subjectivism into the Christian faith is poison. It means Christianity is whatever the burning in my bosom tells me it is.

 

[Neo_Frisk]

My same criticism applies. If I can't find any assurance that God is merciful and gracious to me, there's no point in me bothering with Christianity in the first place. A truth in the abstract that has no application for me is just as good as philosophical speculation.

Just read the 4 gospels, and try to argue God is not merciful or gracious to you.

 

[Neo_Frisk]

Why should I believe you have this witness, and a Mormon doesn't?

Seek and ye shall find.