5 reasons babies should be baptized

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You asked what good a baptism is for an infant and so I told you. If you want to respond to THAT, I would of course be happy to read it.
I read this earlier and was disappointed. The point was made (by you?) that an infant has faith or can have faith. So, I defined faith according to the bible... it comes by hearing God and is dead with works. That really does rule out an infants ability to have faith... so why ignore that point and tell me I have to respond to something else now?
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Aren't you mixing Baptism and Salvation by Faith here? There are many congregations that practice "Believer's Baptism" and none of them is certain that the candidate has Faith rather than simple Belief.

In fact, there are many which rush the person through a Baptism on the basis of a quick "Sinner's Prayer" that has been urged upon him during a sermon. All the historic churches do a better job of preparation than that.
I am not... those saying baptism is needed for infants are by forcing the idea that an infant who can't know right from wrong gets their sins remitted BECAUSE OF A CHOICE MADE BY THEIR PARENTS.
 
Upvote 0

Theo Book

Active Member
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
216
76
90
Central Florida
✟81,758.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If infant baptism; or ANY baptism is necessary to become part of Jesus "Kingdom" (saved), I have a MAJOR problem with the following:

1. When and where did the "thief on the cross" (that accepted Jesus) get baptized in liquid water?

The thief was not a Christian dependent upon the saving grace of Jesus' death on the cross; because Jesus was not dead yet, the sacrifice not made yet; and lived under a different set of standards. What saved that thief was his public confession of the crucified Christ, at a moment in history that was in reality, between two systems, that of Law, and that of Faith.

2. A person is on their death bed; and that person dies one second AFTER they surrendered to Jesus; how and where did that person get baptized in liquid water?

"...and rise to walk in newness of life..." Baptism is for those who survive to walk in a new life. For those who die, it is more a matter of confessing a belief in that which previously you doubted.

3. A baby JUST born dies. When and how can that baby get baptized in liquid water?
see previous response.

4. A soldier in battle accepts Jesus; and instantly a rocket propelled grenade blows his head off (it happens!; when and how would that soldier get baptized in liquid water?

4. A young child accepts Jesus when the preacher gives the altar call; then on the way home that child is hit by a car and is killed (It happens!), how and when can that child get baptized in liquid water?

5. A baby is just born; the parents call for a priest or preacher to baptize their baby, etc; and before the clergyman can get there, the baby dies (it happens!); how and when can that baby get baptized in liquid water?

6. Say you are an atheist at ANY age; but you are touched by watching a Billy Graham TV crusade; and you surrender and cry out to Jesus; but sadly you instantly die of a heart attack (it happens!); when and how can you be baptized in liquid water?

7. When Jesus was preaching to the multitudes on many occasions; and say a few of them died (it happens) BEFORE John the Baptist; or a disciple which had not been chosen yet; could baptize them in liquid water; how and when could they be baptized in liquid water?

8. Paul is preaching in Corinth and several "jews" accept Jesus; but one of them dies BEFORE baptism (it happens) in liquid water can be arranged; how and when can that person be baptized in liquid water?

9. A Pentecostal is dragged down the aisle of his church by his parents to get him "saved"; and the Pentecostal accepts Jesus crying uncontrollably; But the Baptism is not scheduled for 2 weeks hence (common practice in churches ALL over the world); and sadly the Pentecostal dies before the baptismal can take place; how and when can that Pentecostal get baptized in liquid water?

10. Etc, etc, and ETC!

Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with (liquid) water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

WHAT is that verse saying? Think about it! What does it really mean? Read that verse again and then ask yourself ALL of the questions above? Think about it. Does Mathew 3:11 answer completely ALL of the questions above? Huh?

John 4:13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: John 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

What is Jesus really saying? Huh? WHAT was the "water" representing with Jesus' statement; versus the water that would last for "eternal life"? Could it be that Jesus was saying, "ONCE you are baptized by the Holy Spirit that baptizes your soul and circumcises your heart the moment I realizes you will humble yourself and believe in me; "liquid" water baptism becomes superfluous; REGARDLESS of what many in the bible will write"?

Think about it

In any case, may Jesus richly bless you and yours always.

All of your questions deny the one thing baptism is designed for; living a life of faith. Because Baptism is a likeness to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus himself.

"You are buried with him in baptism, to rise and walk..."

Baptism is called a burial, a Circumcision, and a crucifixion


BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF BURIAL OF THE DEAD:
Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus
Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with
him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the
dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in
newness of life.5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness
of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:6
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of
sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.7 For
he that is dead is freed from sin.

8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live
with him: 9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no
more; death hath no more dominion over him. 10 For in that he died, he
died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but
alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. 12 Let not sin therefore
reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts
thereof.13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that
are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of
righteousness unto God.

BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF CIRCUMCISION:
Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all
principality and power: 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the
circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins
of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in
baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the
operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF THE CRUCIFIXION:
Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness
of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection
Gal 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live
unto God. 20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not
I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh
I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself
for me.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,139
33,259
✟583,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I read this earlier and was disappointed. The point was made (by you?) that an infant has faith or can have faith.
No, I didn't say that. Maybe someone else did.
So, I defined faith according to the bible... it comes by hearing God and is dead with works. That really does rule out an infants ability to have faith... so why ignore that point and tell me I have to respond to something else now?
This may explain why I thought that I'd made a reasonable answer to the question of the OP (which is not to say that I explored everything that can be said about the sacrament/ordinance, but just that I offered some reasons why baptizing infants might be considered a positive thing), and got back a reply that didn't seem to deal with what I'd written. See below.

That really does rule out an infants ability to have faith... so why ignore that point and tell me I have to respond to something else now?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ken Rank
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,139
33,259
✟583,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I am not... those saying baptism is needed for infants are by forcing the idea that an infant who can't know right from wrong gets their sins remitted BECAUSE OF A CHOICE MADE BY THEIR PARENTS.

That's right. We have different views of the sacrament/ordinance.
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That's right. We have different views of the sacrament/ordinance.
The bible says that we each give an answer for ourselves... in other words, you don't get judged for me, I get judged for me. Therefore, how can a choice made for me, before I was even able to understand the alternatives, by my parents mean I am answer for me? I don't (personally) see how any of this gets around that.

There is a side aspect to this I hadn't really thought through and I am going to do just that. I might change my mind on this... not sure. Will certainly let you (all) know if I do and why.

Blessings.
Ken
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tangible
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,139
33,259
✟583,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The bible says that we each give an answer for ourselves... in other words, you don't get judged for me, I get judged for me. Therefore, how can a choice made for me, before I was even able to understand the alternatives, by my parents mean I am answer for me? I don't (personally) see how any of this gets around that.
Here's the standard answer: No one is saved by being baptized. That takes care of what seems to me to be the main part of your objection. It's not believed that being baptized replaces faith. No. Everyone who is of age is in the same situation in that respect. BUT this doesn't mean that Baptism is either useless or wrong when administered to an infant or young child, either. I think I listed some of the reasons earlier.
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Here's the standard answer: No one is saved by being baptized. That takes care of what seems to me to be the main part of your objection. It's not believed that being baptized replaces faith. No. Everyone who is of age is in the same situation in that respect. BUT this doesn't mean that Baptism is either useless or wrong when administered to an infant or young child, either. I think I listed some of the reasons earlier.
You might have... but if a parent baptizing an infant does not affect it's eternal destination, does not remit it's sins because it will have to make a conscious choice when it is able to discern, then why bother?
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,139
33,259
✟583,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You might have... but if a parent baptizing an infant does not affect it's eternal destination, does not remit it's sins because it will have to make a conscious choice when it is able to discern, then why bother?
Ken, having been advised that I'd already given answers to that very question, I guess I expected you to check back to see what they were...before posting what you did here.

But since you did not do that, here is what I wrote in post #71, only a relatively few posts ago:

Forgiveness of sin, becoming a formal member of the family of God, reception of grace for daily living, commitment of the sponsors to see that the child is raised in the faith....

Those are some of the reasons to bother.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,139
33,259
✟583,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Really. Where does it state this specifically? I seem to have missed those verses.
In several places it is reported that "whole households" were baptized. While it's theoretically possible that they contained no children at all, this is most unlikely in the Middle East of that era.
 
Upvote 0

EmethAlethia

Newbie
Oct 5, 2014
404
107
62
✟28,633.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes. AFTER the whole household believed. Plus, you are assuming there are children under the age of 12 in the household. I didn't ask for a "guess" that there "might" have been babies, infants or young children under 12. I asked if you had proof that there were babies, infants or children under the age of 12. Otherwise I can say that all pets in the household were baptized as well. There is no proof, but then, if that's what I "want to believe", it is the same evidence you supply, so it's probably just as accurate. No evidence is no evidence. Just a blind belief.

Jesus commanded His disciples to follow this format:


Mat 28:19 Step 1: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,

Step 2: baptizing them(those new disciples) in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

Mat 28:20 Step 3: teaching them(Those newly baptized disciples) to obey all that I commanded you;

That's what Jesus commanded. Now if they aren't "obeying" what Jesus commanded them, then they aren't disciples, and thus they aren't teaching people to OBEY exactly what He commanded them, now are they?

If whole households are baptized it is because everyone in the entire household first became a disciple.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,139
33,259
✟583,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Yes. AFTER the whole household believed.
The verse doesn't say that.

Plus, you are assuming there are children under the age of 12 in the household.
I said that. The Philippian jailer was baptized along with his household. As it is written, "he was baptized, he and all his" (Acts 16:33). That's not a reference to his servants, but to his family and more of them than just his spouse.

I didn't ask for a "guess" that there "might" have been babies, infants or young children under 12.
Then we're done here. I answered your question and pointed to the Biblical verse that supports my view and that of most Christians. You have a different guess, which is your right, but I didn't ask for an exposition of it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tangible
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Ken, having been advised that I'd already given answers to that very question, I guess I expected you to check back to see what they were...before posting what you did here.

But since you did not do that, here is what I wrote in post #71, only a relatively few posts ago:

Those are some of the reasons to bother.

While I respect your rights and choices... baptism does not forgive us of sin, God does. And somebody else, doing what God commands us to do... does not help any either. So from that aspect (forgiveness of sin), I don't see you (or anyone else) making a biblical case for that. Become part of the family? I have to say I can't argue against that... because if circumcision of an 8 day old brought him into covenant at least UNTIL he could choose on his own... then how can I see and accept that but then not make that same allowance for baptism on those grounds? I am not saying I agree... not saying I don't either :) ...... just saying I can't argue against it.

In regards to raising that child in the faith based on baptizing him... that is not supported in Scripture. You can dedicate the child, take an oath to bring him up in God's ways... but that is between YOU and God, not God and the child. The child cannot make that choice and you can't make it for him. Meaning, you can take a vow/oath to raise him that way but that is your doing not the child's doing. So... we agree in part, we disagree in part... no big deal. :)

Who is advising you as to what you should post to me?
 
Upvote 0

EmethAlethia

Newbie
Oct 5, 2014
404
107
62
✟28,633.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The verse doesn't say that. I said that. Then we're done here. I answered your question and pointed to the Biblical verse that supports my view and that of most Christians. You have a different guess, which is your right, but I didn't ask for an exposition of it.

You assume that most Christians agree with you. I would state that most Christians don’t agree at all. But then these are just opinions. It only matters what God’s Word says and means.

I would state that those who disagree and disobey Christ are not Christians. If you love Me you will keep My commandments. The question is, what did Christ command. AM I, or you obeying Christ's commandment with regards to who is to be baptized and when? Are you or I following tradition blindly and thus nullifying what Christ Himself commanded. Judge yourself. I continue to ask for proof and I get opinions and beliefs without proof. I offer proof. First the passages that are key to being a Christian:

Joh 14:15 "If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.

Mat 7:24 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 "And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock. 26 "Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 "The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell--and great was its fall."

Christ’s commandment of who to baptize and when:

Mat 28:19 1.) "Having gone, make disciples of all the nations,

2.) baptizing them(disciples) in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20

3.) teaching them(disciples) to observe all that I commanded you;

That is what ALL Christians/Disciples OBEY. Hear and do or hear and don’t do… the choice lies with each of us… with different destinations based on what we really do.

Now, all the passages that pertain to households being baptized... I am not afraid of evidence … Yet I see no proof that anyone disobeyed this commandment of Christ Himself. Let’s look at the passages. Please feel free to offer any “PROOF” that what Christ commanded wasn’t followed to the letter.

Act 10:42 "And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead. 43 "Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins... 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.

From what I see, everyone who “believed” was one of those who were listening to the message. i.e. hearing the gospel which is a prerequisite of believing/becoming a disciple. This does not include those who could not hear or understand, but only those actually listening to the message. There is no evidence to support that Mat. 28 was not followed to the letter. If you see anything that “proves” otherwise, point it out.

Act 16:14 A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul. 15 And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay." And she prevailed upon us.

Lydia at least “believed”/ responded to the gospel, prior to baptism. Again, there is no evidence that everything Christ commanded was not followed to the letter. Paul shared the gospel, Lydia is listed as having responded. True the rest of her household was baptized as well. The question is, is there any proof that the rest did not hear and believe as well. If not, you still have no proof that Paul was disobedient to His own teachings as to who was to be baptized and when, let alone disobeying Christs own commandments on the issue. If you have proof that these people did not believe first (Contradicting all the other teachings in scripture) produce it.

Act 16:31 They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household." 32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house. 33 And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household. 34 And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household.

This one proves my point that when whole households were baptized they ALL believed FIRST. Again, believing / becoming a disciple is the stated prerequisite to baptism. That entire households believe first, fits perfectly with Christ's commandment on the issue. They all “believed” and THEN they all were baptized (vs. 34): everyone in the entire household believed and was baptized. This proves obedience to Christ’s commandment, not disobedience by baptizing those who were not disciples / did not believe first. Again, any proof that the “baptizers” disobeyed Christ’s commandment on the issue? I see full compliance with the command.

1Co 1:16 Now I did baptize also the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any other. 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel...

This time God puts the importance of baptism in it's place. Baptism is secondary to the preaching of the gospel. Preaching the gospel is foremost … which is a requirement to making disciples. Followed by Hearing, believing / becoming a disciple, THEN being baptized, TEHN being taught to OBEY ALL that Christ commands … is again the chain of importance. So tell me, is there ANY proof here that the order of God’s/Christ’s commandment pertaining to who is to be baptized (Mat. 28) is being violated? If so, point out the proof.

Mar 16:16 "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

So what is the key in this passage? Belief and disbelief, right? Do infants and young children believe or disbelieve? Answer: Neither. But Belief AND baptism is required for salvation, is it not? You tell me.

Act 8:36 As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch *said, "Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?" 37 [And 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."] 38 And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him.

So tell me, what is the teaching? Can anyone who wants to be baptized, or must you “Believe” First?

Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

This is one of the many verses that leave out baptism for salvation altogether. Yes, there are many more. Not that baptism isn’t commanded, but rather that it is a separate step, and is not a requirement for salvation. Note: The thief on the cross who believed and was saved was not baptized.

1Co 1:21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

A listing of (2) of the steps of salvation. 1.) Hearing the gospel 2.) Believing, again it leaves out the obedience of being baptized / obedience but it still lists the first 2 parts.

Rom 10:10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."

This leaves out baptism … again. Along with obedience. But the preaching of the gospel and the resultant belief is listed.

There are a ton of passages that describe the process of salvation. None puts baptism PRIOR to belief or hearing the gospel. Many list hearing, then believing, as the first 2 steps. Followed by belief / repentance. Baptism always follows belief / repentance and there is never any passage that puts baptism before belief / repentance or before hearing and understanding the gospel. That everything is not listed everywhere is not a contradiction or proof of violation of the commandment of Christ/God. All the details are not listed in every passage. The important thing is that nothing ever contradicts what is listed every place else in scripture. Imagining that a contradiction exists doesn’t “make” it exist. Prove anyone, anywhere, violated the commandment of Christ/God pertaining to making disciples, baptizing disciples and teaching disciples to obey all that Christ commanded, INCLUDING this command as to who to baptize and teach, and you have something. Otherwise all you are doing is choosing to disbelieve and disobey the word of God with all of it’s resulting consequences. Remember those beginning passages? Hearing and obeying verses hearing and disobeying?

If the scriptures aren’t trustworthy and reliable all our beliefs based on scripture are wrong. Apart from the reliability and consistency of scripture everything is just an opinion, and every belief is just as correct as every other belief.

If we assume that God, God’s Word and God’s people are 100% consistent unless God corrects them, Matthew 28 stands as Christ’s commandment as to who to baptize and when. If you have any passage that contradicts Christ’s command as to who to baptize and when (Not just an assumption that someone contradicted Christ’s commands without any proof) point it out. Otherwise those that love truth and want to hold fast to it, will follow this command of Christ with regards to the progression of what Christians / Disciples are to do:

Mat 28:19 1.) "Having gone, make disciples of all the nations, 2.) baptizing them(disciples) in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 3.) teaching them(disciples) to observe all that I commanded you;

I tell you, not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord will be saved, but rather those that hear and obey the commandments of God / the will of the Father.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,139
33,259
✟583,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
While I respect your rights and choices... baptism does not forgive us of sin, God does. And somebody else, doing what God commands us to do... does not help any either. So from that aspect (forgiveness of sin), I don't see you (or anyone else) making a biblical case for that. Become part of the family? I have to say I can't argue against that... because if circumcision of an 8 day old brought him into covenant at least UNTIL he could choose on his own... then how can I see and accept that but then not make that same allowance for baptism on those grounds? I am not saying I agree... not saying I don't either :) ...... just saying I can't argue against it.
Right. I am on the side of all the historic denominations, both Catholic and Protestant, on this matter. You are in step with the Baptists, Bible churches, and similar denominations.

We see the place and meaning of Baptism differently, and I'm not out to change your mind. BUT if someone asks, "why bother" (as you did), you now know several "reasons why" from the perspective of the majority of Christians. You conclude that they are not good reasons, but these are reasons. It's not as though no one on the side of infant baptism has a clue of why they do it.

In regards to raising that child in the faith based on baptizing him... that is not supported in Scripture.
You think that promising to raise your child as a Christian is somehow prohibited by the Bible?? I can point you to verses that say just the opposite.

You can dedicate the child
Where is THAT ceremony which is performed in many churches that don't baptize infants referred to in the Bible? (since I understand you to say it's "supported in Scripture")

take an oath to bring him up in God's ways... but that is between YOU and God, not God and the child.
Certainly. That's the idea. That's why baptisms have sponsors or godparents when a child is baptized.

The child cannot make that choice and you can't make it for him.
You can't promise God and the congregation that you'll look after the child's religious upbringing?? Huh?

So... we agree in part, we disagree in part... no big deal. :)
Yes, that's pretty much the way I see it.

Who is advising you as to what you should post to me?
No one. What makes you ask such a question?
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,139
33,259
✟583,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You assume that most Christians agree with you.
I don't "assume" it. Most Christians belong to churches that baptize infants and few have any objection to it.

I would state that those who disagree and disobey Christ are not Christians.
I'm sorry you feel that way.

This one proves my point that when whole households were baptized they ALL believed FIRST.
That's not indicated in scripture.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

EmethAlethia

Newbie
Oct 5, 2014
404
107
62
✟28,633.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't "assume" it. Most Christians belong to churches that baptize infants and few have any objection to it.


I'm sorry you feel that way.

This one proves my point that when whole households were baptized they ALL believed FIRST.
That's not indicated in scripture.

Have you read the great commission at the end of Matthew 28? How does it read to you? What were the disciples to do? Who was it Christ commanded them to baptize? Who was it they were commanded to teach? What was it that they were commanded to teach? If they are all disciples commanded to obey and teach others to obey?

Is there any statement anywhere in scripture that says anything that proves anyone baptizing anyone else did not fully obey Christ's commands? Don't "imagine" them disobeying or a situation where disobedience to Christ "could" have occurred. Show me a passage that states that they did disobey Christ's commands. I showed all of the places where it literally said all of the household believed prior to baptism. I showed all that places that indicate that at least some of the people involved both heard the gospel first and then believed. I showed you the commandment of Christ Himself and all the places where it says it isn't those that hear My words, or say to Me Lord, Lord ... but those that actually obey that are right with God. I provided scriptures. You hold blindly to beliefs regardless of what is stated in scripture. I can't argue with, I have no proof but I am correct, I refuse to acknowledge or even discuss your proof but I am correct. That's a closed eyes and ears response. I get it. Christ dealt with it throughout His ministry. That's your choice. I just would prefer you to reconsider considering what Christ said the destination of such thinking/responses.
 
Upvote 0