Baptism

[Thekla]

actually sprinkling in Jesus day was limited to buildings and things that could not be immersed.... so you're basically doing a rite set aside for a building - lol

the new temple of the Holy Spirit
(per Paul's description)

 

[Meshavrischika]

then why not just sprinkle everyone and abandon the term baptize because IMMERSON is what the word means.

 

[MamaZ]

Exactly.. Dunked as one would say..

 

[MamaZ]

I Don't see Sprinkling in the scripture either. Where do they get this from I wonder.

 

[Meshavrischika]

OH! could it be a MAN MADE thing?

 

[Celticflower]

Words, words, words -- and what they mean depends on who you talk to.

Some scholars claim to have found the word baptizo being used in reference to washing things that would not be immersed (such as tables).

Personally, I find the term "sprinkling" to be misleading. It makes it sound very hit or miss. And never have I seen anyone "sprinked" when baptised. The water is poured from cupped hand or small container (at least in the UMCs I've been a member of).

People also tend to forget that most churches which do infant baptism also have a follow-up later. It is called "confirmation" -- in the UMC it happens at about age 13. After a period of study you are brought to a point where YOU make the decision to follow Christ or not. The service is the same one used for baptism, you just take for yourself the vows that were taken for you by your parents. No water is used, because water baptism is only done once.

All in all, I really don't think the when and how and how much stuff we argue about baptism means much. You can be immersed every month of your life, but if you never let Christ in all you got was a monthly bath. If a child is baptised and never brought up in the faith and taught about Christ and brought to acccept Him, then all you had was a damp headed baby. Baptism is the start of a life's journey, not a punched ticket on the Glory Train. You need to live out the promise of baptism all your life.

 

[cyberlizard]

sprinkling or full immersion - read the didache.


Steve

 

[christianmomof3]

Baptism is an outward sign of faith. In the case of infant baptism, it is really the parents who are confessing Christ, dedicating the life and upbringing of their child to Him, and asking God to send His Spirit upon the child. (My brother's church actually calls this "dedication" rather than baptism.)it is good to dedicate our children to the Lord, but it is not the same as baptism

To delve deeper into the Word to illustrate the importance of baptism as an outward sign of faith:

“He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:16). This verse makes it clear that belief in Christ is the determining factor. Baptism is important as a sign of submission to the will of God. But what is most important is the state of one's heart.

I'm a Catholic, but not a very good one (being brought up Lutheran)... I know that infant baptism and other sacraments appear as though they are man-made "works" that we say are necessary for salvation. But what I was taught in becoming Catholic was that the validity of any sacrament is fully dependent upon the state of the recipient's heart; if I really do not believe in Christ then it matters not what actions I perform, as I will not receive grace regardless of whether I go through the motions. Now this brings up a tough question, as when we baptize an infant, the point is for the infant to be the recipient of grace through the sacrament; but how can we know the state of a infant's heart? Does it all depend upon a person reaching the age of reason? And who therefore is responsible for the child's state of grace prior to that age?

So then, what about infants? Who knows the state of their heart but God? Does baptism actually save an infant? Is an infant capable of believing? What if children die before reaching the age of reason, whether baptized or not, if they cannot confess Christ while alive on this Earth, will they go to Heaven or Hell?

I look to the following verse as offering hope that any child who dies before the age of reason is welcomed into Heaven by our Lord with open arms:

“Truly, I say to you, unless you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 18:3-4)

You made a good case for the fact that infant baptism is not necessary. It is not necessary for our eternal salvation. It is dependant upon our hearts and infants cannot tell us what is in their hearts. This verse shows that children are sanctified - set apart to God - holy- by having believing parents. 1 Corinthians 7 : 14 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the brother; otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.

I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it says that babies and children will go to hell if they are not baptised. In fact, you yourself stated that it is belief in the Lord - not baptism that saves us.

The Bible tells us to call upon the name of the Lord and we will be saved. To call upon His name shows that we believe in Him as well. Babies cannot call upon the name of the Lord either.
But, I think that the Lord cares for them. He is just and merciful and if He was going to condem them if we didn't baptise them He would have to spell it out clearly to us or else He would be unrighteous by doing that. And God is righteous. He does not condemn babies or children or people with limited mental capacity to hell just because they are not baptised or have not confessed belief.

My children have grown up in a Christian household. All of them have called upon the name of the Lord since they could speak. This is because they hear their parents do it and they join in. Just like this past Lord's Day, several children (most of them ages 11 and 12) were baptised at our church meeting. All of the younger children were seated up front watching and a little girl who is not yet two years old came walking up in front of me - I was seated with the children and she sat in front of me with her older brother. The brothers who were baptising the children were praying aloud along with their parents and some others and the rest of us were saying "amen". The little girl who is not yet two years old was also saying "amen" with us. It was very cute. In the same way, at our house we often pray and call upon the name of the Lord and my children have joined in since they could speak.

Only my oldest daugher, who is now 15, has been baptised. She was also baptised when she was 11. That is not an enforced age - we just teach about baptism in 5th and 6th grades in children's meeting and we encourage the children to be baptised at that age if they feel that they wish to. Some chose to be baptised at younger ages and some older and that is fine.

My other two children are 6 and 9 years old. They have not been baptised. I don't think they are condemned to hell if they die right now though. They believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and have been calling upon His name and praying to Him and singing to Him for as long as they could utter words. He will care for them. When they wish to be baptised, then they will be.

 

[Meshavrischika]

Words, words, words -- and what they mean depends on who you talk to.

Some scholars claim to have found the word baptizo being used in reference to washing things that would not be immersed (such as tables).

Personally, I find the term "sprinkling" to be misleading. It makes it sound very hit or miss. And never have I seen anyone "sprinked" when baptised. The water is poured from cupped hand or small container (at least in the UMCs I've been a member of).

People also tend to forget that most churches which do infant baptism also have a follow-up later. It is called "confirmation" -- in the UMC it happens at about age 13. After a period of study you are brought to a point where YOU make the decision to follow Christ or not. The service is the same one used for baptism, you just take for yourself the vows that were taken for you by your parents. No water is used, because water baptism is only done once.

All in all, I really don't think the when and how and how much stuff we argue about baptism means much. You can be immersed every month of your life, but if you never let Christ in all you got was a monthly bath. If a child is baptised and never brought up in the faith and taught about Christ and brought to acccept Him, then all you had was a damp headed baby. Baptism is the start of a life's journey, not a punched ticket on the Glory Train. You need to live out the promise of baptism all your life.

I was confirmed in the UMC. (at about 13 actually). I don't remember anything about a call to follow Christ. It was a bible class. LOL.

I agree with your last statement though. My problem is the attitude of "my way is the only way". If that wasn't so presnt, I'd speak my peace and back off because I believe that it's the heart, not the ceremony in any religious practice, that matters... so technically whether someone is "right" or not makes no difference to God.

 

[JamesThaddeusMartin]

The baptism of water does not save. It is having complete faith in Christ and What he has accomplished on the cross that saves. When one believes solely on Christ for salvation a beautiful new birth happens inside the believer. Christ comes to reside in this persons heart. This is the saving power of Jesus. The water baptism is from the OT also. It was a cleansing ritual. So when John was baptizing it was not uncommon. What was uncommon was that He was telling Jewish people they needed to repent and be baptized.

Matthew 28:16

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.


I think the one who loves the Lord would do as he commands



"He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned."

And it is very obvious that the one who does not believe will certainly not be baptized. Why would they? Common sense it seems. faith is followed by action.




pax

 

[Meshavrischika]

but again, baptism of the spirit is never shown NOT to be the baptism they are speaking of

(btw, did anyone notice that baptism in the bible does not require someone to do it for you)

 

[christianmomof3]

but again, baptism of the spirit is never shown NOT to be the baptism they are speaking of

(btw, did anyone notice that baptism in the bible does not require someone to do it for you)

i thought it did. the apostles are told to baptise people, and all examples that I recall that are shown in the Bible are of people being baptised by other people. i don't recall anyone baptising themselves. can you point that out please?

 

[Melethiel]

did you ever consider this could have just been a reference to birth? we are all born of the water initially, then of the spirit.
not to mention, Christ keeping mikvah is not something that should be considered anything out of the ordinary as he told others to do it when he healed them as well.
I don't think God changed, I think people corrupt God's intention. It's nothing new. Why do you think there are denoms in Judaism? There were at Jesus' time. To think this is a "protestant" thing is to think in error.

I've heard that interpretation, and I don't buy it. No duh, you have to be physically alive before you can be saved?

 

[Celticflower]

actually sprinkling in Jesus day was limited to buildings and things that could not be immersed.... so you're basically doing a rite set aside for a building - lol

Of course you could go back a bit farther and find that in Exodus when Moses had brought back the Lord's words and law and the people vowed to follow them, Moses had young bulls sacrificed as fellowship offerings to the Lord. Half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar and the rest he sprinkled on the people as a confirmation of the covenant they had entered into with God. (see Ex. 24: 5-8)

 

[MamaZ]

Believing is what will give salvation. Not baptism. Yes of course I do believe that it is an act of Obedience for the fact of what Baptism signifies. But once again it is not the baptism that keeps you in or out of Gods Kingdom. It is the believing or not believing that will.. For Jesus said they are condemned already for they have not believed. Nothing about baptism in His speaking here..

 

[Meshavrischika]

Scripture never teaches that immersion must be performed by someone else. In fact, we have the Scriptural evidence that the apostles COMMANDED the crowd to be immersed, and some 3000 were saved. Logic tells us that 12 men did not immerse 3000 people, or they would have been found floating downstream by the end of the day. Rather, the crowds immersed themselves.

John is recorded as having immersed the Messiah, and Philip also immersed the Ethiopian man, so it is obvious that such a procedure is not wrong, and may even be advisable, but is not required.

A baby has no knowledge of right or wrong. The existence of the Law combined with the knowledge of sin is what makes something sin for us. (For example, nakedness was not a sin for Adam and Eve until they KNEW, and then the sin knowledge required that they be clothed.) As Paul said, "If I KNOW to do good, and do it not, it is sin unto me." A baby does not know to do good and do it not, therefore baby baptism for the remission of sins, although it may fill the "letter", does not fulfill the spirit or intent of the command.

 

[Meshavrischika]

I've heard that interpretation, and I don't buy it. No duh, you have to be physically alive before you can be saved?

doesn't your church consider a fetus alive? i thought they did.

 

[Melethiel]

Now notice in the above statment that it is not men who will bapitize you with Holy Spirit and fire but Jesus that will.

Right...and do you still refuse to understand the historic position? We hold that it is GOD doing the baptizing. He works through the water and the hand of the pastor, but the ultimate act is God's. If you read through Scripture in it's entirety, God has always worked through material means - he commanded Namaan to wash in the river, he put mud on the blind man's eyes, etc. I see no indication in the Scripture that God suddenly changed his modus operandi and started working in a vague emotional manner. To say otherwise is Gnosticism.

 

[jmacvols]

John says Christ washed us from our sins with His own blood. The question is, how does this happen. Not a single verse say "belief only" or saying a "sinner's prayer" causes Christ's blood to wash away our sins. Facts we know from the bible: Christ shed His blood that washes away sins in His death, Jn 19:34. Baptism is what puts one in Christ's death where that blood was shed

See, there is nothing here that says "water is blood". What I said is that water baptism is where the blood of Christ washes away sin.

 

[MamaZ]

Of course you could go back a bit farther and find that in Exodus when Moses had brought back the Lord's words and law and the people vowed to follow them, Moses had young bulls sacrificed as fellowship offerings to the Lord. Half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar and the rest he sprinkled on the people as a confirmation of the covenant they had entered into with God. (see Ex. 24: 5-8)

If you will notice that is was the blood He sprinkled and not water. This is why Jesus died on the cross as the Lamb of God. Baptism is not blood but water.