Baptism

[Albion]

A 10-year old child is mentally able to choose to follow and believe in Jesus Christ. The Vineyard churches believe an 8-year old can do it, so that is their minimum age for baptisms.

...a verification of my comment that such an illogical policy is indeed commonplace in various denominations.

 

[112358]

So you have to understand what the baptism is about for it to be valid even if you are a Christian? In that case, there should be a lot of rebaptisms.

Since you are asking me the question I will answer it. BUT, it needs to be understood that my answer is based only on what I find in scripture. I am not making accusations or leveling condemnation on anyone or on anyone's beliefs, which I have been accused of before when asked questions like this to which I gave an honest answer. I am simply stating what scripture states regarding baptism. I feel this qualification is necessary based on past experience. So here is the answer to your question:

Baptism is the time and place where remission of sins occurs, where one comes into spiritual contact with the atoning sacrificial blood of Christ, and the time and place when the Lord adds the penitent, obedient, believer to His church. So yes, one has to understand what baptism is about in order for the baptism to be valid, and if the baptism is not valid one is not yet a christian (See the conversion of the apostle Paul as one example). Regarding "rebaptisms", there is no such thing. Either it is valid, scriptural baptism, or it is not. Everything that is not valid scriptural baptism is just getting wet!

 

[GodLovesCats]

Regarding "rebaptisms", there is no such thing. Either it is valid, scriptural baptism, or it is not. Everything that is not valid scriptural baptism is just getting wet!

There certainly is such a thing as a rebaptism. If you were baptized as a baby, then again as a Christian - which I was - you were baptized twice. Of course the first baptism was not valid in the sense that we just get our hair wet, but still, that is being baptized. Because I did not understand what baptism is as a baby, the second one (my choice after being saved) was valid and not just taking a bath.

 

[112358]

There certainly is such a thing as a rebaptism. If you were baptized as a baby, then again as a Christian - which I was - you were baptized twice. Of course the first baptism was not valid in the sense that we just get our hair wet, but still, that is being baptized. Because I did not understand what baptism is as a baby, the second one (my choice after being saved) was valid and not just taking a bath.

We're debating semantics. My point is that biblical New Testament baptism is a one time event (as in "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" Ephesians 4:5). The word simply means "immerse", so used in the broader sense I suppose one could say they have been baptized numerous times, every time they've jumped in a pool for example. Babies have not been separated from God by their sins because they have not sinned. Therefore they have no need of remission of sins. Therefore they have no need of baptism for the remission of sins. Therefore if they have been dunked by their parents or priest, they have simply gotten wet. That is not NT baptism.

 

[Albion]

There certainly is such a thing as a rebaptism. If you were baptized as a baby, then again as a Christian - which I was - you were baptized twice.

If something is indelible and it causes some permanent change, no repetition amounts to starting over from scratch.

Some people have reaffirmed their baptismal vows, just as there are people who find emotional value in reaffirming their wedding vows in a separate ceremony years later, but in so doing they obviously are not getting married again or 'more married' LOL.

 

[GodLovesCats]

The reason I was invited to church was to watch somebody I knew and her husband renew their vows the night I was saved. Of course they understood it was not remarrying.

For me it was not reaffirming my faith at all, but obeying God's command to believers, because I wasn't a Christian at age 3 months. I agree after you are a believer, one baptism is enough.

 

[Albion]

For me it was not reaffirming my faith at all, but obeying God's command to believers, because I wasn't a Christian at age 3 months.

If you were baptized at 3 months, you actually were a Christian, whether or not you were told that at any time.

That is one of the consequences of baptism--becoming a member of the church of Christ, everything else aside..

 

[GodLovesCats]

Why do you say that? Any Christian knows the only way to be saved is FAITH ALONE because that is what the Bible teaches.

 

[charsan]

Salvation is by Grace alone through faith that is not alone

 

[112358]

Why do you say that? Any Christian knows the only way to be saved is FAITH ALONE because that is what the Bible teaches.

I assume you are using faith synonymously with belief. If so it is only part of what the Bible teaches. If belief were enough to save then demons themselves would be saved, for “even they believe and tremble”. Christ commanded belief and baptism. Belief alone was apparently not enough to save Paul. He said baptism is when we “put on Christ”, and it’s when we “are baptized into His death”. Peter said it is baptism “that now saves us.” He commanded baptism for the remission of sins to those who would be the very first Christians. On and on it goes...The evidence is simply overwhelming.

 

[GodLovesCats]

I assume you never read John 3:16 or any similar verses.

Baptism of the Holy Spirit is not the same as being baptized in water. Unless water explicably mentioned, don't assume baptism always means getting dunked in a river.

 

[ViaCrucis]

My issue with this idea is the fact that if it was up to God, everyone would have a free ride to heaven. He, of course, wants everyone to be saved, not just the 2.5 billion Christians and to-be-miscarried fetuses.

You're right, God does want everyone to be saved. The only reason some are not saved is because they choose to not be saved.

That we can reject salvation does not mean that we can choose salvation.

Scripture teaches that salvation is solely God's gracious and loving work alone.
Scripture also teaches that men are perishing through their own sinful choices.

God alone saves.
Man alone damns.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

A 10-year old child is mentally able to choose to follow and believe in Jesus Christ. The Vineyard churches believe an 8-year old can do it, so that is their minimum age for baptisms.

That is a completely arbitrary age. There's no magic age where suddenly someone is able to be a Christian where before they couldn't be.

Human cognizance development is an ongoing process. In fact, it isn't until around the age of 25 that we reach full development. But, beyond that, we are always growing, we are always learning.

Any age we choose is ultimately completely arbitrary.

And, frankly, it's been my experience that there are plenty of people--adults well into their 30's, 40's, 50's, and even 60's and 70's who have little to no understanding of Christ or the Gospel. Even though they've been believers their entire lives.

Salvation isn't about passing a theological exam. And that is precisely what Decisionism ultimately aims to teach--that salvation is about human ability and knowledge, rather than God's mercy, love, and grace.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Why do you say that? Any Christian knows the only way to be saved is FAITH ALONE because that is what the Bible teaches.

Do you believe that faith is a human work that we must do in order to earn salvation?

Or is faith God's gift?

Consider your answer, and now let's look at what Scripture says:

"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." - Ephesians 2:8-9

"So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ." - Romans 10:17

So, now looking at the Scriptures, is faith a human work, or the gift of God?

If faith is God's gift (which Scripture says), and faith is given through God's word (i.e. the Gospel), and since we know the Gospel "is the power of God to salve all who believe" (Romans 1:16), and that Christ sanctified His Church through "the washing of water with the word" (Ephesians 5:26) then why would you deny the power and gift of God through His Means which He promised to give faith? Namely Word and Sacrament.

The baptized infant has faith. Because faith isn't human ability, but a divine gift. It is a working, gift, and act of God's grace.

Faith is not a property of the intellect giving assent to certain theological propositions. Faith is a bold, radical trust in the Person of Jesus Christ and God's grace.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[112358]

I assume you never read John 3:16 or any similar verses.

Really?

Baptism of the Holy Spirit is not the same as being baptized in water. Unless water explicably mentioned, don't assume baptism always means getting dunked in a river.

I've heard this argument in various forms a number of times and, respectfully, I don't think it's an intellectually honest argument. The exegetical gymnastics required to remove water from NT baptism are literally unbelievable.

Again, if one claims to have been baptized with HS baptism, they better be prepared to demonstrate which of the miraculous accompanying signs/powers they were endowed with at the time of that baptism, because HS baptism was ALWAYS associated with one or more of those signs/powers.

 

[GodLovesCats]

If you believe water baptism is required for salvation, you deny the very clear message in John 3:16 (and other verses) that faith alone is what saves us. What do you think "whosoever believes in Him" means if baptism in water is necessary?

 

[112358]

If you believe water baptism is required for salvation, you deny the very clear message in John 3:16 (and other verses) that faith alone is what saves us. What do you think "whosoever believes in Him" means if baptism in water is necessary?

John 3:16 acknowledged and accepted with enthusiasm. May I ask...

What do you make of Mark 16:16, (Jesus Christ speaking) "He who believes and is baptized will be saved, but he who does not believe will be condemned."?

Must the two scriptures be mutually exclusive? Or, may they work together to help us understand the whole of what scripture has to say on the subject?

 

[GodLovesCats]

Here are two more verses that clearly state only belief is required:

John 3:18
Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

John 3:36
"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life. Whoever rejects the Son will not see life. Instead, the wrath of God remains on him."

 

[112358]

Here are two more verses that clearly state only belief is required:

John 3:18
Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

John 3:36
"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life. Whoever rejects the Son will not see life. Instead, the wrath of God remains on him."

Both scriptures acknowledged and accepted with enthusiasm. Patiently awaiting your response to my last question above.

 

[GodLovesCats]

What do they acknowledge and accept with enthusiasm? It is obviously the fact that we are only saved by faith, not being baptized.

Mark 16:16 also emphasizes you must believe to be saved whether you are baptized or not to be saved. I am sure this is a good citation for the argument against infant baptisms.