"fake" baptism

BigNorsk · Feb 5, 2009

It is interesting how the groups who see baptism in terms of a means of grace and it being God's work do not see most baptisms as invalid. For how could man make God's work invalid.

And those who see it as an ordinance that man should obey but not doing anything concerning grace consider many baptisms to be invalid.

Such is life under grace compared to law.

Concerning paedobaptism. I don't really see it that way, it's baptism. It include children because the Bible included children. For instance, in the first baptism in the Bible, the infants of the nation of Israel were baptised as they were carried across the Red Sea. In the New Testament, Peter told the crowd the promise was for them and their children.

Infants have always been included by God.

Marv

CaliforniaJosiah · Feb 5, 2009

Uphill Battle said:
Ok, just a thought.

Uphill Battle said:
let's say someone was a "fake" christian. IOW, they said the right things, went to church, etc... etc... but never actually repented.

they were baptised. Let's assume for the sake of argument, they were baptized in whatever appropriate formula exists for your particular church.

later in life, they realize the errors of their ways. They repent.

was their baptism "valid" in the view of your church?

this isn't meant to be a "you need baptism to be saved" "no ya don't" argument thread.

I'm just curious on the take on a situation such as this.

I suspect there would be an interesting discussion here only if one accepts OSOS. However, no Sacramental church does.

I was baptized within a couple of minutes of my birth, by my father (a minister) in the operating room. I was very small, premature, and under full life support. I was likely not conscience, certainly not awake. Yet, since I see salvation as GOD'S act, not mine (in that sense, I'm more with the Calvinists), such doesn't matter since GOD was not sleeping! God adopted me as His own (as He indeed had chosen me) and, via this means, granted simple, baptismal faith in my heart. I believe that if I had died (and that was a very high possibility), I would be in heaven now. But, could I have let go of God's hand? Could I have denounced my faith? As crazy as that seems, I suspect the answer is yes. Does that make the Baptism invalid? No. Does it make me tragic? Yes.

Let me use this illustration: Let's say I was adopted by my family. I was this cute little baby and Mom and Dad feel in love with me and adopted me. I became their own. And they loved me. Now, CAN I run away from home? Deny all my parents stood for? Do crime and drugs? Yes. In a sense, I have left THEM, let go of THEIR hand. Now, does that make my adoption moot? No. And I could return home (Prodigal Son) - and would be welcomed back. My parents, in this case, did not abandoned me or reject me, I rejected them. I think this possible (Adam & Eve story, etc.).

My $0.005

Pax

- Josiah

.

sunlover1 · Feb 5, 2009

Tu Es Petrus said:
unless you're a baby

very true. Unless you're a baby.

SummaScriptura said:
Okay, I can see how this is falling out...

The underlying issue which seems to determine how one will answer the OP's question is really more fundamental.

It seems those who believe in the baptism of infants do not think rebaptising is necessary mostly.

Those who believe in believer's-baptism-only find the need to re-baptise conceivable (a misnomer in my book).

So, to get to the heart of the matter the OP should have asked:

1. Do you believe in pedo-baptism?
2. If no, do you think re-baptising might be needed on occasion?

Good post.

ezek33 · Feb 5, 2009

My wife was baptized as a child and re baptized after giving her heart to God as an adult.

HandmaidenOfGod · Feb 5, 2009

Uphill Battle said:
Ok, just a thought.

let's say someone was a "fake" christian. IOW, they said the right things, went to church, etc... etc... but never actually repented.

they were baptised. Let's assume for the sake of argument, they were baptized in whatever appropriate formula exists for your particular church.

later in life, they realize the errors of their ways. They repent.

was their baptism "valid" in the view of your church?

this isn't meant to be a "you need baptism to be saved" "no ya don't" argument thread.

I'm just curious on the take on a situation such as this.

I guess I'm confused as to how such an event could take place.

I mean, if a person is baptised as an infant, and then realizes later on in life they need to repent of something they just need to go to confession and repent of their sins.

If a person were to convert as an adult, they would have to do a lifelong confession prior to the baptism, and I'm not sure how anyone could "fake" that.

If they did, or if anything was left out, they would just have to mention it in their next confession to be restored to the church.

It doesn't change the validity of their baptism though.

(I'm obviously speaking only in terms related to the Eastern Orthodox Church.)

Strong in Him · Feb 5, 2009

Uphill Battle said:
Ok, just a thought.

let's say someone was a "fake" christian. IOW, they said the right things, went to church, etc... etc... but never actually repented.

they were baptised. Let's assume for the sake of argument, they were baptized in whatever appropriate formula exists for your particular church.

later in life, they realize the errors of their ways. They repent.

was their baptism "valid" in the view of your church?

this isn't meant to be a "you need baptism to be saved" "no ya don't" argument thread.

I'm just curious on the take on a situation such as this.

Hi,

I was "re-baptised" - baptised by immersion - when I was at college about 27 years ago. I did it because at the age of 3 months I knew nothing about my baptism and had had no say in the matter. I did choose to be confirmed, but that was far more about belonging to the church than about wanting to be filled with the Holy Spirit. In fact, I would say that I wasn't a Christian when I was confirmed. I was a sincere and enthusiastic churchgoer who wanted to learn about God and please him, but not a Christian. (If that makes sense?)
The vicar and deaconess at my church didn't like that I did this (though they didn't chuck me out); and a couple of years later there were a number of articles/letters in a Christian newspaper that that we should repent of this "re-baptism." I stand by it and the reasons I did it, and it was a lovely experience.

However, I do wonder if I had been given the opportunity to stand up in church, give my testimony and say how the Lord had blessed me and been working in my life, if I would have still done it. And although I agree with baptism by immersion, I do understand the reasons for infant baptism more now than I did then. As a Lay Preacher in the Methodist church I cannot preach or teach against it, well, not without getting into trouble.

Maybe at the time a bit of me did consider that my baptism as a child "didn't really count" because it was not my choice, but I would not now say that infant baptism is invalid.

HandmaidenOfGod · Feb 5, 2009

PujolsNonRoidHomerHitter said:
Is full emersion ok? or better to sprinkle?

Go Cards!

The Orthodox church performs baptisms using full emmersion and the Trinitarian formula. Recently in Bible Study, we spoke of baptism. My priest informed us, that in line with the Didache, a baptism should ideally be performed by a priest in a river. If that is not possible than by a priest in a font. If that is not possible then by a priest with sprinkling. (Say a baby was just born, and was ill, about to die, you're not going to dunk them!) If sprinkling for some odd reason is not possible, then lift them up to be baptized by the moisture in the air.

If a priest is not available, then an Orthodox Christian can perform the baptism. If an Orthodox Christian is not available, then another Christian who has been baptized can perform the baptism. If a Christian is not available, then a non-Christian can perform the baptism.

The most important thing is that they use the formula "The servant of God (insert name) is baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen."

The bottom line is that another person must be engaged for the baptism ritual, and the Trinitarian formula must be used.

Tu Es Petrus · Feb 5, 2009

SummaScriptura said:
Okay, I can see how this is falling out...

The underlying issue which seems to determine how one will answer the OP's question is really more fundamental.

It seems those who believe in the baptism of infants do not think rebaptising is necessary mostly.

Those who believe in believer's-baptism-only find the need to re-baptise conceivable (a misnomer in my book).

So, to get to the heart of the matter the OP should have asked:

1. Do you believe in pedo-baptism?
2. If no, do you think re-baptising might be needed on occasion?

The belief in the Baptism of infants is a result of what we believe about baptism itself: That it is a sacrament, and that it works by the power of the Holy Spirit. Therefore it works on a baby as well as on an adult. As I said previously, we believe it removes the "stain" of orignal sin, it is the means by which we are born again, and it replaces cirumcision as the means by which one enters into the covenant family of God. It is because baptism is all of these things that it cannot be repeated. How many times can one wash away original sin? How many times can one be born again?How many times can one become an adopted son of God? Only once

And infants can enjoy the fruits of this as much as an adult

Tu Es Petrus · Feb 5, 2009

Strong in Him said:
....I was "re-baptised" - baptised by immersion - when I was at college about 27 years ago. I did it because at the age of 3 months I knew nothing about my baptism and had had no say in the matter. I did choose to be confirmed, but that was far more about belonging to the church than about wanting to be filled with the Holy Spirit. In fact, I would say that I wasn't a Christian when I was confirmed. I was a sincere and enthusiastic churchgoer who wanted to learn about God and please him, but not a Christian......

Oh man: No disrespect intended, but that is sooooo wrong. You most certainy WERE baptised. Infants are baptized on the faith of the Church as expressed by their parents. Whether or not one is below the age of reason and capable or incapable of belief is not the issue. You seem to miss this point. The issue is, Can God confer his grace upon an individual based on the faith of another? The answer is a resounding Yes. The Bible is filled with examples of this.

In Matthew 8:513 we read: As he entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to him, beseeching him and saying, Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, in terrible distress. And he said to him, I will come and heal him. But the centurion answered him, Lord I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I am a man under authority, with soldiers under me; and I say to one, Go, and he goes, and to another, Come, and he comes, and to my slave, Do this. and he does it. When Jesus heard him he marveled, and said to those who followed him, Truly, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such faith. . . . And to the centurion Jesus said, Go; be it done for you as you have believed. And the servant was healed at that very moment.

Here we see the servant healed based on the faith of the centurion. But not only that, the text also tells us that Jesus marveled at the faith of the Roman soldier. Would he not also approve of the faith of parents who have their infants baptized? Absolutely

LutheranChick · Feb 6, 2009

Tu Es Petrus said:
That sounds pretty good.

Lutherans do infant baptism too, right?

Yes, we do.

LutheranChick · Feb 6, 2009

Tu Es Petrus said:
The belief in the Baptism of infants is a result of what we believe about baptism itself: That it is a sacrament, and that it works by the power of the Holy Spirit. Therefore it works on a baby as well as on an adult. As I said previously, we believe it removes the "stain" of orignal sin, it is the means by which we are born again, and it replaces cirumcision as the means by which one enters into the covenant family of God. It is because baptism is all of these things that it cannot be repeated. How many times can one wash away original sin? How many times can one be born again?How many times can one become an adopted son of God? Only once

And infants can enjoy the fruits of this as much as an adult

(Bolding mine) Very good point- and, in addition, we all know that one cannot be circumcised a 2nd time.

MamaZ · Feb 6, 2009

An Infant cannot repent..

Celticflower · Feb 6, 2009

The whole idea of invalid baptism and re-baptism is a very real part of my life. I was baptised at the age of 1 month in the UMC. I was taught there is only one baptism done with water - age of the person and amount of water used does not matter. I confirmed that baptism at the age of 14 by my own choice, the service used the same ritual that is used for a baptism, just without the water. The church I currently attend does not accept my baptism as valid and insists that I must be re-baptised in order to be a part of the church membership. I have politely declined on many occasions (although when one elder said he wanted to "convert" me, all I could think of was "from what to what?" and had a hard time remaining calm). Unfortunately, I foresee an increase in pressure for me to be re-baptised, as my husband just became a deacon in the church. But for me it would mean going to God and saying "Remember back in June of '62, you, me, my folks and Rev. Barker gathered at the front of the church? Well, this group of Christians say You did it wrong, so we have to do it over. And everything I thought about my life as one of Your kids - I guess I got that wrong too". Well, I'm not about to tell God He goofed, and until I receive a clear indication from Him that a re-baptism is called for, it aint gonna happen.

MamaZ · Feb 6, 2009

Well for one thing baptism is not to join a church. So I would not blame you for not wanting to be rebaptized for that. Baptism is the profession of faith in Christ.

LutheranChick · Feb 6, 2009

Celticflower said:
The whole idea of invalid baptism and re-baptism is a very real part of my life. I was baptised at the age of 1 month in the UMC. I was taught there is only one baptism done with water - age of the person and amount of water used does not matter. I confirmed that baptism at the age of 14 by my own choice, the service used the same ritual that is used for a baptism, just without the water. The church I currently attend does not accept my baptism as valid and insists that I must be re-baptised in order to be a part of the church membership. I have politely declined on many occasions (although when one elder said he wanted to "convert" me, all I could think of was "from what to what?" and had a hard time remaining calm). Unfortunately, I foresee an increase in pressure for me to be re-baptised, as my husband just became a deacon in the church. But for me it would mean going to God and saying "Remember back in June of '62, you, me, my folks and Rev. Barker gathered at the front of the church? Well, this group of Christians say You did it wrong, so we have to do it over. And everything I thought about my life as one of Your kids - I guess I got that wrong too". Well, I'm not about to tell God He goofed, and until I receive a clear indication from Him that a re-baptism is called for, it aint gonna happen.

You have it right- you have been baptized. and do not need to be re-baptized. I realize this might be very difficult for you in your situation, but I would wonder if I really wanted to belong to a church that rejected my infant baptism. I would wonder, what else do they reject?

Tu Es Petrus · Feb 6, 2009

LutheranChick said:
(Bolding mine) Very good point- and, in addition, we all know that one cannot be circumcised a 2nd time.

Thank God. LOL

Tu Es Petrus · Feb 6, 2009

MamaZ said:
An Infant cannot repent..

But his parents can. As I said in a previous post: Infants are baptized on the faith of the Church as expressed by their parents. Whether or not one is below the age of reason and capable or incapable of belief is not the issue. The issue is, “Can God confer his grace upon an individual based on the faith of another?” The answer is a resounding “Yes.” The Bible is filled with examples of this.

In Matthew 8:5–13 we read: “As he entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to him, beseeching him and saying, ‘Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, in terrible distress.’ And he said to him, ‘I will come and heal him.’ But the centurion answered him, ‘Lord I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I am a man under authority, with soldiers under me; and I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes, and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes, and to my slave, ‘Do this.’ and he does it.’ When Jesus heard him he marveled, and said to those who followed him, ‘Truly, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such faith. . . . And to the centurion Jesus said, ‘Go; be it done for you as you have believed.’ And the servant was healed at that very moment.”

Here we see the servant healed based on the faith of the centurion. But not only that, the text also tells us that Jesus “marveled” at the faith of the Roman soldier. Would he not also approve of the faith of parents who have their infants baptized? Absolutely

OrthodoxyUSA · Feb 6, 2009

MamaZ said:
An Infant cannot repent..

An infant has nothing to repent of.

Forgive me...

Christ+a · Feb 6, 2009

Uphill Battle said:
Ok, just a thought.

let's say someone was a "fake" christian. IOW, they said the right things, went to church, etc... etc... but never actually repented.

they were baptised. Let's assume for the sake of argument, they were baptized in whatever appropriate formula exists for your particular church.

later in life, they realize the errors of their ways. They repent.

was their baptism "valid" in the view of your church?

this isn't meant to be a "you need baptism to be saved" "no ya don't" argument thread.

I'm just curious on the take on a situation such as this.

i haven't read through the whole thread, so i apologise if i repeat what others have already said.

the scenario you describe, all that person did on that occasion was getting wet.

baptism is the outward testimony of an inward occurrence, i.e. being born again, being made a new creation. and if that didn't happen, then it's just being dunked and getting wet.

so when such person finally does get born again, they should get baptised as well giving an outward and public testimony of that which happened on the inside.

OrthodoxyUSA · Feb 6, 2009

MamaZ said:
Well for one thing baptism is not to join a church. So I would not blame you for not wanting to be rebaptized for that. Baptism is the profession of faith in Christ.

Baptism is a person joining a community of believers (a church).

Forgive me...

"fake" baptism

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Beloved, Let us love one another

Junior Member

Christ is Risen! Indeed He is Risen!

Great is thy faithfulness

Christ is Risen! Indeed He is Risen!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

MamaZ

Guest

charity crocheter

MamaZ

Guest

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency