"fake" baptism

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Actually, the Bible has something different to say concerning this.
Romans 5:12: "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—"

and

Psalm 51:5; "Surely I was sinful at birth,
sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

All are born with original sin, inherited from Adam.

All true... but, you can not repent of a sin that you did not commit.

That does not mean that the stain of original sin is not there and need to be removed.

Forgive me...

 

[LutheranChick]

Math. 3: 1 - 6
Math. 4: 17 and i apologise, Jesus did NOT say be baptised, He did said "repent"
Acts 2: 38

Mathew 3:1-6 and Mathew 4:17 are not about baptism. Please see my previous response to Acts 2:38- read verse 39 as well.

 

[MamaZ]

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

What does this have to do with a human being turning to Christ? Each individual will stand before God on their own. Therefore being baptized as an infant will not gaurantee that they are going to accept Christ. This has to be done on an individual basis.

 

[MamaZ]

All true... but, you can not repent of a sin that you did not commit.

That does not mean that the stain of original sin is not there and need to be removed.

Forgive me...

If you have broken one of the laws you have broken them all.

 

[MamaZ]

Does one need to train a child to sin?

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

Everybody is talking past each other in this thread, because we have totally different beliefs about what Baptism is and does.

 

[Strong in Him]

Oh man: No disrespect intended, but that is sooooo wrong. You most certainy WERE baptised.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that it was wrong, but I might not have rushed to do it if I believe what I believe now. At the time, it was about publicly standing up and declaring for myself that I repented, wanted to follow Jesus, and what's more, affirmed that the promises that other people had made for me years earlier.

I didn't say that I wasn't baptised, I just said that such an important event was not my choice, nor did it mean anything to me.

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.

I probably did then; this was nearly 30 years ago. I'm sure my vicar told me this when he was trying to talk me out of it, but, as I said, neither baptism nor confirmation had meant that much to me, and all I could see was that this was me making my own choice about Jesus and being baptised after repentance as they did in the early church.

Would he not also approve of the faith of parents who have their infants baptized? Absolutely

Yes, and I have said that I see things somewhat differently now - I have even defended infant baptism from those who try to discount it.

If my parents had held a welcome or thankgiving service for me when I was a baby, then maybe baptism - however it was done, the attraction wasn't immersion - at an age when I could have understood would have been more meaningful. And if I hadn't been in such a rush to be like everyone else and belong to the church, maybe I would have taken my time over confirmation too, and there's a chance it would have been a time when I was filled with the Holy Spirit.

But none of it happened like that.

Also, I don't think it applied in my case, but 2 of my cousins were baptised simply because their non believing parents thought it was the thing to do. The thrid wasn't; they had decided to give up the hypocrisy of it by then.

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

I wouldn't go so far as to say that it was wrong, but I might not have rushed to do it if I believe what I believe now. At the time, it was about publicly standing up and declaring for myself that I repented, wanted to follow Jesus, and what's more, affirmed that the promises that other people had made for me years earlier.

I didn't say that I wasn't baptised....

Ah, I see.

.....2 of my cousins were baptised simply because their non believing parents thought it was the thing to do.....

Hmmm. Yes. That is another story right there

 

[sunlover1]

Everybody is talking past each other in this thread, because we have totally different beliefs about what Baptism is and does.

I think people are talking TO each other, trying to 'discover' what
Baptism is and does.
But you gotta answer them back otherwise yes,
it is talking past them
You ignored my answer to your suggestion that baptism
replaces circumcision.
Here it is again:

Hi TuEsPetrus,
Where do you get that idea?
So... why are girls baptized but boys
alone were circumcised?
I dont think they're connected.

What say you?

 

[visionary]

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.

Baptism is Micvah which is a ceremony of cleansing.. and yes .. micvah as often as necessary for cleansing...

Did not those baptized in John's baptism were again baptized in Yeshua when they received His message? Refreshing... transforming...and a marker for your spiritual steps forward in truth.

 

[SummaScriptura]

Everybody is talking past each other in this thread, because we have totally different beliefs about what Baptism is and does.

That's fine. Some of us will follow God in His way, the rest can follow God in theirs.

 

[SummaScriptura]

<snip>I didn't say that I wasn't baptised, I just said that such an important event was not my choice, nor did it mean anything to me.<snip>

If you were "christened" (whatever that implies!) as an infant, you most certainly were NOT baptised. Ask the Orthodox in this thread what the Greek word for "baptise" means. They never forgot what the word meant.

 

[SummaScriptura]

Baptism is Micvah which is a ceremony of cleansing.. and yes .. micvah as often as necessary for cleansing...

Did not those baptized in John's baptism were again baptized in Yeshua when they received His message? Refreshing... transforming...and a marker for your spiritual steps forward in truth.

So true.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by sunlover1 Hi TuEsPetrus,
Where do you get that idea?
So... why are girls baptized but boys
alone were circumcised?
I dont think they're connected.

How would they have circumcized a girl

 

[sunlover1]

How would they have circumcized a girl

Right, thank you LL.
So if only boys were circumcized, yet all christians
are baptized, how could the one replace the other?
Plus, what exactly 'is' baptism to accompish?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Right, thank you LL.
So if only boys were circumcized, yet all christians
are baptized, how could the one replace the other?
Plus, what exactly 'is' baptism to accompish?

Good question.....what indeed

 

[Strong in Him]

If you were "christened" (whatever that implies!) as an infant, you most certainly were NOT baptised. Ask the Orthodox in this thread what the Greek word for "baptise" means. They never forgot what the word meant.

Well in that case, either I was christened as a child and baptised "properly" as an adult, which obviously you think is ok, or I was baptised as a child and "rebaptised" as an adult, which some people think is not ok.

One way or another, I have been baptised. As to which was the "proper" or "valid" one; take your pick.