If baptism saves...

[OkieAllDay]

If baptism saves I don't understand how baptizing babies could be efficacious. It seems to say that the baby is saved because of the faith and actions of their parents, and not their own faith and love for God. How does that make sense?

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

This topic can be deep depending upon your presuppositions or understanding and the best I can do to help you is recommend this edifying discussion:
(Part 1)

(Part 2)

(Part 3)

God bless

 

[HTacianas]

If baptism saves I don't understand how baptizing babies could be efficacious. It seems to say that the baby is saved because of the faith and actions of their parents, and not their own faith and love for God. How does that make sense?

Baptism imparts grace and seals the child with the Holy Spirit. It has been practiced by Christians since the beginning. "So faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God", see Romans 10:17. It is incumbent on the parents to teach their children the word of God, and through that hearing faith comes.

 

[tturt]

There's "...the doctrine of baptisms,..." (Heb 6:2).

Baptism means immersions and there's 3 main Biblical ones. Each one with outward behaviors resulting from this new, inward, spiritual state.

1 - By The Holy Spirit into Jesus reconcilng us to God (at salvation).
2- By another believer (water baptism) All 3 persons of the Godhead involved in this baptism as well.
3 - By Jesus who sends the promise of the Father baptists us "by," "with" and "in" the Holy Spirit and comes upon us (The Spirit baptism)

More details:
1 - By The Holy Spirit into Jesus which reconciles us to God is the baptism at salvation. It's being baptized by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ by believing in His death, burial, and resurrection. We become new creatures in Christ. We will tell others of our salvation. (Rev 1:5; Matt 26:28; Mark 1:4-9, 16:16; Luk 3:3; 1 Cor 12:13; Acts 2:38; Gal 3:27, II Cor 5:17-18, Rom 10:9).

Water and Spirit baptism follows salvation - not in a set order though
2 - By another believer (water baptism) "... fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness," (Matt 3:6-16, 28:18-20; Acts 8:39, 10:47, 22:16; John 3:5).

3- - By Jesus who sends the promise of the Father baptists us "by," "with" and "in" the Holy Spirit (The Spirit baptism) includes when the Holy Spirit comes upon us, He endures us with power for service to Him, to be His witnesses, and to keep His Word. (Matt 3:11, 5:16; Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16; John 1:33, Acts 1:5, 8:14-17, 10:44-48, 11:16; I Cor 12:13, Luk 24:49, Eph 5:18, Acts 4:31; I John 3:24; Eze 36:25-28; John 14:25-27).

"And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." I John 5:8

 

[Maria Billingsley]

If baptism saves I don't understand how baptizing babies could be efficacious. It seems to say that the baby is saved because of the faith and actions of their parents, and not their own faith and love for God. How does that make sense?

And of the unborn child ? What is their condition? I say they are all with the Lord regardless of their lack of water baptism. Blessings.

 

[ViaCrucis]

If baptism saves I don't understand how baptizing babies could be efficacious. It seems to say that the baby is saved because of the faith and actions of their parents, and not their own faith and love for God. How does that make sense?

From a Lutheran perspective faith is always a gift, something God gives, creates, works, and strengthens. The phrase we use is Extra Nos, "from outside ourselves". Faith is extra nos. Faith isn't something we do, or create in ourselves, faith doesn't arise from the intellect or our reasoning faculties. Faith is from God who gives and works faith in us by His own word (Romans 10:17).

Thus we say and believe, that whenever and wherever God's word is, God is doing something. This is what it means when Lutherans speak of "Word and Sacrament" as "Means of Grace". When we use "Word and Sacrament" we are not saying there is one thing "Word" and then another thing "Sacrament"; we mean one thing "Word and Sacrament". And we call these "Means of Grace" because we believe, and believe Scripture teaches, that God uses means, there are certain things which God has promised to work and act through, to be gracious to us. To speak His promises, to give us assurance in His promises, to give us faith and hold us and keep us and strengthen faith in us.

So, naturally, the preaching of the word is means of grace. When the word is preached, that is when the Gospel is preached, it isn't dead but living, it is a living thing that has power, God's power to save all who believe (Romans 1:16), "from faith to faith, ... 'the just shall live by faith'" (Romans 1:17).

That same word, the promises of God which are ours in Christ, are there too connected to water in the Sacrament of Holy Baptism. If it were just water, it'd just be getting wet. But since the water is united with God's word, His promises, then it is no longer just ordinary water, it is Baptism, and thus as St. Peter says, "this baptism now saves you, not as the removal of dirt from the body, but as the pledge of new conscience before God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:21), even as Jesus Christ said that there is new birth "by water and the Spirit" (John 3:3-5), or as Paul says in Galatians 3:27, we have "put on Christ" in baptism.

God is the one who is active in Baptism, God is right there working, creating, strengthening faith.

That means that the faith which saves the baptized infant isn't the faith of their parents/sponsors, it isn't the actions of the one who officiates, or the actions of the parents/sponsors. Baptism doesn't save ex opere operato ("from the working of the work itself") but saves because of God's word which creates and works faith. That means the baptized infant has faith. It is the faith which the infant has which freely justifies them before God, and thus they are indeed truly and really saved, truly justified on the basis of Christ's finished and perfect work, and it is through faith alone.

It doesn't matter if a grown man of 80 years is baptized, or if a baby of 8 days is baptized. God's grace is still God's grace, the Gospel is still the Gospel, the atoning and perfect work of Christ is still still the perfect work of Christ, and faith is still faith.

The only difference is that there is a greater likelihood that an 80 year old has the ability to express that faith with some amount of reason and learned language skills--but it is not reason which saves, it is not the ability to understand or articulate or do something ourselves that saves. It is God's grace alone, through faith alone, which God alone gives, on account of what Christ has done alone.

If we are saved by grace alone through faith alone on Christ's account alone, then we don't get to gate keep God's gracious power to save and then try to take credit ourselves; as though we have anything to boast about, because we don't. We don't even get to take credit for our faith.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[concretecamper]

If baptism saves I don't understand how baptizing babies could be efficacious. It seems to say that the baby is saved because of the faith and actions of their parents, and not their own faith and love for God. How does that make sense?

Grace is an unmerited gift from God. Are you implying that somehow the individual has to be able to do something to receive His Grace?

 

[tturt]

Jesus said repent (Matt 4:17)

"That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." (Rom 10:9)

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth in him should not perish,
but have everlasting life." John 3:16

 

[PsaltiChrysostom]

Another thing to consider is that because we are made of matter, matter plays a role in our salvation. In fact, God the Son became man to share the human experience. He hungered, slept, and even cried at the tomb of Lazarus. Orthodox, Coptic, Catholic, Anglican and Lutheran all see baptism as well as the Lord's Supper and for others, anointing in oil or icons etc. playing a key role here. If we were simply spiritual beings, there would have never been a need for circumcision or paint the doors with the blood of the lambs during the Passover. But God chose to include material means as part of his plan of salvation. So the sacraments include a material component as well as a spiritual one.

 

[The Liturgist]

Another thing to consider is that because we are made of matter, matter plays a role in our salvation. In fact, God the Son became man to share the human experience. He hungered, slept, and even cried at the tomb of Lazarus. Orthodox, Coptic, Catholic, Anglican and Lutheran all see baptism as well as the Lord's Supper and for others, anointing in oil or icons etc. playing a key role here. If we were simply spiritual beings, there would have never been a need for circumcision or paint the doors with the blood of the lambs during the Passover. But God chose to include material means as part of his plan of salvation. So the sacraments include a material component as well as a spiritual one.

Indeed, this is entirely correct. We have to avoid a crypto-Docetic soteriology which results from adopting a Quaker-like view of the Sacraments as something spiritual and not material, and indeed as I mentioned in my previous post it was Quaker theology that resulted in the great tragedy, which is slowly being reversed, of the Salvation Army not practicing baptism or the Eucharist.

 

[The Liturgist]

From a Lutheran perspective faith is always a gift, something God gives, creates, works, and strengthens. The phrase we use is Extra Nos, "from outside ourselves". Faith is extra nos. Faith isn't something we do, or create in ourselves, faith doesn't arise from the intellect or our reasoning faculties. Faith is from God who gives and works faith in us by His own word (Romans 10:17).

Thus we say and believe, that whenever and wherever God's word is, God is doing something. This is what it means when Lutherans speak of "Word and Sacrament" as "Means of Grace". When we use "Word and Sacrament" we are not saying there is one thing "Word" and then another thing "Sacrament"; we mean one thing "Word and Sacrament". And we call these "Means of Grace" because we believe, and believe Scripture teaches, that God uses means, there are certain things which God has promised to work and act through, to be gracious to us. To speak His promises, to give us assurance in His promises, to give us faith and hold us and keep us and strengthen faith in us.

So, naturally, the preaching of the word is means of grace. When the word is preached, that is when the Gospel is preached, it isn't dead but living, it is a living thing that has power, God's power to save all who believe (Romans 1:16), "from faith to faith, ... 'the just shall live by faith'" (Romans 1:17).

That same word, the promises of God which are ours in Christ, are there too connected to water in the Sacrament of Holy Baptism. If it were just water, it'd just be getting wet. But since the water is united with God's word, His promises, then it is no longer just ordinary water, it is Baptism, and thus as St. Peter says, "this baptism now saves you, not as the removal of dirt from the body, but as the pledge of new conscience before God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:21), even as Jesus Christ said that there is new birth "by water and the Spirit" (John 3:3-5), or as Paul says in Galatians 3:27, we have "put on Christ" in baptism.

God is the one who is active in Baptism, God is right there working, creating, strengthening faith.

That means that the faith which saves the baptized infant isn't the faith of their parents/sponsors, it isn't the actions of the one who officiates, or the actions of the parents/sponsors. Baptism doesn't save ex opere operato ("from the working of the work itself") but saves because of God's word which creates and works faith. That means the baptized infant has faith. It is the faith which the infant has which freely justifies them before God, and thus they are indeed truly and really saved, truly justified on the basis of Christ's finished and perfect work, and it is through faith alone.

It doesn't matter if a grown man of 80 years is baptized, or if a baby of 8 days is baptized. God's grace is still God's grace, the Gospel is still the Gospel, the atoning and perfect work of Christ is still still the perfect work of Christ, and faith is still faith.

The only difference is that there is a greater likelihood that an 80 year old has the ability to express that faith with some amount of reason and learned language skills--but it is not reason which saves, it is not the ability to understand or articulate or do something ourselves that saves. It is God's grace alone, through faith alone, which God alone gives, on account of what Christ has done alone.

If we are saved by grace alone through faith alone on Christ's account alone, then we don't get to gate keep God's gracious power to save and then try to take credit ourselves; as though we have anything to boast about, because we don't. We don't even get to take credit for our faith.

-CryptoLutheran

That’s quite lovely, and it also corresponds with the Patristic idea that Baptism and the Eucharist are salvific through noetic rather than pneumatic or intellectual interaction, and are thus of benefit to infants.

 

[The Liturgist]

Actually I realized I fumbled a bit in describing the noetic aspects of the sacraments; I am not using precisely the correct Orthodox terminology @Vis Crucis. I need to re-read some of my basic theological texts on Soteriology, which will not take long, so if I have not replied again with a corrected statement, that means I have become distracted, in which case you should feel free to just @ tag me, and I will update my remarks. Alternately while I do not expect @HTacianas or @prodromos to necessarily agree or disagree with my feeling that there is a similarity between the concept of a salvific faith even in infants that you outlined, and the Orthodox idea of a noetic interaction in the sacred mysteries, they might be able to expound with greater clarity and efficacy the precise Orthodox doctrine on how the sacraments work with the noos and other aspects of the human being to provide salvation even in the case of infants.

 

[DamianWarS]

If baptism saves I don't understand how baptizing babies could be efficacious. It seems to say that the baby is saved because of the faith and actions of their parents, and not their own faith and love for God. How does that make sense?

water itself can only accomplish a physical washing "not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience" (1 Peter 3:19-22) so baptism is an abstract value similar to that of circumcision. Colossian uniquely links circumcision and bapstism together in Col 2:9-12

"For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

This is also the same description of baptism in Romans 6:3-4. The important aspect here is similar to the old covenant vs the new covenant where the old has a lot of emphasis on the physical that points to the spiritual, whereas the new has greater revelation on the spiritual. The spiritual goals however are superior to the physical goals and we may be baptised in water having no spiritual impact as the act of baptism itself is not magic and our role is always in our heart.

In Acts we see the baptism of the Holy Spirit coming upon the house of Cornelius before water baptism (Acts 10:47) which shows us that although baptism is highly valued it does not affect the influence of the spirit upon someone's life.

But we are still physical beings and psychologically speaking the physical has great importance. Baptism in this way is an act worthy of our attention as it is a public declaration of our faith that we and those around us can celebrate with us. These things are powerful experiences and we should not just simply pass them off. So it's sort of both, although baptism itself does not save all believers who should be baptized. There is something powerful in knowing that the one who baptized me, was baptized by another who was baptized by another, etc... , all the way back to Christ.

 

[Taker }SoC{]

I believe that baptism is something that a believer has to choose to do and is meant to act as a public declaration of faith. I base this on acts 8:36 and 37.
"As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?" And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

Therefore; believing in your heart that Jesus Christ is the Son of God is, according to Philip, a necessary pre-requisite for baptism. If this is the case then it stands to reason that baptizing someone who can barely understand language wouldn't meet this requirement. The main problem with infant baptism is that you only need to be baptized once in your life so if someone was baptized as a baby they may be miss-lead into believing that they have already been baptized properly. And there in lies the problem with infant baptism, the baby isn't publicly declaring anything, instead it is their parents who are making that declaration on their behalf. Therefore I'm convinced that a baptized baby isn't truly baptized in the same fashion that Philip baptized this eunuch.
Parents do have a job to do with regards to raising their children in the faith, they are also supposed to go before their church family and make a public declaration of this duty. But I can't find any verses which combine this duty with water baptism. In every example we find of baptism within scripture it is always an adult baptizing another adult and it involves the informed consent of the one being baptized.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

I believe that baptism is something that a believer has to choose to do and is meant to act as a public declaration of faith.

I don't see anywhere in Scripture baptism defined as a "public declaration of faith." Baptism is never spoken of as an event for the eyes of the audience. If it was the case, baptism is a "public declaration" then we would expect to find verses speaking about baptism linked to individuals who witness the baptisms to be the focus of the text or the testimonies of individuals to be the focus of the text.

In most cases, people are baptized as soon as possible, often without audiences as in the Samaritans in Acts 8:12-13, Ethiopian eunuch 8:34-39, Saul of Tarsus 9:17-18, 22:12-16, Cornelius and family 10:14, 44-48, Lydia and family 16:13-15, the Philippian jailer and family 16:30-34, Crispus and family 18:7-8, and the Ephesian disciples 19:1-5. We also do not see any testimonies for the public before baptism, past “they believed” (present in some examples and not others) which may or may not have been a vocal profession.

​

​

 

[FireDragon76]

If baptism saves I don't understand how baptizing babies could be efficacious. It seems to say that the baby is saved because of the faith and actions of their parents, and not their own faith and love for God. How does that make sense.

Look up covenantal theology.

The notion that salvation is an individual matter didn't exist prior to the 18th century, and is very much tied to western individualism.

 

[RileyG]

And of the unborn child ? What is their condition? I say they are all with the Lord regardless of their lack of water baptism. Blessings.

We commend them to the mercy of God, and only God knows.

Blessings

 

[RileyG]

Salvation replaced circumcision of the Old Covenant. It is now open to all believers regardless of age. It fills the soul with grace and faith.

 

[FireDragon76]

We commend them to the mercy of God, and only God knows.

Blessings

The salvation of children isn't contingent on a denial of sacramental grace or efficacy. John Calvin himself reconciled both. He saw that Jesus blessed children, so he concluded that children that died young had been elected for salvation, dying in a state of blessedness.

 

[RileyG]

The salvation of children isn't contingent on a denial of sacramental grace or efficacy. John Calvin himself reconciled both. He saw that Jesus blessed children, so he concluded that children that died young had been elected for salvation, dying in a state of blessedness.

Thanks for the info!