Infant Baptism, why do you reject it?

[KEPLER]

a talking ass perhaps?

A typing ass.

 

[jckstraw72]

A typing ass.

now thatd id like to see.

 

[KEPLER]

now thatd id like to see.

I use the "hoof and peck" method....

 

[Tenebrae]

Why do some groups hold to the historical Christian teaching of infant Baptism while others do not?

The Catholic Church has always held to this important teaching as have groups like Anglicans, Lutherans and Calvinists but for some reason other groups reject it.

If you reject it, on what grounds do you reject it (especially considering other groups accept it)?

Nothing in the bible to support infant baptisms...

the one getting baptised, were the people who were comming to christ, dont think they ever mentioned infants

 

[Lynn73]

once again, no one is saying that baptism is a guarantee of salvation.

Oh I'm quite aware of that viewpoint, I've seen it here enough to be very aware of it. Supposedly baptism saves and then it's up to you to keep your salvation by good works and such, doing and believing whatever your church says, etc. I kind of understand the drill. I'm OSAS so I don't believe true Chrisitan are ever lost again. Nor, of course, will I believe that being water baptized saves anyone. It sure didn't save me. Faith in Christ saves, period. Water baptism comes after to symbolize what's already taken place. That's what I believe and what I'll continue to believe because that's what I believe is revealed in Scripture.

 

[Polycarp1]

Oh I'm quite aware of that viewpoint, I've seen it here enough to be very aware of it. Supposedly baptism saves and then it's up to you to keep your salvation by good works and such, doing and believing whatever your church says, etc. I kind of understand the drill. I'm OSAS so I don't believe true Chrisitan are ever lost again. Nor, of course, will I believe that being water baptized saves anyone. It sure didn't save me. Faith in Christ saves, period. Water baptism comes after to symbolize what's already taken place. That's what I believe and what I'll continue to believe because that's what I believe is revealed in Scripture.

What makes you think that you will be saved by having faith in Christ? While it's a bit rhetorical, it's a real question. Why should God save you for any reason whatsoever?

The answer, of course, is that we can be sure of our salvation because He is true to His promises. And baptism is inextricably bound up in salvation in all His commands.

Nobody -- well, nobody who understands the theology of it -- believes that it's "magic water" -- it's the family bringing their child in faith to the Church as the household of faith, and God being true to His promise to save whoever comes to Him.

You yourself, Lynn, in the past, have dismissed some theological points raised by others as "way too deep" -- so you cannot claim that it's adherence to right doctrine that's needed. IMO, it's faith to the extent the individual is capable of it that is our response to His grace. I don't expect a Down's Syndrome sufferer to grasp sacramental theology or the abstruse proofs of Calvinism: "I love God and He loves me" is all the creed I expect of such a person. The one thing about a small child is that it trusts its parents to take care of it and bring it up right, in loving discipline. Why should that stop short at the baptismal font?

Baptism is not about what you do for God -- it's about what He does for you.

 

[jckstraw72]

Oh I'm quite aware of that viewpoint, I've seen it here enough to be very aware of it. Supposedly baptism saves and then it's up to you to keep your salvation by good works and such, doing and believing whatever your church says, etc. I kind of understand the drill. I'm OSAS so I don't believe true Chrisitan are ever lost again.

how does the OSAS viewpoint deal with these scriptures:

Hebrews 6:11 we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: 12 That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.
.....diligence is required to maintain HOPE. The promise is inherited through patience, which is shown over time. Its not inherited at one point in time.




Romans 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
.....God gives eternal life according to deeds (this is not referring to works of the Law of course, rather to cooperation with the Holy Spirit in sanctification)

2 Peter 1:9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. 10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
.....you can even forget that sins are purged, therefore we must be diligent to make our election sure--obviously a one-time purging sins is not all there is to salvation.

and of course theres "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" and many, many others.

 

[KEPLER]

Supposedly baptism saves and then it's up to you to keep your salvation by good works and such, doing and believing whatever your church says, etc. I kind of understand the drill.

I'll let the EO and RC respond to this for themselves.... But your response above in no way reflects the theology of the Reformation.

Lutherans believe that God uses baptism to apply the benefits of Christ's death to the perosn being baptized, in the same way that God used a serpent on a stick to heal.

Lutherans do not believe that we "keep up" our salvation by good works. Lutherans believe that those who remain in the faith do so because are kept in the faith by the Grace of God. Those who leave the faith do so of their own free will.

K

 

[Oblio]

Lutherans believe that God uses baptism to apply the benefits of Christ's death to the perosn being baptized, in the same way that God used a serpent on a stick to heal.

As do EO.

Lutherans do not believe that we "keep up" our salvation by good works. Lutherans believe that those who remain in the faith do so because are kept in the faith by the Grace of God. Those who leave the faith do so of their own free will.

AMEN

By Grace, through Faith

We would add (clarify ?) that this is worked by God through His Holy Mysteries.

e.g.

[c]Prayer to our Lord Jesus Christ[/c]

My most merciful and all-merciful God, Lord Jesus Christ, through Thy great love Thou didst come down and take flesh to save all. And again, O Saviour, save me by Thy grace, I pray Thee, for if Thou shouldst save me for my works, this would not be grace or a gift, but rather a duty. Indeed, in Thy infinite compassion and unspeakable mercy, Thou O my Christ hast said: Whoever believes in Me shall live and never see death. If faith in Thee saves the desperate, save me, for Thou art my God and Creator. Impute my faith instead of deeds, O my God, for Thou wilt find no deeds which could justify me, but may my faith suffice for all my deeds. May it answer for and acquit me, and may it make me a partaker of Thy eternal glory. And may satan not seize me, O Word, and boast that he has torn me from Thy hand and fold. O Christ, my Saviour, whether I will or not, save me. Make haste, quick, quick, for I perish. Thou art my God from my mother's womb. Grant me, O Lord, to love Thee now as once I loved sin, and also to work for Thee without idleness, as I worked before for deceptive satan. But supremely shall I work for Thee, my Lord and God, Jesus Christ, all the days of my life, now and ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen.

 

[KEPLER]

Amen right back at ya, O.

 

[GraceInHim]

Jesus has commanded His Church to "make disciples of all nations baptizing them . . .." Christ made no exceptions!

Infants are part of all nations, as are every other age group. We do not have to prove this. The burden of proof is on those who deny that infants are to be included in "all nations."

To deny the blessing of infant baptism because you can't find the words "infant baptism" in the Bible makes as much sense as rejecting the teaching of the Trinity because you can't find the words "Trinity" or "triune" in the Bible.

Lord Jesus Christ has commanded us to baptize all nations, We obey Christ and baptize "all nations," including infants, even though some do not understand it? Or will you obey Reason and reject infant baptism because you don't understand how babies can believe?

 

[nephilimiyr]

Jesus has commanded His Church to "make disciples of all nations baptizing them . . .." Christ made no exceptions!

Infants are part of all nations, as are every other age group. We do not have to prove this. The burden of proof is on those who deny that infants are to be included in "all nations."

To deny the blessing of infant baptism because you can't find the words "infant baptism" in the Bible makes as much sense as rejecting the teaching of the Trinity because you can't find the words "Trinity" or "triune" in the Bible.

Lord Jesus Christ has commanded us to baptize all nations, We obey Christ and baptize "all nations," including infants, even though some do not understand it? Or will you obey Reason and reject infant baptism because you don't understand how babies can believe?

.

 

[GraceInHim]

If you posted this just to prove to us that you can be just as rude as some of the RCs who post in GT after you have made the decision to go back to the RCC again then you have convinced me, sorry to say...

how is that rude? Neph, you could pm me if you want to make a personal statement to me.. sorry, I speak what I believe and infants are people amoung the nations...

peace

 

[nephilimiyr]

how is that rude? Neph, you could pm me if you want to make a personal statement to me.. sorry, I speak what I believe and infants are people amoung the nations...

peace

And that was also rude of me, I apologize, I should not have made my thoughts public and have sent you a pm.

 

[Lynn73]

Jesus has commanded His Church to "make disciples of all nations baptizing them . . .." Christ made no exceptions!

Infants are part of all nations, as are every other age group. We do not have to prove this. The burden of proof is on those who deny that infants are to be included in "all nations."

To deny the blessing of infant baptism because you can't find the words "infant baptism" in the Bible makes as much sense as rejecting the teaching of the Trinity because you can't find the words "Trinity" or "triune" in the Bible.

Lord Jesus Christ has commanded us to baptize all nations, We obey Christ and baptize "all nations," including infants, even though some do not understand it? Or will you obey Reason and reject infant baptism because you don't understand how babies can believe?

The Lord should not have to spell out for you that infants don't need baptizing. Over and over we see in His word that people believe first, then comes baptism. Phillip told the eunich that he could be baptized if he believed with all his heart. Why can't you get that babies cannot hear, understand, and accept the gospel therefore there is no need to baptize them? Water cannot save, anyway, imho.

 

[Borealis]

The Lord should not have to spell out for you that infants don't need baptizing. Over and over we see in His word that people believe first, then comes baptism. Phillip told the eunich that he could be baptized if he believed with all his heart. Why can't you get that babies cannot hear, understand, and accept the gospel therefore there is no need to baptize them? Water cannot save, anyway, imho.

Yes, we are very aware that you feel the need to repeat, ad nauseum, that water doesn't save. I know this will come as a total shock to you, but we don't believe that water saves, either.

God saves. He chooses to work through the water of baptism. And his gift is freely given to EVERYONE. Jesus says, 'let the children come to me.' You deny that by rejecting their right to receive the freely given gift of baptism.

 

[Lynn73]

As long as you keep repeating "ad nauseum" the things that you do, I'll do the same. Where does it say that "let the children come to me" refers to water baptism? I don't see that anywhere. It just says let them come. And we're talking about babies, not older children. You are the one restricting them saying they can't come without getting dunked or sprinkled. That's a fallacy. Batpism isn't a gift, it's something we do in obedience to Christ that's a symbolic depiction of what has already taken place. God hasn't chosen to save or work through water in saving. He has chosen to save by grace through faith those who trust in Christ as Savior. That's how He saves, the shed blood of Christ and our faith in Him, NOT through getting dunked in water. Baptism is NOT for everyone, it's for those who've chosen to believe in Christ. For by grace are ye saved through faith. If you believe with all your heart you may be baptized.

I'm just as tired of listening to you as your are of listening to me. Some of us don't believe Scripture is on your side so why expect us to be silent when you keep repeating "ad nauseum" that God works His salvation through the water? I believe the Bible disagrees with you. You assume that every time the Bible uses the term "baptism" it means water. Assumptions get people in trouble. As long as the myth of baptismal regeneration is propogated don't expect those of us who believe the Bible teaches otherwise to be silent.

 

[mark75]

What I hear being said on this thread by those who practice infant baptism is that baptism doesn't save anyone, but God saves them through baptism. It seems like a roundabout way of saying that one is still saved by being baptized in water.

How do deal with passages like Rom. 10:9-10 where salvation is spoken of as a heart decision? In fact, baptism isn't even spoken of. And in the cases where it is spoken of such as Acts 16:31-33, people are baptized after they have made this decision of the heart.

I guess we also have to look at a passage like Galatians 3:24-27 -

"Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.
25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ."

and decide if this is speaking of literal water baptism or an inward change that occurs by God's Holy Spirit when a heart change is made. It seems that if water baptism were necessary for God to impart salvation, Paul would have included that in his discourses on salvation and that those whom he led to the Lord would have been baptized before being declared saved.

Just some thoughts.

Mark​

 

[Oblio]

Why can't you get that babies cannot hear, understand, and accept the gospel therefore there is no need to baptize them?

Because that is not the entire Gospel, nor is it how the Early Church understood salvation.

 

[Oblio]

The Lord should not have to spell out for you that infants don't need baptizing.

Since the Early Church baptized infants, why is it we see no correction of this practice in the Epistles ?