Infant Baptism, why do you reject it?

[qh93536]

Irrelevant.

HIGHLY RELEVANT!

 

[KEPLER]

Is this why many believe baptism is for infants? Because scripture seemingly says (Acts 16:33) all of a household was baptized?

33And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.

This is indeed confusing if you look at only these few verses singularly. I like to see other examples in Scripture to see what "all the household" really meant.
Did it mean every single person (including infants and children)?
or
Did it mean every single person who had the capacity to believe?

Lets see....in the up coming chapter we see (Acts 18:8):

8Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized.

This verse makes two points. First, it makes mention of "all" Cripus's household "believing". If household meant even the infants, then we have a problem. An infant does not have the mental capacity to understand or believe. Also, the verse seemingly makes in claer that it was those who believe that decided to get baptized. Again, as noted above, an infant can not do.

Lets look at some more household verses:

John 4:53 (also see Acts 16:34)
53So the father knew that it was at that hour in which Jesus said to him, "Your son lives"; and he himself believed and his whole household.

If whole household meant everyone including infants, then we have a problem here. Infants don't have the mental capacity to believe.

Mark 6:4
4Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and among his own relatives and in his own household."

How can and infant give honor to someone?

Philippians 4:22
22All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar's household.

How can an infant greet someone?

AND NOW THE BIG ICE BREAKER!!!

1 Tim 3:12
12Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.

In this verse we see a seperation between someones household and their children.

Proof postive that household can mean those who only have the capacity to believe and understand, in those few select verses some people like to use to claim infant baptism as correct dogma.

Ahh, Jig, thank you. If I didn't laugh, I'd cry. This (ahem...erm...) "exegesis" really makes my morning.

Here's the root problem with your "exegesis" (in legal-speak): you are assuming facts which are not in evidence. Namely, you ASSUME that infants can't have faith, and the entirety of your objection rests on this single assumption.

Please prove to us that an infant cannot have faith. (And in the meantime, I will attempt to prove to you that dead bodies don't come back to life. )

We wait with baited breath. Until then your exegesis is worth about as much as this pile of used kleenex sitting in the trash can next to me.

Cheers,

Kepler

 

[TruthMiner]

HIGHLY RELEVANT!

Only in your own mind.

The effectiveness of God's work and power is not dependent upon the extent of your understanding nor is your capacity to receive a gift dependent on the extent your understanding.

 

[KEPLER]

Because it is a meaningless ritual. It is impossible for a person to be successfully baptized if that person does not understand the meaning and connotations of the process. It is a devotion from the heart, not the water.

"meaningless ritual" ... ???

"forgiveness of sins"
"washing of regeneration"
"buried with Christ"
"clothed with Christ"
"clears our conscience"

 

[Lynn73]

Which is precisely why Ethan_Fetch believes in baptizing them, Lynn!

Cheers,

Kepler

They don't need to be baptized for Him to love them or take them to heaven. And you say in another post that how do we know babies can't have faith. Well, give us an example of a gurgling infant in diapers expressing his or her understanding and acceptance of the gospel. In my opinion, the whole thing is being made a lot more comlicated and illogical than it really is.

 

[TruthMiner]

"meaningless ritual" ... ???

"forgiveness of sins"
"washing of regeneration"
"buried with Christ"
"clothed with Christ"
"clears our conscience"

Bible contriving Baptist maybe.

 

[KEPLER]

They don't need to be baptized for Him to love them or take them to heaven. And you say in another post that how do we know babies can't have faith. Well, give us an example of a gurgling infant in diapers expressing his or her understanding and acceptance of the gospel. In my opinion, the whole thing is being made a lot more comlicated and illogical than it really is.

In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a town in Judah, and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb

The baby leaped in the wound when it's mother was greeted by the Mother of God.

Pace Jig's histrionics, this is clear evidence of a baby greeting someone.

Shall we go on to the Psalms? Shall we go on to Timothy, who knew the scriptures as an infant?

Cheers,

Kepler

 

[TruthMiner]

Shall we go on to the Psalms? Shall we go on to Timothy, who knew the scriptures as an infant?

So are you claiming 1 year old Timothy was reading Leviticus?

 

[KEPLER]

So are you claiming 1 year old Timothy was reading Leviticus?

How or in what manner he knew them, I cannot say, because Scripture does not say.

But he knew them from infancy. That is a Scriptural absolute.

 

[frumanchu]

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)?

As a Calvinist, I've found that most often the reason it is rejected is based upon inductive reasoning and the fact that there is not a clear explicit example of infant baptism or command to baptize infants. At the same time, there are also no commands not to baptize infants.

The most common error I see is in pointing to verses that say "believe and be baptised" as proof that baptism should only follow a profession of faith. These verses are quite obviously directed at adults undergoing a conversion, not people who are already members of a covenant community. To the first century Jews who first received the command to be baptized, the expectation absolutely would have been to baptize their entire household, children included, as such has always been the covenant practice among the people of God.

I disagree to a great extent with the Catholic and Orthodox views of exactly what infant baptism involves and the implications, but I fully affirm the practice.

 

[KEPLER]

As a Calvinist, I've found that most often the reason it is rejected is based upon inductive reasoning and the fact that there is not a clear explicit example of infant baptism or command to baptize infants. At the same time, there are also no commands not to baptize infants.

The most common error I see is in pointing to verses that say "believe and be baptised" as proof that baptism should only follow a profession of faith. These verses are quite obviously directed at adults undergoing a conversion, not people who are already members of a covenant community. To the first century Jews who first received the command to be baptized, the expectation absolutely would have been to baptize their entire household, children included, as such has always been the covenant practice among the people of God.

I disagree to a great extent with the Catholic and Orthodox views of exactly what infant baptism involves and the implications, but I fully affirm the practice.

Well said, Fru. (Although of course, I agree with the Orthodox and mostly agree with the Catholics). But sometimes there's a small bit of comfort in orthopraxy.

Cheers,

Kepler

 

[TruthMiner]

How or in what manner he knew them, I cannot say, because Scripture does not say.

But he knew them from infancy. That is a Scriptural absolute.

I guess this is where we pretend to understand in order to suit ourselves.

 

[Borealis]

Because it is a meaningless ritual. It is impossible for a person to be successfully baptized if that person does not understand the meaning and connotations of the process. It is a devotion from the heart, not the water.

So why was Jesus baptized? Was He into meaningless rituals? Why were thousands baptized on Pentecost? A meaningless ritual? Please. And here I thought you people actually believed what was in the Bible. Apparently the correct term should be 'sola Scriptura, unless it contradicts with what I believe.'

 

[woman.at.the.well]

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)?

I myself was baptized in the Lutheran church as an infant but do not accept it (as you say it) myself personally now for this reason: because babies do not sin. They don't even understand what sin is. So how can they repent and be baptized for the remission of sins they do not know exists?

Having read through some of the posts I agree with those who say nowhere in scripture is there examples of infant baptism. I don't condemn religions that practice this. I think of it as a dedication of the child to the Lord but not the same baptism Jesus told His followers to take part in.

 

[KEPLER]

I myself was baptized in the Lutheran church as an infant but do not accept it (as you say it) myself personally now for this reason: because babies do not sin. They don't even understand what sin is. So how can they repent and be baptized for the remission of sins they do not know exists?

A certain guy named David disagrees with you:

1Have mercy on me, O God,
according to your steadfast love;
according to your abundant mercy
blot out my transgressions.
2Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
and cleanse me from my sin!

3For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is ever before me.
4Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you may be justified in your words
and blameless in your judgment.
5Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
and in sin did my mother conceive me.
6Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being,
and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart.

Somewhere along the way, my guess is that someone or something told you that sin is primarily an action. It is not.

Sin is a condition. Like a disease. And we are born with it, as David says. We are born terminally ill.

Having read through some of the posts I agree with those who say nowhere in scripture is there examples of infant baptism. I don't condemn religions that practice this. I think of it as a dedication of the child to the Lord but not the same baptism Jesus told His followers to take part in.

How nice. Not a shred of biblical support, but nice.

 

[TruthMiner]

A certain guy named David disagrees with you:


Somewhere along the way, my guess is that someone or something told you that sin is primarily an action. It is not.

Sin is a condition. Like a disease. And we are born with it, as David says. We are born terminally ill.


How nice. Not a shred of biblical support, but nice.

You must be careful though.... people often mistakenly think sin is a bodily pollution like black spots on an otherwise clean linen. It isn't. And that is where all sorts of confusion regarding the incarnation occurs.

 

[HisKid1973]

So why was Jesus baptized? '

Was it when He was an infant ??? What was John baptising for?

 

[frumanchu]

I've always said that any person who claims children do not sin either has none or is ignorantly biased. I am the father of three children whom I love dearly, and I learned very early on that they are every bit as in need of a Savior as I am.

 

[frumanchu]

Was it when He was an infant ??? What was John baptising for?

Was Jesus circumcised? What did that symbolize and signify? What does baptism symbolize and signify?

 

[woman.at.the.well]

I've always said that any person who claims children do not sin either has none or is ignorantly biased. I am the father of three children whom I love dearly, and I learned very early on that they are every bit as in need of a Savior as I am.

seeing as how I am "igonorant." Thank you for straightening me out frumanchu I really do appreciate it.

I did not supply biblical support for my statement because it was not requested in the OP and also because there is no biblical support for infant baptism. Is this a debate forum? If not I'd suggest putting your claws back in girls. Not a nice way for non Christians to see believers speak to one another, ya think?