Infant Baptism, why do you reject it?

[Oblio]

This seems to indicate that there is something going on in the person's mind during baptism.

It might be, or it could just be herd mentality emotions brought forth at a 'revival', but in any event, the Scripture above does not speak exhaustively. Orthodox believe that indeed an adult cannot simply get wet and enter the Church unto salvation, but we also believe that an infant can be brought into the Church through their simple faith and through the participation in sacraments, and the growth in Christ within the Body of Christ the he was born into.

As we sing at the rite of Baptism:

As many as have been Baptised into Christ, have put on Christ, Allelulia ...

If one believes that salvation (literally in the Greek, healing) is a one time event, made effectual by a sinner's prayer, then one might excuse the objections to paedobaptism. When seen in light of the Orthodox belief of Salvation being a process through which we, through the Grace of God and the Sacramental life of His Church, attain the likeness of Him, these objections hold no sway.

 

[Iollain]

I don't think anyone is saying that either. But you sound very high and mighty there Oblio, comparing people who make a decision for Christ as a herd and saying your church is the only way to salvation.

 

[Oblio]

But you sound very high and mighty there Oblio, comparing people who make a decision for Christ as a herd and saying your church is the only way to salvation.

Perhaps you have never been to a 'revival' in the Southern US

I am simply saying that the Orthodox Church, the Body of Christ, the repository of the faith once delivered unto the Saints, and the Holy Mysteries of God through her are the way to Salvation. I will not make judgement on those who are not members of her, nor will I limit how God can work the salvation of others, I will simply pray for the Lord to have mercy on them.

 

[Jig]

I encourage everyone to search the Scriptures for examples of what the Bible means by household.

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.

 

[tall73]

It is the norm for children who are Baptised and Chrismated into the Church. We are given the example of St. John to show that it is not only for adults that the Holy Spirit is given.

If it were the norm that they had the spirit from birth they wouldn't need baptism to save them from their sins would they?

 

[Harlan Norris]

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)?

Acts,8:27,And he arose and went: and,behold a man of Ethiopia,an enuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethieopians,who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to jerusalem for to worship,28, Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet. 29then the spirit saidunto Phillip,Go near,and join thyself to this chariot.30, And Phillip ran tither to him,and heard him read the prophet Esaias and said understandest thou what thou readest?31, And he said, how can I,except some man should guide me? And he desired Phillip that he would come and sit with him.32,The place of the scripture which he read was this,He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:33,In his humiliation his judgement was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.34,And the eunuch answered Phillip and said,I pray thee,of whom speaketh the prophet this?of himself,or of some other man?35,Then Phillip opened his mouth,and began at the same scripture,and preached unto him Jesus.36,And as they went on their way,they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said,see,here is water;WHAT DOTH HINDER ME TO BE BAPTISED?37,And Phillip 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.38, And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Phillip and the eunuch;and he baptised him....Clearly, this scripture outlines the requirement of understanding,and belief in Jesus Christ,BEFORE baptism. How can an infant do either of these?

 

[tall73]

It might be, or it could just be herd mentality emotions brought forth at a 'revival', but in any event, the Scripture above does not speak exhaustively. Orthodox believe that indeed an adult cannot simply get wet and enter the Church unto salvation, but we also believe that an infant can be brought into the Church through their simple faith and through the participation in sacraments, and the growth in Christ within the Body of Christ the he was born into.

At what age is this simple faith expressed? Perhaps after 2 or so they might have a simple faith. But all of my infants had only clearn diapers and more food on their mind when they were first born. They can't even focus their eyes completely and make sense of their environment, let alone reason through to faith.

As we sing at the rite of Baptism:

As many as have been Baptised into Christ, have put on Christ, Allelulia ..

If one believes that salvation (literally in the Greek, healing) is a one time event, made effectual by a sinner's prayer, then one might excuse the objections to paedobaptism. When seen in light of the Orthodox belief of Salvation being a process through which we, through the Grace of God and the Sacramental life of His Church, attain the likeness of Him, these objections hold no sway.

And if one realizes that the Scriptures say belief and repentance and a pledge of a good conscience to God are the things that come before baptism then you can see where we might object.

We see no examples of infant baptism in the Bible. And we see texts that speak of requirements of faith. So again, it is not just an instance where the Bible doesn't include something, it is an instance of the Bible saying what is necessary and babies not qualifying.

I do not believe that salvation is a one time thing either. But that doesn't mean I would baptize my child who cannot comprehend what is happening.

Since it is instrumental to your argument that this has always been this way, what do the ECF say on the issue?

 

[jckstraw72]

King David knew the Lord while on his mothers breast.

Psalm 22: 8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts.10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly.

 

[tall73]

King David knew the Lord while on his mothers breast.

Psalm 22: 8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts.10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly.

Must have been one of those la leche leagues. Some of them breast feed until age 4

But I find it interesting that folks can see the obvious hyperbole in statments about Mary being our only hope, but then miss it in the psalms.

And if you take it quite literally, then you have another example of someone who doesn't NEED baptism. God is already his God from his mother's belly, not from his baptism.

.

 

[Taylor43]

No where in the bible does it mention infant baptism. I was Bapisted that way but when I turned 15 i recieved Jesus as my Lord and saviour. He spoke to me to get Baptised full immersion. I truly feel it is a act of faith on our part. I believe in infant being Blessed but they are too young to understand.
Love
Taylor

 

[Paleoconservatarian]

You make a good point about the covenant...which the exact reason they don't need to be baptised...they are already in His protection. Dedication is simply me making a commitment to raise my child in the right way. It is not saying anything about her relationship to Christ...like baptizing is saying she has been baptized into the faith.

That argument wouldn't have worked on the Jews, who applied the covenant sign (circumcision) to their children. Neither does it work with the sign and seal of the new covenant (baptism).

The Scripture says that the promise belongs to the children of believers. It is not a statement about the parents, they've already been mentioned. This applies to their children. It's not all about you and your relationship. It's about the child's as well. So give them the sign and the benefits that rightfully belong to them.

Dedication, then, isn't really a dedication of the child at all, is it? It's about the dedication of the parent. You're saying, then, that you take up the task to convert your child who is basically an unbeliever, outside of the church, and needs to be converted. No wonder so many children today fall away from the faith. If we treat them like unbelievers, they'll get the message.

 

[Jig]

I encourage everyone to search the Scriptures for examples of what the Bible means by household.

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.

Is this not what you asked for Oblio? No response?

 

[Lynn73]

Excellent post, Jig, and to just add a little something for those who think automatic salvation is for the whole house if one gets saved, see the underlined portion of Scripture below. The whole house was saved because they listened to the word of the Lord and believed it. And then they were baptized. Baptism is for the believers, not to just indiscriminately baptize the whole house if they don't believe. Didn't Jesus say he would divide households? Mother against daughter, father against son etc.? Why? Because some will believe and some won't. In some cases, all will believe but not always. And babies cannot understand or receive the gospel therefore there's no need to baptize them, that's not the true example of Scripture. If God is just, Christ's blood covers them because they are mentally incapable of believing anything. They aren't going to be sent to hell just because they haven't been dunked in water. Because I know He is just, I can leave babies in His loving hands knowing He'll do what's right and no one will be able to say that He's unjust in eternity.

Acts 16 28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here. 29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, 30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. 32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway. 34 And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

If they had not chosen to believe, they wouldn't have been baptized nor would baptism have saved them.

 

[BigNorsk]

No where in the bible does it mention infant baptism. I was Bapisted that way but when I turned 15 i recieved Jesus as my Lord and saviour. He spoke to me to get Baptised full immersion. I truly feel it is a act of faith on our part. I believe in infant being Blessed but they are too young to understand.
Love
Taylor

You need to do a little study on the baptism unto Moses. Infants absolutely were baptised in that baptism. They were carried in the arms of the adults. The adults mostly perished in the wilderness, the infants received the promised land-go figure!

Marv

 

[tall73]

You need to do a little study on the baptism unto Moses. Infants absolutely were baptised in that baptism. They were carried in the arms of the adults. The adults mostly perished in the wilderness, the infants received the promised land-go figure!

Marv

If anything I would consider that a lesson on the age of accountability, rather than infant baptism. The younger generation did not share in the sin of the older because they were not old enough to choose.

 

[Ethan_Fetch]

Jesus
Loves
Babies!

 

[Lynn73]

Jesus
Loves
Babies!

Amen!

 

[KEPLER]

Jesus
Loves
Babies!

Amen!

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

Cheers,

Kepler

 

[qh93536]

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)?

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.

 

[TruthMiner]

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.

Irrelevant.

It is a devotion from the heart, not the water.

Water baptism is how we die with Christ.