Infant Baptism

[lsume]

"I assume you have not yet had the aforementioned experience."

"The Bible is pure and unadulterated and Christ is the only way to go to Heaven."

Yes, and I didn't say otherwise. Didn't say baptism is a requirement for salvation ... if that's where you are coming from

I think you misread ... misunderstood my post and making assumptions.

That is good news.

 

[Daniel9v9]

The problem is not baptizing children whom can distinguish between right and wrong and repent , but mere infants whom do not have the understanding to repent since they cannot differentiate right and wrong.

Matt 3:5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
Matt 3:6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Why does an infant need to be bapized for sin? Since they don't know about it. Baptism is a baptism of repentance.

I don't want to spam this thread with repeated messages, but you can find a response to this in post #64 (page 4, I think). In short, God is the one who grants repentance, and He surely grants it to everyone through Christ. This includes children.

 

[Alithis]

How many baptisms are there for the Christian?
One. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Who instituted this one baptism?
Christ. Matthew 28:16-28

Who is Christ?
He is fully God and fully man. The whole fullness of deity (the triune God) dwells in Him bodily. He is God in flesh.

So, when we are baptised into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, we are baptised into Jesus Christ. That is, we are buried with Christ by baptism into death, in order that, just as Jesus was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

Yes but that not what i asked.
I asked have you noted the contrast that the phrase is found once only..
And the practice is not aligned to the one phrase.
The apostles always and only baptised in the name of JESUS.
Yes the name is that given by the father to the son by the Spirit..
Since baptism is a part of the obedient process of Salvation and there is no other name by which men can be saved... To exclude the direct name is to remain unrepentant in disobedience.

 

[Daniel9v9]

Yes but that not what i asked.
I asked have you noted the contrast that the phrase is found once only..
And the practice is not aligned to the one phrase.
The apostles always and only baptised in the name of JESUS.
Yes the name is that given by the father to the son by the Spirit..
Since baptism is a part of the obedient process of Salvation and there is no other name by which men can be saved... To exclude the direct name is to remain unrepentant in disobedience.

There is a lot of confused statements here, and what I was getting at does actually answer your question, albeit it's very brief and may not be clear.

To be baptised into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and to be baptised into the name of Jesus Christ, is the same thing because there is only one God. There is one baptism for Christians, and this one baptism was instituted, not by man, but by God, or rather, the God-man Jesus Christ.

Jesus, by virtue of being fully man and fully God (not half and half, not a demi-god), is true God. He is the Son from all eternity, but also, incomprehensively, the whole Godhead dwells in Him bodily. So can we say that Jesus saves? Yes. Can we say that the Father saves? Yes. Can we say that the Holy Spirit saves? Yes. For it is one God, in three persons. God saves. "Jesus", quite literally means "God saves". So when Christ commands the apostles to baptise in God's name, they do exactly that - in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - or, Jesus Christ. Furthermore, when we include "the Son", in the Trinitarian statement, we do name Jesus specifically as He is the Son. This is the one baptism that the Church has received.

Baptism is not our obedience to God, but rather it's the grace of God. It's not what we do for God, but it's what God does for us. It's His promise to us, that we will truly be baptised into His own name. This is apprehended through faith and effected through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Salvation is not a process. We are justified by grace through faith, once and for all, by the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Now, sanctification, on the other hand, is a process. The fruit of the Holy Spirit produces faith, trust, obedience and love for God, and joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.

 

[zoidar]

Yes but that not what i asked.
I asked have you noted the contrast that the phrase is found once only..
And the practice is not aligned to the one phrase.
The apostles always and only baptised in the name of JESUS.
Yes the name is that given by the father to the son by the Spirit..
Since baptism is a part of the obedient process of Salvation and there is no other name by which men can be saved... To exclude the direct name is to remain unrepentant in disobedience.

As far as I know baptism in the early Church was always baptism in Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I have found no early Church father who says we are to baptize only in the name of Jesus. When Acts mention baptize to Jesus, I am of firm belief that this means baptize in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, sice that is how Jesus says we are to baptize (Matt 28:19).

 

[Alithis]

There is a lot of confused statements here, and what I was getting at does actually answer your question, albeit it's very brief and may not be clear.

To be baptised into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and to be baptised into the name of Jesus Christ, is the same thing because there is only one God. There is one baptism for Christians, and this one baptism was instituted, not by man, but by God, or rather, the God-man Jesus Christ.

Jesus, by virtue of being fully man and fully God (not half and half, not a demi-god), is true God. He is the Son from all eternity, but also, incomprehensively, the whole Godhead dwells in Him bodily. So can we say that Jesus saves? Yes. Can we say that the Father saves? Yes. Can we say that the Holy Spirit saves? Yes. For it is one God, in three persons. God saves. "Jesus", quite literally means "God saves". So when Christ commands the apostles to baptise in God's name, they do exactly that - in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - or, Jesus Christ. Furthermore, when we include "the Son", in the Trinitarian statement, we do name Jesus specifically as He is the Son. This is the one baptism that the Church has received.

Baptism is not our obedience to God, but rather it's the grace of God. It's not what we do for God, but it's what God does for us. It's His promise to us, that we will truly be baptised into His own name. This is apprehended through faith and effected through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Salvation is not a process. We are justified by grace through faith, once and for all, by the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Now, sanctification, on the other hand, is a process. The fruit of the Holy Spirit produces faith, trust, obedience and love for God, and joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.

Obedience.....

 

[Alithis]

As far as I know baptism in the early Church was always baptism in Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I have found no early Church father who says we are to baptize only in the name of Jesus. When Acts mention baptize to Jesus, I am of firm belief that this means baptize in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, sice that is how Jesus says we are to baptize (Matt 28:19).

This is why no where are we told by God to follow man but to obey God ..
I do not adhere to man made institutions who call themselves " the church" and make their own traditions, superimposing them over the word of God and making Gods word null and void By thiee " traditions" .

So you lost me forever the moment you used reference to " them" as if that is some how authoritive.
I dont mean to offend you but i can never accept instituions of men as authoritive.
I adhere to And follow Only the lord JESUS .

 

[Albion]

...their own traditions, superimposing them over the word of God and making Gods word null and void By thiee " traditions" .

So you lost me forever the moment you used reference to " them" as if that is some how authoritive.
I dont mean to offend you but i can never accept instituions of men as authoritive.
I adhere to And follow Only the lord JESUS .

The problem with that argument which we have heard innumerable times is that it doesn't matter if the idea or teaching comes straight from the Bible or not; it will still be called "traditions of men" by some people who prefer a different belief--and especially so if the words of Holy Scripture have been guiding the practice or belief since the time of the early church.

 

[Alithis]

The problem with that argument which we have heard innumerable times is that it doesn't matter if the idea or teaching comes straight from the Bible or not; it will still be called "traditions of men" by some people who prefer a different belief--and especially so if the words of Holy Scripture have been guiding the practice or belief since the time of the early church.

and yet in that very scripture we have the book of acts in which what was practiced by the apostles themselves ...was always baptism in the name of JESUS after a person heard the gospel then repented and then as an.action of thier own free will and faith obeyed God and got baptised... We see No other practice in scripture...
Any tradition differing is only a man made one that was begun by men in opposition to scripture and the recorded practice ...
There was a usurping took place and paul warned of it right in the book of acts warning even then that unscrupulous men would come in and teach lies...
Mans traditiond will never be validated over the word of God... But men will be held to account by God.. For every word they have taught others .

 

[Alithis]

Well im out of here...
If the op wanted " only advice " there are advice forums.
When i observe people manipulating cf rules to simply silence others because they are being presented with arguments they cant counter... I know its become a dead thread..

 

[Albion]

Lets not go blaming the inquirer. While there is an advice forum, it is quite understandable how this one might have seemed the more appropriate one for the OP.

 

[Servant of Yeshua]

If you say "many," I guess we cannot second-guess it since who knows how many "many" is or which people that includes?

However, I strenuously disagree with the idea that baptizing a child doesn't bear fruit. While that is possible--just as it is with people who wait until they are teens or adults, remember--I know all sort of people who felt special growing up knowing that they were the children of God and part of the church that their parents took them to and taught them about. To say to them that they aren't eligible, etc. does not seem a good way to insure that the faith will seem personal and/or meaningful to them!

And that is to say nothing about the grace imparted by the sacrament.

Honestly I see what you are saying about using the term "many". Perhaps it is not fair to say "many" without having done a survey with exact numbers. When we dedicated all 3 of our children, it was a serious ceremony. We made promises before God to bring them up in the Lord. We took that promise very seriously as a solemn vow before God. The blessings from God come from parents trusting in the Lord and keeping their promise to bring their children up in the Lord. Every child born is already a child of God because God is the creator and He knit them into the womb. God knew them before He formed them. I am only the temporary caregiver and I am very thankful for that role. Grace is a free gift from God. Doing a study on all the times grace is mentioned in the bible is a wonderful study!!

 

[mama2one]

.

 

[Albion]

Servant of Yahweh,

To be clear, I do not denigrate the solemnity of the dedication ceremony, the commitment of the parents, or any of that.

What I do point out, though, is that it is an entirely artificial ritual, not scriptural, and has nothing over infant baptism which does everything that you describe with your own children as a result of the dedication ceremony. More, in fact.

 

[mama2one]

.

 

[Albion]

There are a batch of dedications mentioned in the Bible, but none of them is parallel to the ceremony that was invented in recent years in order that churches which do not baptize their young might have something ceremonial.

 

[mama2one]

.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

I realize I have been going to a church that does not baptism infants, and that my husband and I really feel strongly about baptizing our infant daughter. We have already dedicated several months to our current church, but I am thinking this may be a deal breaker. I strongly believe in making this covenant to God. I know there are baby dedication ceremonies from some churches, but I don't know if they are quite the same as an infant baptism theologically speaking. The type of church we are currently attending is a reformed Baptist, and in the almost 6 months we have been attending we have not seen or heard of an adult baptism let alone a dedication or infant baptism. I think I already know the answer if I asked them, but that leaves me with this question...what type of churches DO believe in infant baptism?

the baptism thing is, indeed, a deal breaker as you wouldn't be able to come to a consensus without someone's conscience being violated.

suggestions for a church that would baptize your child have been given and I would concur with those who have suggested any Reformed Presbyterian congregation. all the best on your search.

 

[mama2one]

.

 

[zoidar]

This is why no where are we told by God to follow man but to obey God ..
I do not adhere to man made institutions who call themselves " the church" and make their own traditions, superimposing them over the word of God and making Gods word null and void By thiee " traditions" .

So you lost me forever the moment you used reference to " them" as if that is some how authoritive.
I dont mean to offend you but i can never accept instituions of men as authoritive.
I adhere to And follow Only the lord JESUS .

You don't believe the companions of Paul and John followed God? Are they not trustworthy? Do you know that Paul didn't write most of his letters himself, but used secretaries? Why are you then not to trust the early fathers who knew and talked to the apostles? If you don't trust in traditon of Church we don't have a Bible. The Bible was put together by tradition of the Church, what book would and wouldn't be in the cannon. That's one reason why "Bible only" is a problem.

The other problem is that the Bible needs to be interpreted. How can we do that without the help of the early Christians? Some people believe more in Luther or Calvin then the early Christians. Others believe they interpret it better than the early Christians themselves, with the Holy Spirit. That's very problematic, because often two people who "know" right interpretation through the "Holy Spirit" have different ideas of the same text.

 

[PROPHECYKID]

I realize I have been going to a church that does not baptism infants, and that my husband and I really feel strongly about baptizing our infant daughter. We have already dedicated several months to our current church, but I am thinking this may be a deal breaker. I strongly believe in making this covenant to God. I know there are baby dedication ceremonies from some churches, but I don't know if they are quite the same as an infant baptism theologically speaking. The type of church we are currently attending is a reformed Baptist, and in the almost 6 months we have been attending we have not seen or heard of an adult baptism let alone a dedication or infant baptism. I think I already know the answer if I asked them, but that leaves me with this question...what type of churches DO believe in infant baptism?

The question you should be asking is if what you feel strongly about is biblical or not. What scriptures can you use to to support your feeling?