At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
I was baptised when I was a small baby. My parents automatically dedicated my life to Christianity by doing so. In short, I wasn't given a chance to think for myself. Do you think parents should wait until an offspring can think for him/herself before being baptised?
No, it is part of the faith to baptise or dedicate the baby and teach them in the Christian faith. If as a adult they wish to be re-bapitised they can always be if they change to a different christian faith.
As a Christian ( sorry to others) we beleive ours is the only correct and true faith, so giving out children a option of not being saved would be almost unforgivable since as a parent we want the best for our children,
As a Christian, to do otherwise would be just unacceptable within the teachings of the church itself.
Christian parents who have their baby baptised make a promise at that time that they will teach the child the beliefs their church has. This gives the child a base, a foundation. When the child is older, he will read and discuss and learn about other beliefs.
He isn't bound to Christianity for the rest of his life, since he has the freedom to choose from other paths. His upbringing in Christianity (or in some religion) gives him a basis for comparison. Had he been brought up with no religion, he would have to figure out first what he himself believes (if anything) about who he is, why he is on earth, and where he is going after death.
If he is interested in finding a religion (or a religion other than Christianity), he then would try to match his beliefs to something, try to find a fit with another religion.
Faith is not automatic, but it is a choice each makes for thierself at some point and time, but it is the parents duty to teach and raise them in that faith,
I was baptised when I was a small baby. My parents automatically dedicated my life to Christianity by doing so. In short, I wasn't given a chance to think for myself. Do you think parents should wait until an offspring can think for him/herself before being baptised?
Jeff
I'm not going to say that a mother who is concerned for her baby is necessarily committing some sort of a sin if she has her baby baptized but I personally believe that it is a waste of time. It might make her feel better but baptism should be a choice made by someone who has come of age. The age of accountability in the Bible is 20 years old. However, I have known teens who felt very strongly about being baptized. If they feel that strongly, then, by all means, be baptized. But I believe that they ought to be re-baptized as an adult if they still believe in Jesus Christ.
The Bible says, "repent, and be baptized..." A baby is too young to understand what repentance is and, therefore, too young to understand what baptism is. Also, one of the results of being baptized is that you receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. I bet that there have been many babies who have been baptized prematurely who have become anything but Christians in their adult lives. Just a guess.
Some might say "Ah, but weren't babies circumcised at the age of 8 days?" Yes. The reason being that vitamin K is at its peak at that age (vitamin K being a blood clotting agent). Also, circumcision was done for sanitation purposes.
Sorry to disagree action jackson but where in the world did you ever hear that the bible says age of accountablilty is 20, first there is no such thing, and if it was, it would not be 20, Twenty was considered almost middle age in bible times, marriage for girls would have been at 13 or 14.
But for those that do beleive in infant baptism, we feel there is orginal sin that a baby is born with, and that baptism is needed to save them from that sin. And that is a saving thing for them till they become of age, but that is only 12 or 13.
We see in the bible where a man had his entire household baptised.
But circumcision was in the old testement and was done for religious reason.
I am sorry but you are misquoting the bible badly and basing your ideas on incorrect information.
AJ -- So the Holy Spirit has no involvement with a baby's baptism, only with an adult's? If you read the words used during infant baptism, you will learn why babies are baptized and what the Biblical support is for that.
There are lots of adults who were baptized as adults who are no longer involved in a church or are active Christians. Baptism isn't a magic bullet.
Sorry to disagree action jackson but where in the world did you ever hear that the bible says age of accountablilty is 20, first there is no such thing, and if it was, it would not be 20, Twenty was considered almost middle age in bible times, marriage for girls would have been at 13 or 14.
But for those that do beleive in infant baptism, we feel there is orginal sin that a baby is born with, and that baptism is needed to save them from that sin. And that is a saving thing for them till they become of age, but that is only 12 or 13.
We see in the bible where a man had his entire household baptised.
But circumcision was in the old testement and was done for religious reason.
I am sorry but you are misquoting the bible badly and basing your ideas on incorrect information.
Numbers 1:3 "From twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel; thou and Aaron shall number them by their armies."
Exodus 38:26: "A bekah for every man, that is, half a shekel, after the shekel of the sanctuary, for every one that went to be numbered, from twenty years old and upward, for six hundred thousand and three thousand and five hundred and fifty men."
Twenty years old was the age that a man was considered old enough to go into combat and the age Israelites were counted when numbering the children of Israel. That correlates to our law today that considers ages 18 and 21 as ages of accountability.
Middle age for some of the men of the Bible was 400 years or so. But even if 20 was middle age for the men that came later, most had still not reached maturity until they reached the approximate age of twenty. Why did God choose that age to number the children of Israel or to send them off to war? Because God knows the growth and maturity levels of mankind.
So if a baby is aborted prior to being babtized, will that helpless child go to hell in his or her sin? I agree that humans are born in sin. They are very self-centered and selfish. They cry when they want something for themselves. But can we hold them accountable for that sin? Unless a man be born again of the Spirit he shall not see the Kingdom of God.
I fully understand that there are a whole bunch of different beliefs out there but you said that I am misquoting the Bible badly. You also said that there is no such thing as the age of twenty being an age of accountability. I showed two of several verses that say otherwise. Therefore, before you smear me too badly, perhaps you ought to give me a chance to document some of my beliefs. I always try to follow what the Word of God says. When I find that I've made a mistake, I will step up to the plate and say so.
AJ -- So the Holy Spirit has no involvement with a baby's baptism, only with an adult's? If you read the words used during infant baptism, you will learn why babies are baptized and what the Biblical support is for that.
There are lots of adults who were baptized as adults who are no longer involved in a church or are active Christians. Baptism isn't a magic bullet.
Agreed. Baptism is not a magic bullet. That's why Peter in Acts 2:38 said, "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."
When I look closely at that verse, I see an order of things. 1) Repent 2) Be baptized
3) Receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (in that order). Now some may say that I am badly misquoting the Bible. I will admit that I do need new glasses. If I have misquoted the above verse, please correct me. Now if those "lots of adults who were baptized" that you spoke of in your post did not repent prior to being baptized, then it comes as no surprise that they are no longer "active Christians." If they didn't first "repent" as Peter instructed, then they probably did not receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
I would guess that they sincerely repented, but perhaps the things of the world slowly but surely pulled them away from the church. We certainly can't say their repentance hadn't been real or heartfelt at that time.
That takes us to the "once saved, always saved" conundrum. Humans always have the choice to reject God.
Linear Mode
