[Wondergirl]

I don't believe that the baptism that occurred during infancy takes the place of that.

Ok, no problemo. That person can asked to be rebaptized as an older child or adult and make the decision his own. No one has said that, after being baptized as an infant, a person cannot be baptized a second time at his own request.

Baptizing an infant also (we hope) jumpstarts parents, relatives, and friends into considering that child to have been dedicated to God and encourages their responsibility to guide the child to grow in grace. Unfortunately, too often baptism is merely a "christening," a naming ceremony and occasion for a big family dinner with gifts for the baby.

[ActionJackson]

Ok, no problemo. That person can asked to be rebaptized as an older child or adult and make the decision his own. No one has said that, after being baptized as an infant, a person cannot be baptized a second time at his own request.

Baptizing an infant also (we hope) jumpstarts parents, relatives, and friends into considering that child to have been dedicated to God and encourages their responsibility to guide the child to grow in grace. Unfortunately, too often baptism is merely a "christening," a naming ceremony and occasion for a big family dinner with gifts for the baby.

I'm glad we're on the same page. I have no doubt that you love Christ and want to live a Christian life. God bless you, your family, and your church.

[Hope12]

Hello Jeff Logan,
Everyone who has ever thought of his own or his child’s baptism should be vitally interested in this question. There is no doubt that baptism is a requirement for Christians. Jesus Christ himself was baptized in the Jordan River. But what is the Bible’s view of baptizing babies, which is usually done with a few drops of water? Does an unbaptized baby that dies suffer in a world beyond in what has been called “perdition”? Is there hope for unbaptized babies who die?

Just when infant baptism began is not known with preciseness, but it was definitely after the death of the apostles of Jesus Christ that the practice appeared. The Encyclopœdia Britannica Explains: “The whole early period knows baptism only for adults, who join themselves of their own resolve to the Christian community. Infant baptism appears sporadically towards the end of the second century and was practiced also during the following centuries, yet only as an exception.” Vol. 3, page 84.

This same authority shows that it was nearly four hundred years after the time of Jesus Christ that baby baptism came into considerable prominence, due largely to the influence of Augustine: “The theorist of baptism who has been most influential for succeeding ages is S. Augustine.” What did he believe? “Infants dying unbaptized are excluded from the Kingdom of heaven in consequence of original sin, and live in the world beyond in some form of perdition, even if of the mildest kind. Baptism has effect upon original sin, in the sense that it takes from it its character of guilt.”

But what of the view that infant baptism is of apostolic origin? The religious historian Neander writes of the first-century Christians: “Faith and baptism were always connected with one another; and thus it is in the highest degree probable that baptism was performed only in the instances where both could meet together, and that the practice of infant baptism was unknown at this period. . . . That not till so late a period as (at least certainly not earlier than) Irenaeus, a trace of infant baptism appears, and that it first became recognized as an apostolic tradition in the course of the third century, is evidence rather against than for the admission of apostolic origin.”—Planting and Training of the Christian Church.

Did things change with the institution of Christian baptism, so that now babies should be baptized? To answer that question we must ask: How was Jesus baptized? Why was Jesus baptized?

The Son of God went to John the Baptist and, to John’s surprise, asked to be baptized. John did not understand why Jesus should be baptized and said: “I am the one needing to be baptized by you, and are you coming to me?” (Matt. 3:14) Jesus stood firm in his request and John obeyed, dipping Jesus under the water as he had been dipping others.
Jesus was not merely sprinkled but was down in the water: “Jesus immediately came up from the water.”—Matt. 3:16.

Why did Jesus get baptized? It could not have been for the removal of sins or for a sign that he had repented of sins, because he was “guileless, undefiled, separated from the sinners.” And “he committed no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth.” A perfect man—yet Jesus was baptized!—Heb. 7:26; 1 Pet. 2:22.

The sinless man Jesus got baptized because of his desire to do his Father’s will. Explaining this, the apostle Paul applies Psalm 40:6-8 to Jesus Christ: “Look! I am come (in the roll of the book it is written about me) to do your will, O God.” (Heb. 10:4-7) Jesus was baptized because he wanted to symbolize his dedication to do Jehovah’s will; and he proved that he had made this dedication by turning his back on carpenter work and beginning the ministry. Jesus made this dedication as a full-grown man: “Jesus also was baptized. . . . Furthermore, Jesus himself, when he commenced his work, was about thirty years old.”—Luke 3:21, 23.

Christian baptism today should be performed in imitation of the example that Jesus Christ set. Thus the significance of Jesus’ baptism adheres to the baptism of his followers today. The baptism of a Christian serves as a symbol that one has dedicated his life to God and has vowed, like Jesus: ‘I am come to do your will, O God.’

Those who believe that water baptism washes away sins often quote Acts 2:38 as support. This verse contains the apostle Peter’s words: “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins.” Here Peter, at Pentecost, was talking to those who had sinned against Jesus. How could they gain forgiveness? They needed to repent and to accept Jesus and his cleansing blood and show this by getting baptized in Jesus’ name. Not that the baptismal water would itself wash away their sins; if that were the case they would have had to get rebaptized after every new sin. But as Acts 22:16 explains: “Now why are you delaying? Rise, get baptized and wash your sins away by your calling upon his name.” How are sins washed away? Not by the water itself but by “calling upon his name.”

So water baptism for Christians is a symbol of having repented of sins and of having accepted Jesus and of having dedicated one’s life to do God’s will
faithfully, as Jesus did.

The command given by Jesus was: “Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.”Matt. 28:19, 20.
Did this term “people of all the nations” include babies? No it did not,that would have changed the meaning of the baptism Jesus instituted! Babies cannot make a personal dedication to God, based on faith and knowledge. Further, baptism is not that which removes one’s sins. The apostle wrote: “Unless blood is poured out no forgiveness takes place.” Heb. 9:22 It is Christ’s ransom sacrifice and the Christian’s repentance and acceptance of that ransom, as proved by his changed course in life, that makes such forgiveness possible. Moreover, the apostle explains: “For ‘anyone that calls upon the name of Jehovah will be saved’. However, how will they call upon him in whom they have not put faith? How, in turn, will they put faith in him of whom they have not heard? How, in turn, will they hear without someone to preach?” (Rom. 10:13, 14) No, the “people of all the nations” that were to be baptized did not include babies; they had to grow up first so they could understand the value of Jesus’ ransom sacrifice and put their faith in it, after hearing about the Messiah.

Search as you will in the Holy Scriptures, you will never find a single example of the baptism of a newborn baby! Supporters of baby baptism try to defend the doctrine by saying that entire families accepted Christianity in the apostles’ days and were baptized. But if these families included tiny babies, the apostles failed to say so,despite the excellent opportunity this would have given them to underline the importance of such a doctrine.

Instead of being concerned about baptizing their baby, Christian parents will heed the advice of the inspired Scriptures and bring up their child “in the discipline and authoritative advice of God. Eph. 6:4
Teach the child the will and commandments of God. Do as the inspired proverb says: “Train up a boy according to the way for him; even when he grows old he will not turn aside from it.” Prov. 22:6

If parents have been diligent to teach their children God’s truth, then when they grow up they will be able to make a personal decision to dedicate their lives to God. After having made this decision, they will, like Jesus, symbolize that dedication by water immersion. By being faithful to that dedication, they will prove worthy of enjoying everlasting life on earth, under the kingdom of heaven. Did you note that we are to be baptized as Jesus was when he was baptized at the Jordon. Complete emersion and not sprinkling on the head.

What if the child dies before it is old enough to make a personal dedication to God? We can be sure that since God views the children of believing parents as “holy,” any child of such faithful parents who dies will be certain to be resurrected from the dead. Parents who obey and follow Jesus’ example never go wrong. Even the evildoer who was put to death on the torture stake next to Jesus was promised a resurrection and the opportunity of gaining everlasting life in the righteous new world. “You will be with me in Paradise,” said Jesus. Luke 23:43

To real Christians the words and example of Jesus Christ carry far more authority than the traditions of men. Real Christians follow the example of Christ closely. They see from a study of the Holy Scriptures overwhelming evidence that
(1) no baby was ever baptized by the first-century Christians;
(2) Christian baptism is not for washing away sins but is a symbol of a personal dedication to God, and
(3) children of believing parents, without baptism, are viewed by God as “holy.”

Babies, then, need not and should not be baptized. Baptism is a ceremony that marks a personal commitment, a commitment that no one else can make for you and that certainly a babe-in-arms cannot make for itself. The Biblical doctrine of water baptism, and therefore the one water baptism that God really accepts, remains the same today as it was when Jesus began it.

Thanks for reading this and take care,
Hope12

[speechlesstx]

Personally Jeff, I don't see the point in infant baptism. Seems to me all it does is get the child wet. The biblical model for baptism is an act obedience following conviction of sin, repentance of sin and confession of Christ as Lord and Savior.

Acts 2:38-39 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will call."

Acts 8:12-13 But when they believed Philip as he preached the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Simon himself believed and was baptized.

Acts 8:36-38 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 baptized? And Philip 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. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

In Acts 19, the Ephesians there had received the baptism of John, and Paul told them John said "to believe in the one coming after him," and "on hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus."

Clearly, baptism is an act of obedience following acceptance of Christ. Parents are not proxies of the child's faith, and so I believe infant baptism is only for the parents sense of security. I believe it does nothing for the child as far as "saving" the child goes. I'd be interested to see a better scriptural answer to the contrary.

[ActionJackson]

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 :)

"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." Acts 2:38. Not the chronological order of events: Belief, repentance, baptism, the gift of the Holy Ghost.

THE BAPTISM OR OUR LORD, SAVIOUR, AND EXAMPLE

"And Jesus, when He was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto Him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon Him." Matthew 3:16 Please note the order of events: Belief followed by baptism followed by the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Christ, our example, was not baptized as an infant but as a grown man nearly 30 years old.

[moomin007]

Hi Jeff,
I was Christened as a baby. When I was older I made the decision to get Baptised as I felt that was what God was callingme to do.
Yours in Christ
Moomin

[ActionJackson]

[QUOTE=speechlesstx]Personally Jeff, I don't see the point in infant baptism. Seems to me all it does is get the child wet. The biblical model for baptism is an act obedience following conviction of sin, repentance of sin and confession of Christ as Lord and Savior.

If it is okay to baptize a baby without that human soul having made the choice on his or her own, then is it okay to baptize an adult who hasn't made that choice yet? Let's say I want an alcoholic that I find laying in the gutter to have the gift of the Holy Ghost. Should I scoop the guy up, take him to a body of water, toss him in, say some words over him, then dry him off all while he was unconscious? How would that be any different than baptizing a baby who isn't really conscious of what is going on?

[Fr_Chuck]

Ok, so some of you don't believe as the majority of Christians do in infant baptism, so don't,

But for the ones that do, it is important, if you don't, you are not doing an important duty in your Christian life as a parent.

And of course no one is listing the verses where entire families were baptised, nice to leave out verses that don't agree with what you say.


There is no reason to dishonor the beliefs of others by such remarks.
Christ of course was dedicated in the temple ( and he was not baptised since that was only started after he started his ministry)

And by christian legal terms, Christ was not actually baptised, since he was not baptised in the name of the father, son and holy spirit as required by the new testement to be a valid baptism, so by the bible itself, Christ was not baptised, John was baptising but not in the name of Jesus, so by today's christian churches it was not any more a baptism, than the dedication that Jesus had as an infant, so in fact, I could challenge that Jesus was "baptised" since he was dedicated as an infant.

[Tessy777]

Ok, so some of you don't beleive as the majority of Christians do in infant baptism, so don't,

But for the ones that do, it is important, if you don't, you are not doing an important duty in your Christian life as a parent.

And of course no one is listing the verses where entire families were baptised, nice to leave out verses that don't agree with what you say.


There is no reason to dishonor the beliefs of others by such remarks.
Christ of course was dedicated in the temple ( and he was not baptised since that was only started after he started his ministry)

And by christian legal terms, Christ was not actually baptised, since he was not baptised in the name of the father, son and holy spirit as required by the new testement to be a valid baptism, so by the bible itself, Christ was not baptised, John was baptising but not in the name of Jesus, so by todays christian churches it was not any more a baptism, than the dedication that Jesus had as an infant, so in fact, I could challenge that Jesus was "baptised" since he was dedicated as an infant.

FR_ chuck,

What verse do you use for infant baptism? Just curious. I don't have a problem with a dedication to Christ. I just think a child should be able to understand what it means. Both of my boys were dedicated and then they made the decision themselves when they were older.

[ActionJackson]

Ok, so some of you don't beleive as the majority of Christians do in infant baptism, so don't, But for the ones that do, it is important, if you don't, you are not doing an important duty in your Christian life as a parent. And of course no one is listing the verses where entire families were baptised, nice to leave out verses that don't agree with what you say.

First, I'm not interested in what the majority thinks. Simply not interested. Some have listed the verses of which you speak. You didn't but others have. There is still some question as to whether or not "household" included those who were unable to make a conscious decision or those old enough to understand what they were agreeing to.

There is no reason to dishonor the beliefs of others by such remarks.
Christ of course was dedicated in the temple ( and he was not baptised since that was only started after he started his ministry)

I'm not dishonoring your belief. I'm asking how baptizing an unconscious adult is any different that baptizing a new born infant.

And by christian legal terms, Christ was not actually baptised, since he was not baptised in the name of the father, son and holy spirit as required by the new testement to be a valid baptism, so by the bible itself, Christ was not baptised,

First of all, I thought that New Testament Christians aren't under the Law anymore. At least that's what the prevailing belief seems to be. Secondly, "Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. But John forbad Him, saying, 'I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou to me?' And Jesus answering said unto him, 'Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.' Then he suffered Him. And Jesus, when He was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon Him." Matthew 3:13-16
Fr_Chuck says Christ was not baptized and the Bible says He was. Hmmm, which conclusion should I choose?

John was baptising but not in the name of Jesus, so by todays christian churches it was not any more a baptism, than the dedication that Jesus had as an infant, so in fact, I could challenge that Jesus was "baptised" since he was dedicated as an infant.

John baptized Jesus at Jesus' command. Jesus was fully immersed in water (the very definition of baptism) and He received the gift of the Holy Ghost (a promise given to those who accept Christ and are baptized in Christ's name). Secondly, Christ (our living example) still wasn't baptized as an infant regardless of whether or not you believe that His adult baptism was "legal" or not. "Dedicated as an infant?" Chapter and verse please. And even if He was "dedicated" how does that take the place of baptism?

I've been accused of "badly" quoting the Bible. In this case, I quoted the Bible verbatim.