Baby Baptism

[Lindsey-Loo]

And how at all it is scriptual,

That's just it. It's not.

 

[Katzpur]

They were even trying to baptise dead people before the ink dried on the NT.

Actually, they weren't. I'm not aware of any of the early Christians who baptized dead people, but the Saints at Corinth clearly performed baptisms by proxy for and in behalf of their deceased ancestors, who would have a choice as to whether or not to accept this ordinance as they awaited their own resurrections. The Apostasy actually occured a bit later on, and the ancient practice was discontinued.

 

[PHOTOTAKER]

how do infents recive the holy ghost is there another part or do they recive the holy ghost right when they get baptized? why do they need baptisom when in the eye of God and Jesus Chritst they are all clean from sin? if you don't practice infent baptims please do not answer...

 

[Doktormartini]

I would like to know why when my mom getting babtized it was to remove original sin, but me getting baptized was like a promis to my mom, to raise me Catholic (which she obviously failed at).

My mom told me that they changed it!

 

[dawny0826]

We do baby dedications as opposed to baby baptisms, although in our church, our Pastor would NEVER oppose to full family baptisms...babies and all.

My children were dedicated about a month ago. In the dedication...my husband and I make a promise before God and our congregation that we will raise our children on biblical principles and raise them within the church.

Typically, we believe as many protestants do...that baptism represents the rebirth that one experiences when they accept Christ as their saviour. My children are not old enough to understand that.

BUT I see nothing biblically which suggests it would be wrongful to allow them to be baptized as infants. I think it's a BEAUTIFUL gesture. We simply chose a dedication over water baptism and pray that as they grow older and hopefully accept Christ...they will decide to be baptized in water.

I know my response here is pretty random...

I'm good at that...

 

[Katzpur]

We do baby dedications as opposed to baby baptisms, although in our church, our Pastor would NEVER oppose to full family baptisms...babies and all.

My children were dedicated about a month ago. In the dedication...my husband and I make a promise before God and our congregation that we will raise our children on biblical principles and raise them within the church.

We do something similar to that, Dawny. We call it giving the baby a name and a blessing. It is done in front of the congregation. A prayer is offered, usually by the baby's father, stating the name by which the child will be known throughout his life and asking God's blessings of health, wisdom, righteousness, etc. upon the baby, and His guidance for the baby's parents in raising him.

 

[cardero]

NetDoc writes: Interesting Cardero,

I wonder how many of us remember that infant baptism? I was baptised in a small Columbian parish when I was 7 days old. I am not sure what signifigance the 7 days represented and my mother does not remember either (she was never Catholic).

Now, I DO remember that late night baptism during late Fall at the Crossroads church of Christ. I remember distinctly the sins I repented of and the sorrow and shame I felt for them. It was MY decision to die that night: not my Mother or Father's decision. Mine and mine alone! I remember how chilly the water was and how I just didn't care.

I was also baptized at an early age but later converted to Patrickism. I think this may have stemmed from my upbringing. My mother was disassociated with the church and was very lenient in me finding my own voice and my own path towards GOD. I believe this is a search that everyone must take when it becomes comprehendible. As far as baptism goes at an older age, I am also familiar that this is a practice that some religions require.

If I may share another passage in which the baptism of Jesus is referred to:

“As for baptism, this was Jesus' idea of establishing a covenant with ME. Was it important? He thought so. The symbolism of baptism has ALL(WAYS) been a cleansing or a fresh start, whether it BE through water or through fire. Is baptism necessary? That depends on the individual. Do I demand or expect it? No. I LOVE you either way.”

HELLO IT’S ME: An Interview With GOD
Chapter: Jesus The Christ
Pg: 120

 

[sojourner]

I have no problem with "believer's baptism." But, baptism may be more multi-faceted than we're giving it credit for. What is baptism for? Remission of sin? To seal a covenant? An initiation into the Body of Christ? It's all of those things (and more!) Basically, baptism is a sacrament -- an "outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace." Baptism is one of those places where God is expecially present to us, and in which our souls are revived and nourished.

My question for all of the die-hard "believer's baptism" folks to think about is this:

I think we all agree that all are in need of Christ. I think we all agree that all are in need of spiritual grace and spiritual nourishment. I think we can all agree that all need adequate food, if we are to live.

We feed babies because they need food. Yet, babies are unaware of the physical importance of food. They are unaware of the healthful benefits of food. They are unaware of how their bodies process food. But we still feed them, because we do know those things and we want to take care of them.

What's so different about baptism? And communing? Shouldn't we, as faithful parents, take care of our children spiritually, as well as physically, giving them the spiritual nourishment their little souls need, just as we feed their little tummies? Infant baptism isn't so much about "washing" as it is about "sustenance."

Many times we bathe infants, not because they are particularly dirty, but because baths revive the body...they feel good. Does not baptism revive the soul, whether it's dirty or not?

Something to think about...

 

[Scuba Pete]

Yet, babies are unaware of the physical importance of food.

Why on EARTH do they cry when hungry then? Sorry, but this alone disproves your entire premise.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Many times we bathe infants, not because they are particularly dirty, but because baths revive the body...they feel good. Does not baptism revive the soul, whether it's dirty or not?

Do you perform CPR on a living person? Why then would you need to clean that which is not dirty? The child's soul needs no revival, which is why Jesus said that they were the stuff heaven is made of.

 

[SoyLeche]

Shouldn't we, as faithful parents, take care of our children spiritually, as well as physically, giving them the spiritual nourishment their little souls need, just as we feed their little tummies? Infant baptism isn't so much about "washing" as it is about "sustenance."

By all means, take care of your children spiritually. Read them betime stories about Jesus. Make your home a temple where the Holy Spirit can dwell. Baptism is, however, about "washing" - not "sustenance".

 

[sojourner]

Do you perform CPR on a living person? Why then would you need to clean that which is not dirty? The child's soul needs no revival, which is why Jesus said that they were the stuff heaven is made of.

You misunderstood what I said. Baths are not always about being dirty. Sometimes they just refresh us. Souls, whether child or adult, are always in need of refreshment. And baptism is one way of doing that. In my church, we had little fonts by the door. I'd always "splash a little" on me when entering and leaving, to remind myself of my baptism and the refreshment it brought to me.

Baptism is, however, about "washing" - not "sustenance".

I think it encompasses both. The Holy Spirit (which is our Sustainer) is imparted at baptism.

 

[Scuba Pete]

There is only one baptism:

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. NIV

Baptism is an act of FAITH. How can an infant have faith?

Galations 3:23 Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ 25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.

26 You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. that we might be justified by faith. NIV

 

[sojourner]

Baptism can be an expression of faith on the part of the parents, who are responsible for their children, both physically and spiritually.

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

And, one could add here, infant or adult...

 

[Scuba Pete]

But he didn't. So, again I ask... can an infant have faith? Can an infant repent? Can an infant confess that Jesus is Lord?

 

[sojourner]

But he didn't. So, again I ask... can an infant have faith? Can an infant repent? Can an infant confess that Jesus is Lord?

Does an infant have a soul? Can the Spirit intercede for an infant, when the infant does not have words to intercede for itself? Physical age or ability is not cogent to the soul.

What if an adult had cognition to know about faith and to know about right and wrong, but was physically incapable of communicating through handicap? They could not profess their faith. Could they still be baptised, even though they were incapable of professing their faith?

What if someone was physically incapable of being immersed? Would they still be baptized if they were sprinkled?

I think we're assigning too many legalistic values to a sacramental and spiritual act. If the Spirit moves a parent to baptize their child, on what grounds can we refute that?

 

[Scuba Pete]

Does this mean that you WON'T answer my questions? Why is that?

 

[BUDDY]

What if an adult had cognition to know about faith and to know about right and wrong, but was physically incapable of communicating through handicap? They could not profess their faith. Could they still be baptised, even though they were incapable of professing their faith?

I believe that God would have to make that decision, not us, and being the merciful being that He is, I think you know what the answer would be. That does not change the fact that for those who are able, it is imperitive that we be obedient and be baptised upon hearing the word, believing in Jesus, repenting from a life of sin, and confessing that he is Lord and Savior.

What if someone was physically incapable of being immersed? Would they still be baptized if they were sprinkled?

I think that the eternal life is more important than the physical life, and that somehow and someway, a person wanting to be baptised would be able to. I have never heard of a situation where a person could absolutely not find a way to be baptised by water.

 

[Quiddity]

But he didn't. So, again I ask... can an infant have faith? Can an infant repent? Can an infant confess that Jesus is Lord?

No....

 

[sojourner]

Does this mean that you WON'T answer my questions? Why is that?

It means that, while your questions address the legalism that the Church has assigned to baptism, they are not compelling to the deeper meaning of baptism, which, to my mind, is the real issue here.

I think that the parents, who are responsible for the child, express faith for the child, repent for the child, confess for the child who cannot speak for itself. If humanity demands that some sort of verbal interaction take place here, then the parents will have to do it. But we have to remember some things. 1) It is not the water that is efficacious. 2) It is not the words that are efficacious. 3) It is neither the parents, nor the Church that is efficacious. 4) It is not the faith of the candidate that is efficacious. 5) It is the Spirit that is efficacious here.