A question for some non-catholic,,,The Catholic Church Baptizes infants.

[Nicea325]

So just because something has been done for 350 years before the Bible was put together don’t make it correct.

And it is also not correct to change it to something else fabricated up 1500 + years later.

What makes you right and me wrong?

No one is saying you are wrong.Why would we? The RCC baptizes adults all the time who make the decision to be baptized and receive Christ…so what is the problem?

You go follow your Baptist church and we follow our church…got it?

** See it can go eather way.**

Then why so much fuss?

Whether Catholics/Orthodoxs baptize infants should have no bearing on your faith,so why so much huffing and puffing?

 

[Dokimas]

Not at all.
Like I told RevKev - open not just your mind but your HEART as well and you might see Jesus in an entirely new light.

The Jesus I have opened my heart to so love infants they don’t have to be baptized.

 

[rev_kevin]

**What have you proven nada. The only thing you can say it “the whole household” which proves nothing. **

And you too have proven ZILCH! You believe because ‘adults’ were baptized it PROVES only adults can be baptized,especially when they make a ‘decision’ to receive Jesus. You make an assumption and want it to a standard. The text does not state ONLY adults are to be baptized.I have given you Scripture that says, not quoting now, they have made a decision to be baptized, I did not say adults only

Again,NO WHERE does Scripture RESTRICT baptism to persons who can only reason.Once again they made the decision to be baptized, They were able to reason what was being taught to them and made the decision to be baptized.

Again,no WHERE does Scripture FORBID or CONDEMN infant baptisms! And no where does it say you should,

Again,there is not ONE example of a children being raised in a Christian household and being baptized only when he or she makes the ‘decision’ to receive Jesus.Children of reason can make the decision.

Finally, I am shocked that you who claim to be an ex-Catholic ( I seriously question) should know Scripture does not teach everything must be explicitly taught. Where is the Trinity explicitly taught,especially about the three distinct persons of the Trintiy? Who taught us its complex nature? The CHURCH…EXPLICITLY and scripture…IMPLICITLY.
Well do you want the name of the Catholic school I attended, the name of the church I belonged to. Do you want proof that I went through all the Sacriments, how about what semenary I went to for about a year? Just because I disagree with some of the teaching, beliefe of the CC don’t mean I don’t understand the CC. Why do you think I’m not a Catholic anymore? I noticed you used the old stand-by “where does it say the word Trinity in the Bible” Can you come up with something elesl, really that one is getting old.

**I never stated that I was my own pope or authority. See I don’t cover up child molestation like the pope did. **

How do we know? Do we live with you 24/7 to confirm you do not cover up any crimes? And you believe Protestants or Baptists are free of crimes,you have another thing coming.
You don’t just like I don’t know if you have. No they are not free from crimes. They don’t profess the same things that the CC does as being a holyer then though religion.

**So I consider calling me a pope as a insult. My opinon is only twisted because it don’t fall into what you believe. **

I do not what is more of an insult? Being the pope or someone who follows a church founded by mere mortals centuries later teaching novel doctrines such as adult-baptism only?

Being the pope who covers up priests who molest children the ones they profess to protect.

 

[rev_kevin]

So just because something has been done for 350 years before the Bible was put together don’t make it correct.

And it is also not correct to change it to something else fabricated up 1500 + years later.
A lot of things have been changed afer many years, like smoking, many years ago it could not harm you and now we know different.

What makes you right and me wrong?

No one is saying you are wrong.Why would we? The RCC baptizes adults all the time who make the decision to be baptized and receive Christ…so what is the problem?
We have been told time and time again here that we are wrong.

You go follow your Baptist church and we follow our church…got it?
I will, but remember a Catholic started this thread “A question for some non-Catholics…”

** See it can go eather way.**

Then why so much fuss?
The question was asked of non-Catholics and when we answered it we were wrong and that is how the fuss started.

Whether Catholics/Orthodoxs baptize infants should have no bearing on your faith,so why so much huffing and puffing?

Its a debate kinda sight. Its not only the non-Catholics huffing and puffing the Catholics are just a quilty.

 

[Bill_Pick]

I’m not sure what disciple you’re speaking about. I was speaking about the ones that was in the post I quoted.

He also said in John 3:5, “…unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit HE CANNOT ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF GOD.”

 

[Nicea325]

So just because something has been done for 350 years before the Bible was put together don’t make it correct.

And it is also not correct to change it to something else fabricated up 1500 + years later.

**A lot of things have been changed afer many years, like smoking, many years ago it could not harm you and now we know different. **

The issue here is baptisms,not smoking. BTW: Since when in the past was smoking not harmful to one’s health? Smoking WAS always bad.

What makes you right and me wrong?

No one is saying you are wrong.Why would we? The RCC baptizes adults all the time who make the decision to be baptized and receive Christ…so what is the problem?

We have been told time and time again here that we are wrong.

Nope! Because millions of Catholics have done the same.

You go follow your Baptist church and we follow our church…got it?

I will, but remember a Catholic started this thread "A question for some non-Catholics…"

Okay and? You want to prove that the Baptists are correct and they are not,so you can forget trying to convince us. When did the Baptist church pop into the world?

See it can go eather way.

Then why so much fuss?

The question was asked of non-Catholics and when we answered it we were wrong and that is how the fuss started.

No,Baptists are not wrong for baptizing,the have a belief that baptism is soley for those who want to receive Jesus. We do not accept it and never will…get over it!

Whether Catholics/Orthodoxs baptize infants should have no bearing on your faith,so why so much huffing and puffing?

**Its a debate kinda sight. Its not only the non-Catholics huffing and puffing the Catholics are just a quilty. **

U-huh and debating does not retort to the same line you use: Quit asking a question when a question has been given. You keep on dodging my question.

It is has been answered enough,don’t like it move on. Go to a Baptist only board.

 

[Nicea325]

And you too have proven ZILCH! You believe because ‘adults’ were baptized it PROVES only adults can be baptized,especially when they make a ‘decision’ to receive Jesus. You make an assumption and want it to a standard. The text does not state ONLY adults are to be baptized.

**I have given you Scripture that says, not quoting now, they have made a decision to be baptized, I did not say adults only **

I know you have and I have told you numerous times they were adult converts,since there where no cradle Christians.What part do you not comprehend? I read scripture everyday and I know the verses.But guess what? It does not state it is RESTRICTED to a believers-only who can reason. But you keep on insisting it is the only lgeit method.

What happens to a 35 year old man with down syndrome? Tell me at what stage in his life does he make the DECISION to be baptized?

Again,NO WHERE does Scripture RESTRICT baptism to persons who can only reason.Once again they made the decision to be baptized, They were able to reason what was being taught to them and made the decision to be baptized.

Again,no WHERE does Scripture FORBID or CONDEMN infant baptisms!

**And no where does it say you should, **

Oh I see! Because it does not say it in clear cut words it is false? I already explained the household issue and ignore it,makes no difference to me. Where does it say: Only adults who can reason WILL be baptized?

Again,there is not ONE example of a children being raised in a Christian household and being baptized only when he or she makes the ‘decision’ to receive Jesus.

Children of reason can make the decision.

And the age of reason is not CONCLUSIVE. You know for a fact a 7 year old is intelligent enough to ‘reason’ as an adult? And BTW: early church history is not on your side either.

Finally, I am shocked that you who claim to be an ex-Catholic ( I seriously question) should know Scripture does not teach everything must be explicitly taught. Where is the Trinity explicitly taught,especially about the three distinct persons of the Trintiy? Who taught us its complex nature? The CHURCH…EXPLICITLY and scripture…IMPLICITLY.
Well do you want the name of the Catholic school I attended, the name of the church I belonged to.

** Do you want proof that I went through all the Sacriments, how about what semenary I went to for about a year? Just because I disagree with some of the teaching, beliefe of the CC don’t mean I don’t understand the CC. Why do you think I’m not a Catholic anymore?**

Yup! The heart of a Protestant: I do not agree so I will do it my way and scripture will say what I think it is. Just like daddy Luther

Do the THOUSANDS of different churches not ring a bell? All human founders. Precisely why I am not a Protestant.

I noticed you used the old stand-by “where does it say the word Trinity in the Bible” Can you come up with something elesl, really that one is getting old.

Yup that is right it is getting old because Protestants as usual with their rebellion do not grasp it and never will. Secondly, you know it is a fact the CHURCH explained the complexity of the Trinty,not Scripture. No amount of denials will make it go away.

I never stated that I was my own pope or authority. See I don’t cover up child molestation like the pope did.

How do we know? Do we live with you 24/7 to confirm you do not cover up any crimes? And you believe Protestants or Baptists are free of crimes,you have another thing coming.
You don’t just like I don’t know if you have.

**No they are not free from crimes. They don’t profess the same things that the CC does as being a holyer then though religion. **

Please! If that is the case,then why bring up the molestation issue? Apparently Protestants do believe they are holier than thou or else they would not be mentioning at the time…

**So I consider calling me a pope as a insult. My opinon is only twisted because it don’t fall into what you believe. **

Call it insult and I consider Protestantism an insult to Jesus since he never gave an y mere mortal the authority to go create their own church.Look at the end results?

I do not what is more of an insult? Being the pope or someone who follows a church founded by mere mortals centuries later teaching novel doctrines such as adult-baptism only?

Being the pope who covers up priests who molest children the ones they profess to protect

U-huh and enlighten me how it is different than a Baptist Pastor doing the same? But you are not holy than thou-eh?

 

[tweetymom]

Now now now rev your getting nasty!
Lets face it you can’t prove infant WERE not baptized can you?
The early church fathers practiced this 350 years before the bible was put together!
What makes you right and them wrong???
Please enlighten all of us here!

And you can’t prove they were:shrug:

 

[elvisman]

The Jesus I have opened my heart to so love infants they don’t have to be baptized.

And the Jesus I know - the Jesus of the Bible says that you should not hinder the children from coming to him and dying with him in Baptism.**

 

[guanophore]

TobyLue definetly has a point. I don’t think you can do a sola scriptura approach while deny the beliefs of those that put together the scriptura

Oh, but they do! I have had many people on CAF tell me that the doctrine of SS “assumes the canon”. It is one of the aspects of SS, in addition to the fact that it is not found in the Bible, that makes it so outrageous.

 

[guanophore]

We are not talking about the Jewish faith. Where in the bible does it say that parents can make these decissions for them? Can a infant make those decissions?
What does your last statement have to do with infant baptism?

All the first Christians were Jewish, and held their Jewish faith all their lives. God commanded the Jews to do these things for their children. Christianity is the fulfillment of Judiasm. Those things that happened in the history of the Jews were shadows that were revealed in the New Covenant. Concealed in the Old, revealed in the New. Not one jot or tittle of the Law was abolished. All is fulfilled in Christ. God revealed to the Jews how to bring their infants into His covenant so that He could fulfill this in the New Covenant.

 

[rev_kevin]

So just because something has been done for 350 years before the Bible was put together don’t make it correct.

And it is also not correct to change it to something else fabricated up 1500 + years later.

**A lot of things have been changed afer many years, like smoking, many years ago it could not harm you and now we know different. **

The issue here is baptisms,not smoking. BTW: Since when in the past was smoking not harmful to one’s health? Smoking WAS always bad. I the past it was said that it was not bad for you. Do you know what a example is?

What makes you right and me wrong? Back at ya

No one is saying you are wrong.Why would we? The RCC baptizes adults all the time who make the decision to be baptized and receive Christ…so what is the problem?

We have been told time and time again here that we are wrong.

Nope! Because millions of Catholics have done the same.

You go follow your Baptist church and we follow our church…got it?
Got it smart allic.

I will, but remember a Catholic started this thread "A question for some non-Catholics…"

Okay and? You want to prove that the Baptists are correct and they are not,so you can forget trying to convince us. When did the Baptist church pop into the world? No one is trying to convince anyone. Have you read the rules? Have you read what this site is about?

See it can go eather way.

Then why so much fuss?

The question was asked of non-Catholics and when we answered it we were wrong and that is how the fuss started.

No,Baptists are not wrong for baptizing,the have a belief that baptism is soley for those who want to receive Jesus. We do not accept it and never will…get over it!
Look smart allic. You get over it.

Whether Catholics/Orthodoxs baptize infants should have no bearing on your faith,so why so much huffing and puffing?

**Its a debate kinda sight. Its not only the non-Catholics huffing and puffing the Catholics are just a quilty. **

U-huh and debating does not retort to the same line you use: Quit asking a question when a question has been given. You keep on dodging my question.

It is has been answered enough,don’t like it move on. Go to a Baptist only board.

Look this is an non-Catholic site. You don’t tell us to go to a Baptist board when this is open for all. You chose to come to this site just like a person at the age of reason chooses to be baptized.

 

[guanophore]

Not going for the “they assumed” that it didn’t need to be mentioned. They mentioned everything eles about baptism but didn’t think they needed to mention about infants being baptized. If it was important that we know they would have mentioned it.

No. The Apostles taught the faith, and instructed those who were taught to hold fast to the Traditions. For that reason, there was no effort made to include all the essentials in the Scripture. This is a false premise. The NT was never intended to be a complete compendium of the faith. Neither was it ever expected to be separated from the Sacred Traditions that produced it.

 

[guanophore]

The Bible is a title, It is not mentioned in the Bible because at that time there was no Bible.

This is a good point, rev kev. The people that created the Bible in 382 were the ones who had been following the Apostolic Tradition of infant baptism for the last 350 years.

 

[rev_kevin]

All the first Christians were Jewish, and held their Jewish faith all their lives. God commanded the Jews to do these things for their children. Christianity is the fulfillment of Judiasm. Those things that happened in the history of the Jews were shadows that were revealed in the New Covenant. Concealed in the Old, revealed in the New. Not one jot or tittle of the Law was abolished. All is fulfilled in Christ. God revealed to the Jews how to bring their infants into His covenant so that He could fulfill this in the New Covenant.

Do you even know why that was said?

 

[rev_kevin]

This is a good point, rev kev. The people that created the Bible in 382 were the ones who had been following the Apostolic Tradition of infant baptism for the last 350 years.

They put the Scriptures together, {the ones they wanted} to make up the Bible. And that makes it right because the have been doing it for the last 350 years.

 

[guanophore]

Repent and let each of you be baptized.

Peter was addressing adults. this is what adults need to do.

Now who can a infant repent?

Same way the Jewish infants presented themselves for circumcision.

Their parents spoke on their behalf. That is how God intended for families to function.

That is one thing you need inorder to be baptized. So when it says the whole household it means the ones who are able to understand what is being said to them and the ones who are able to repent.

This is a modern American Evangelical innovation. It is a departure from what the Apostles believed and taught.

A infant can’t understand what is being said or taught too them and they can’t repent eather.

Right. That is why we don’t withhold the gift of grace from them. Is it a free gift, or not? If it is free, then why do you insist that one has to “qualify” based on their understanding or participation?

“The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off.”

For your children when they are abel to repent and understand what is being taught to them.

You are adding to the scriptures.

A baby can’t object because they don’t know what is going on. He ordered the ones who were able to object to be baptized.

You are adding to the scriptures again.

How can a infant believe and when they shared the word of the Lord how did the infant understand what was being said?

We have no way of knowing how an infant experiences the Divine. Jesus said the Kingdom of Heaven was made of such as these (little children). He commanded that infants be brought in to the Old Covenant. Why would anything change? Jesus was clear about all the things from the Old Covenant that he expanded or changed. He fulfilled everything. He never commanded that the beleivers should STOP bringing their infants.

 

[guanophore]

So the Bible don’t give you instructions on who to live a life with God? It don’t instruct you with the 10 commandments? It don’t instruct you on how to treat your neighbor?

The Scripture has quite a bit of Apostolic Instruction. It was never intended to be a complete manual. This is why Jesus gave the Church pastors and teachers.

 

[rev_kevin]

Peter was addressing adults. this is what adults need to do.If he was addressing adults why wouldn’t he address what infants need to do?

Same way the Jewish infants presented themselves for circumcision.
How did the Jewish infants present themselves?

Their parents spoke on their behalf. That is how God intended for families to function.
HOw can the parents make the decision for their infants to accept Christ and be baptized, that is a decision only that person can make.

This is a modern American Evangelical innovation. It is a departure from what the Apostles believed and taught.

Right. That is why we don’t withhold the gift of grace from them. Is it a free gift, or not? If it is free, then why do you insist that one has to “qualify” based on their understanding or participation?Grace. Favor, God’s free and underserved love that never quits. Grace is the gift of God that comes as eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Grace is a gift from God that has been with you even before you were born, so I’m not withholding anything from them.

“The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off.”

You are adding to the scriptures.Not adding just saying what it means.

You are adding to the scriptures again.Not adding just saying what it means.

We have no way of knowing how an infant experiences the Divine. Jesus said the Kingdom of Heaven was made of such as these (little children). He commanded that infants be brought in to the Old Covenant. Why would anything change? Jesus was clear about all the things from the Old Covenant that he expanded or changed. He fulfilled everything. He never commanded that the beleivers should STOP bringing their infants.

Weren’t you a infant? Don’t you remember how you as a infant experienced the Divine? How do you know they even experience the Divine?

 

[PeaceSerenity]

Weren’t you a infant? Don’t you remember how you as a infant experienced the Divine? How do you know they even experience the Divine?

Through God, all things are possible. No?

Two pieces of scriptural evidence:

1. John the baptist leaping in his mothers womb
2. “Through the mouths of babes and sucklings have I perfected praise” - Psalms

Babies can recognize and praise God, maybe even better than adults because they are not tainted by the sins of a lifetime.