Baptism of babies & infants

[rinnie]

Hi, Placido,
I respect the things you have written, and the perspective you have. I think God has placed some decisions within the sphere of humankind’s being able to “figure it out for ourselves” rather than God telling us every single thing to think or do, even in matters of religion. But I think there are enough New Testament scriptures that tie baptism with conscious belief and a conscious choice, that an “age of reason” whatever that age be collectively decided on based on the collective experience of humankind, would be more appropriate to p(name removed by moderator)oint an age at which a person is making a conscious determination for themselves to be baptized, than to have their parents make the decision for them and make the commitment for them, however well-intentioned they are in making those decisions in behalf of their baby.

Have a good day.

See the Church that Christ established never said that though. Again goes against scripture. IT say to hold fast to traditions whether oral or by letter. to Shun those acting not according to scripture.

Scripture says Jn 15:16 Jesus appointd special men to be his Apostles, not for us to try to figure it out for ourselves. Actually scripture forbids it. How could you figure it out for yourself and do what you think and still hold fast to traditions. Impossible I would think. Actually private interpretation of scripture is not allowed.

:

 

[rinnie]

Hi, Placido,
I respect the things you have written, and the perspective you have. I think God has placed some decisions within the sphere of humankind’s being able to “figure it out for ourselves” rather than God telling us every single thing to think or do, even in matters of religion. But I think there are enough New Testament scriptures that tie baptism with conscious belief and a conscious choice, that an “age of reason” whatever that age be collectively decided on based on the collective experience of humankind, would be more appropriate to p(name removed by moderator)oint an age at which a person is making a conscious determination for themselves to be baptized, than to have their parents make the decision for them and make the commitment for them, however well-intentioned they are in making those decisions in behalf of their baby.

Have a good day.

Actually also Baptism does not make that decision for the child exactly. At the age of reason the child makes that decision for himself. ITs called confirmation. Thats when you decide to accept the faith and then you have received another sacrament from God. So actually you are not teaching the Catholic faith correctly

 

[ParkerD]

Actually also Baptism does not make that decision for the child exactly. At the age of reason the child makes that decision for himself. ITs called confirmation. Thats when you decide to accept the faith and then you have received another sacrament from God. So actually you are not teaching the Catholic faith correctly

Rinnie,
My attempt has been to try and convey what the New Testament teaches, not to try and teach a particular faith here, unless specifically asked. I think it’s good that a child is expected to make a decision for himself or herself regarding their religious intent and conviction and belief.

 

[Mickey]

I just don’t think infants are inferred in those passages of scripture

And I do not believe you can exclude them. “Whole household” means “whole household”. An “age of reason” for baptism is an innovation created hundreds of years later. Christ would never have excluded his most precious infants from the beautiful sacrament of baptism. Deep in your heart—you know this.

 

[ParkerD]

And I do not believe you can exclude them. “Whole household” means “whole household”. An “age of reason” for baptism is an innovation created hundreds of years later. Christ would never have excluded his most precious infants from the beautiful sacrament of baptism. Deep in your heart—you know this.

Mickey,
Actually, I “know” what I “know” and it is exactly the opposite of that particular idea.

Christ certainly didn’t exclude infants from precious blessings and precious promises, but when infants were brought to Him, He blessed them without having them baptized and didn’t equate the one with the other at all. It’s not a question of “exclusion”, but logical questions of “when is the proper and intended time for baptism?” “What did Christ do, and what did He intend be done for infants?” (He blessed them, and said grown people should be like children.)

 

[placido]

Rinnie,
My attempt has been to try and convey what the New Testament teaches, not to try and teach a particular faith here, unless specifically asked.

Your attempts to limit what “the New Testament teaches” to what is written, is un-Biblical.
“Hold fast to traditions whether oral or by letter,” says the Bible.

I think it’s good that a child is expected to make a decision for himself or herself regarding their religious intent and conviction and belief.

The God of Abraham Who did not expect a child to make a decision for himself or herself regarding their religious intent and conviction and belief in the Old Testament, is the same God of the New Testament - and the NT was suposed to be better and more inclusive than the OT.

placido

 

[Mickey]

Actually, I “know” what I “know” and it is exactly the opposite of that particular idea.

The Lord will reveal the truth to you in time.

Christ certainly didn’t exclude infants from precious blessings and precious promises, but when infants were brought to Him, He blessed them without having them baptized and didn’t equate the one with the other at all.

Whole households means whole households.

It’s not a question of “exclusion”, but logical questions of “when is the proper and intended time for baptism?”

Exactly. And the answer is: as soon as possible. The early Christians knew this. The Church fathers knew this. The Church today knows this.

“What did Christ do, and what did He intend be done for infants?”

You should listen to the Church which carries apostolic succession. Infants should be baptized. Amen.

 

[ParkerD]

Your attempts to limit what “the New Testament teaches” to what is written, is un-Biblical.
“Hold fast to traditions whether oral or by letter,” says the Bible.

The God of Abraham Who did not expect a child to make a decision for himself or herself regarding their religious intent and conviction and belief in the Old Testament, is the same God of the New Testament - and the NT was supposed to be better and more inclusive than the OT.

placido

Placido,
Here is the context of the passage in 2 Thessalonians 2:
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

The word “traditions” would be synonymous with the words “love of the truth”, and apply to what “ye have been taught.” Christ established new “traditions”, a “new covenant” gospel with new light and added understanding. Much of the “old law” and “old tradition” was replaced, not just added to. I certainly agree that it was to be “better.” It was to be more complete, and was also to include the Gentiles as well as the Jews when the time was right, which happened soon after Christ’s resurrection.

 

[Mickey]

The word “traditions” would be synonymous with the words “love of the truth”, and apply to what “ye have been taught.”

Yes. By word or Epistle.

John 21: 24-25
This is that disciple who giveth testimony of these things, and hath written these things; and we know that his testimony is true. But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.

 

[onenow1]

Hi, All,
Acts 2: 38 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

39 For the promise is to you and to your [CHILDREN] and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him."

40 And he testified with many other words and exhorted them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.”

41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

Quote = onenow1, Verse 39 is very interesting .

Comment : I think Jesus knows how much we mortals, need physical realities to represent our Spiritual needs, after all Jesus became man for us.

Matthew 3:13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him.

14 John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”

15 But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now; for thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness.” Then he consented.

Quote= onenow. I think this verse 15, exemplifies, the humility of Jesus.

Jesus need not follow His own ordinances, but humbles Himself for us.

Thus I believe there is a need for families, Just as circumcision was a right to entrance, so to is Baptism.

Peace,and God Bless, onenow1." Soups on "

 

[rinnie]

Rinnie,
My attempt has been to try and convey what the New Testament teaches, not to try and teach a particular faith here, unless specifically asked. I think it’s good that a child is expected to make a decision for himself or herself regarding their religious intent and conviction and belief.

Yes thats what I am trying to do also. Confirmation is a sacrament. A sacrament is an outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace. I believe that is in the N. T.

 

[rinnie]

And I do not believe you can exclude them. “Whole household” means “whole household”. An “age of reason” for baptism is an innovation created hundreds of years later. Christ would never have excluded his most precious infants from the beautiful sacrament of baptism. Deep in your heart—you know this.

I love this statement Mickey. And you for making it. Only you could find the words and put them into action that way!

 

[rinnie]

Hi, All,
Acts 2: 38 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

39 For the promise is to you and to your [CHILDREN] and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him."

40 And he testified with many other words and exhorted them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.”

41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

Quote = onenow1, Verse 39 is very interesting .

Comment : I think Jesus knows how much we mortals, need physical realities to represent our Spiritual needs, after all Jesus became man for us.

Matthew 3:13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him.

14 John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”

15 But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now; for thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness.” Then he consented.

Quote= onenow. I think this verse 15, exemplifies, the humility of Jesus.

Jesus need not follow His own ordinances, but humbles Himself for us.

Thus I believe there is a need for families, Just as circumcision was a right to entrance, so to is Baptism.

Peace,and God Bless, onenow1." Soups on "

Every one of you. Scripture don’t get more clear than that!

 

[Mickey]

I love this statement Mickey. And you for making it. Only you could find the words and put them into action that way!

:hug1:

 

[Mickey]

**“Infants are baptized **for the remission of sins. What sins? Whenever have they sinned? In fact, of course, never. And yet: ‘No one is free from defilement.’ (Job 14:4) **But defilement is only put away by the mystery of baptism. **That is the reason why infants too are baptized.”
Origen (185-254 A.D.)

 

[SavedbyHisBlood]

1. Baptism is for “as many as the Lord our God shall call” (Acts 2:38-39);
2. Even infant children were called (Luke 18:15);
   CONCLUSION: The objection to the baptism of babies and infants is wrong.

placido

I like it!

One thing i always say to someone asking my why we (as Catholics) baptize our infants is this:

Ok, we both know that it says in the bible that you have to be baptized to enter the kingdom of heaven. So tell me this, how would you feel if your child was 2 and obviously could not understand the concept of Jesus dying for our sins. You get in a car wreck and your baby dies, how would you feel knowing that you very possibly denied your child the chance to enter Heaven?

I almost always get a blank stare and/or silence…

I dont know if an unbaptized child is condemmed to Hell or not, granted he is still guilty of Original Sin, but it’s not his fault obviously… Only God knows and i just hope He has mercy for the young children that my have died who’s parents did not baptize them.

 

[ParkerD]

Every one of you. Scripture don’t get more clear than that!

Rinnie,
Hi again, and I hope you are well. “every one of you” appears in the following context in Acts 2:

14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
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.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized…

Are you saying infants were also among that particular group gathered together doing the hearkening and the asking and the repenting and that they also during that moment “gladly received his word”?

 

[rinnie]

Rinnie,
Hi again, and I hope you are well. “every one of you” appears in the following context in Acts 2:

14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
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.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized…

Are you saying infants were also among that particular group gathered together doing the hearkening and the asking and the repenting and that they also during that moment “gladly received his word”?

Well read number 93 if everyone of you is not enough number 39 should sum it up, Repent and BE BAPTISED then 39 say this promise is for you and to your children. There you have it. See you found the answer yourself for all of us. It don’t get no clearer than that, You and YOUR CHILDREN. REPENT AND RECEIVE THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. The children may not have been able to repent but is a baby not considered your child. By George I think we got it! You and your Children after that THEY were Baptized. The children may not have understood the word they received but the Power of the Holy Spirit was given to them. And by that gift of the HS they had nothing but the good word to learn and understand. And that power given at birth did nothing but Good to help them through life.

Now you may ask what kind of sin could a little baby have. Could a little baby have sin, it is not at the age of reason correct? But see ole St Peter knew just what he was talking about. We are all born into original sin. It came from Adam and Eve, and is wiped away with Baptism. So see baby’s indeed need baptism.

 

[rinnie]

I like it!

One thing i always say to someone asking my why we (as Catholics) baptize our infants is this:

Ok, we both know that it says in the bible that you have to be baptized to enter the kingdom of heaven. So tell me this, how would you feel if your child was 2 and obviously could not understand the concept of Jesus dying for our sins. You get in a car wreck and your baby dies, how would you feel knowing that you very possibly denied your child the chance to enter Heaven?

I almost always get a blank stare and/or silence…

I dont know if an unbaptized child is condemmed to Hell or not, granted he is still guilty of Original Sin, but it’s not his fault obviously… Only God knows and i just hope He has mercy for the young children that my have died who’s parents did not baptize them.

No one can answer that question love, but why would anyone take a chance knowing Gods words. That we must be baptised! No one knows Gods mercy, But we do know Gods words, and if we believe them we will want to do the right thing. I still think Mickey had the best answer. No one can beat his IMO on this subject.

 

[placido]

Placido,
Here is the context of the passage in 2 Thessalonians 2:

The word “traditions” would be synonymous with the words “love of the truth”, and apply to what “ye have been taught.”

And it doesn’t matter whether that “love of the truth” is “taught” in a written or oral form.

Christ established new “traditions”, a “new covenant” gospel with new light and added understanding. Much of the “old law” and “old tradition” was replaced, not just added to. I certainly agree that it was to be “better.” It was to be more complete, and was also to include the Gentiles as well as the Jews when the time was right, which happened soon after Christ’s resurrection.

Surprise … surprise … I agree with you totally. The only objection I have is with your attempt to limit the “new traditions” to a written form, contradicting the Bible that says clearly those “new traditions” can be “taught” in written or oral form.

placido