Baptism: Why do Protestants insist that its just an act of obedience

[Kevin_Williams]

I constantly hear from Protestants that the Sacrament of Baptism is only an act of obedience and has nothing to do with the removal of Original Sin.

Can someone explain how this reasoning ever came about?

Also, some Protestants who state the Nicene Creed also say that we can get baptized many times; however this is surely contradictory since we say in the Nicene Creed “We acknowledge ONE BAPTISM for the forgiveness of Sins”.

I think clarification is in order here.

Thanks and Blessings to all!

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

It’s pretty much being backed into a corner by one’s own theology. Having eliminated the possibility of sacramental action (ex opere operato) one must still face the fact that Jesus commanded baptism. Thus, since there must be some significance to this (metaphysically) meaningless act someone came up with the idea that baptism is a public confession of Christ/sign of obedience to him.

 

[Kevin_Williams]

Andreas Hofer:

It’s pretty much being backed into a corner by one’s own theology. Having eliminated the possibility of sacramental action (ex opere operato) one must still face the fact that Jesus commanded baptism. Thus, since there must be some significance to this (metaphysically) meaningless act someone came up with the idea that baptism is a public confession of Christ/sign of obedience to him.

Why can’t people just accept the fact that the Apostles followed Jesus commands by baptizing entire households, including infants, to accept them into the church instead of coming up with reasons to get baptized again later because they feel it is an act of obedience? The parents took care of them already.

Does the additional baptism discredit the earlier acts of the parents who baptized the younger infant’s on their behalf?

If one cannot understand that baptizing “entire households” included infants, what else could we suggest to them?