Z
Zooey
Guest
Yes. To the extent that they understand Him, children may very well have a relationship with God.
Which is, of course, just one more reason why we should baptize them.
- Status
Yes. To the extent that they understand Him, children may very well have a relationship with God.
Which is, of course, just one more reason why we should baptize them.
Z
Zooey
Guest
Brian, let’s look at this from another angle for a moment:
Instead of discussing the tragic case of a child who dies in infancy, let us instead consider the opposite.
Two children–Each lives, grows up, reaches his teens, & as teens will do,
rebels against their parents & their teaching, and their faith.
Child (A) [let us call her Anne] was baptized as a child. Her parents brought her to the house of God, had her baptized, and thereby placed an indelible mark on her soul.
Child (B) [whom we shall call–forgive me, but I
cannot resist, Brian], is raised by equally devout & loving parents. He was, however, left to decide for himslef, whether or not he would be baptized; and in which church he would have this done. (If any).Now, I would submit to you, that the graces of baptism which were imparted to Anne, are a part of her very being. Those graces are there. She rebels, & spends years, even decades, believing in nothing at all…And then, decades later, she feels a strange yearning for something she thought she had forgotten, had left behind. She finds herself collecting momentoes, wherever she travels, of a faith she has rejected, out of hand. And yet…and yet…In her 50s, she finds herself drawn back into faith, first as a mere form, but gradually, more deeply, & more truly,she turns back…to the Person of Jesus Christ.:extrahappy:
Whilst Brian…We can only pray for
poor Brian. Lost, anchorless, unhappy, he :imsorry:wanders. Like a ship without sails or rudder…
You may not (indeed, it would appear, do not) believe that there is any real grace in the waters of baptism…But you see-- It does not matter that you disbelieve. Because, like it or no–there** is** grace to be found there.
And I submit to you that, on the Day of Judgment, I would far rather be one of the parents of “Anne”, than to be one of the parents of “Brian”. Because I would truly have done ALL that I could to insure my child’s soul. I would not, at least, have “neglected so great a salvation”.
B
Brian_Culliton
Guest
, Brian], is raised by equally devout & loving parents. He was, however, left to decide for himslef, whether or not he would be baptized; and in which church he would have this done. (If any).Brian, let’s look at this from another angle for a moment:
Instead of discussing the tragic case of a child who dies in infancy, let us instead consider the opposite.
Two children–Each lives, grows up, reaches his teens, & as teens will do,
rebels against their parents & their teaching, and their faith.
Child (A) [let us call her Anne] was baptized as a child. Her parents brought her to the house of God, had her baptized, and thereby placed an indelible mark on her soul.
Child (B) [whom we shall call–forgive me, but I
Now, I would submit to you, that the graces of baptism which were imparted to Anne, are a part of her very being. Those graces are there. She rebels, & spends years, even decades, believing in nothing at all…And then, decades later, she feels a strange yearning for something she thought she had forgotten, had left behind. She finds herself collecting momentoes, wherever she travels, of a faith she has rejected, out of hand. And yet…and yet…In her 50s, she finds herself drawn back into faith, first as a mere form, but gradually, more deeply, & more truly,she turns back…to the Person of Jesus Christ.:extrahappy:
Whilst Brian…We can only pray for
poor Brian. Lost, anchorless, unhappy, he :imsorry:wanders. Like a ship without sails or rudder…You may not (indeed, it would appear, do not) believe that there is any real grace in the waters of baptism…But you see-- It does not matter that you disbelieve. Because, like it or no–there** is** grace to be found there.
And I submit to you that, on the Day of Judgment, I would far rather be one of the parents of “Anne”, than to be one of the parents of “Brian”. Because I would truly have done ALL that I could to insure my child’s soul. I would not, at least, have “neglected so great a salvation”.
That is a strange scenario you presented there, Zooey.
You said that both sets of parents were equally devout, which means both would have considered religious instruction extremely important. Yet your scenario has Brian completely lost while Ann is drawn to “something she thought she had forgotten.” What did she forget? Was it her infant baptism? Do you think she started to recall having water sprinkled on her head? No, if anything she recalled her faith and Christian instruction, as you said, “a faith she has rejected.”
Now let’s look at poor Brian. You didn’t bother to tell me whether or not he made the decision to be baptized. If he did, that demonstrates tremendous faith for a young child. In terms of being drawn back to the faith later in life, there is absolutely no advantage for Ann in your scenario. At least Brian could remember the commitment he made to God when he chose to be baptized in the name of Christ.
Do you really think God needs you to “save” an innocent life from damnation? Is His power constrained by your actions? Did you create life or did God? The responsible thing to do is to make sure your child understands what he or she is being baptized into.
B
bona_fides_1
Guest
If I may piggyback on here…
Do you really think God needs you to “save” an innocent life from damnation?
YES!
It is part of God’s Divine Plan that humans participate and cooperate with Him. If this were not true then there would be no need to “baptise and teach all nations” and God would just ordain all are saved. But this is not how God chooses to operate. His plan is integral with the human condition - so integral that He becomes one of us as a child to set the example and to give us direct knowledge of how we fit into His plan.
God needs freewill to be cooperate with Him so that Love is operable by choice. Likewise Satan needs freewill so he can take those souls who elect to reject God. This is part of Divine Justice. God has leveled the field and freewill and cooperation are necessary. If somone tosses a drowning man a life preserver he still has to choose to take hold of it.
As for who creates life - God of course is author of life. But again, God uses the natural human facilities in cooperation with His Divine Plan to bring new life into existence. Life is meant to me a fruit of cooperative love. Most everything God does for our salvation is by a partnership between the Divine and the Creature through our cooperative action.
The responsible thing to do is to baptise your child as an infant and then teach him from its earliest age the true faith. The Seed of Faith comes from The Church. In Catholic Baptism a catechumen is sponsored into the Church by a friend, or family who themselves is already a member of the Church. The metaphor of the fruit is apropos here. Each Christian is a fruit of grace and contains the seed of faith that can be given to others and sown in others to propagate the faith. Baptism is the normative means that the seed is planted. For the adult it is our personal fiat: “let it be done according to thy word”. This is how the Christ Child takes residence in adults. For the infant it is a condition of privilege of being born into a Christian household and interwoven within the Christian sacramental marriage vows; vows which require a pledge to raise children as Christian and which is part of the Christian covenant. The parents bring the Christ Child to their infant by right and blessing of being Christian and part of God’s Holy People. The parents dedicate their child to The Lord in baptism just as the Jewish families of old dedicated their children to The Lord. It’s covenential.
BF
Z
Zooey
Guest
Z
Zooey
Guest
The story of Anne is a true story. You may read it at your local library. It is a book called “Called Out Of Darkness”, and it is the spiritual autobiography of the author Anne Rice. (Yes, the “Interview With the Vampire” one). I just bought it this week & read it through without a stop, despite the tears of joy that kept misting my vision.
As for Brian…
There are so many, many Brians. We must all pray. While there is yet time and opportunity.
P
panevino
Guest
just some thoughts on the verses you listed
John 1:12 (NIV) Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God–
John 1:12 (KJV) But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
to me the underlined words imply more is required to actually be reconciled
JOhn 6:29 Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”
john6:47 I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.
Brian - do you consider submission of self in faith to Water Baptism a Work?
i think belief / faith includes obedience
i note jesus also said a little later
in john 8 :31 *To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” *
and one of his teachings includes baptism right? matt 28:18
john 15:9*As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. 10**If **you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. 14You are my friends if you do what I command.
*
one of his comands is baptism
those are pretty big IF’s given after John 6:29 & 47 & john 7:38-39 & 11:26, 12:46
acts 16:31They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.” 32Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house. 33At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his family were baptized. 34The jailer brought them into his house and set a meal before them; he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God—he and his whole family.
i think the immediacy to the baptism is to follow Christ and to obey his commands per john 15:9 & mat 28:18 and john 3:5
to comply with the big IF’s / or ‘Unless’ as in john 3:5.
**If **you obey my commands, you will remain in my love
B
Brian_Culliton
Guest
Panevino, you are affirming my point. Reconciliation to God comes from hearing the word, believing in Christ, and responding to His commandments, which includes baptism. But where in the Bible do you find baptism by itself making a person a child of God?
An infant is a child of God whether it is baptized or not. Jesus said, “*It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners *(Mark 2:17).” Which category is an infant in, healthy or sick, righteous or sinner?
You asked me if baptism is a work. I’ll answer this way: baptism is a response to faith in Christ.
Now let me ask you something Panevino. What do you think happened to King David’s son who died on the seventh day of his life? And what do you think David meant when he said, “I shall go to him, but he will not return to me”? (2 Sam. 12:23)
An infant is a child of God whether it is baptized or not. Jesus said, “*It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners *(Mark 2:17).” Which category is an infant in, healthy or sick, righteous or sinner?
You asked me if baptism is a work. I’ll answer this way: baptism is a response to faith in Christ.
Now let me ask you something Panevino. What do you think happened to King David’s son who died on the seventh day of his life? And what do you think David meant when he said, “I shall go to him, but he will not return to me”? (2 Sam. 12:23)
P
Pax
Guest
Brian C in Christ,
Do you see any merit in what was presented in post # 75 and 76?
God bless.
Do you see any merit in what was presented in post # 75 and 76?
God bless.
P
Philthy
Guest
Just to be clear, are you saying that water baptism is a requirement of salvation? Yes or No?
For the sake of discussion, let us assume that you are correct. Given that assumption, does it not stand to reason that an infant - one “born of the flesh” would require a re-birth??? Your interpretation of the verse contradicts your stated opinion that an infant doesnt require baptism because they lack sin. But here you have just articulated that whatever is born of flesh is flesh, implying that it remains flesh unless it is “born of spirit”. While you are laboring over the exact meaning of “born again” (ie water baptism or something else), you have stumbled upon a more foundational issue: whatever is born of flesh is flesh, and unless it is reborn it will remain flesh and not inherit the kingdom of God.
God is free to save whomever he wills to save. But he has bound himself to save those according to the means he has revealed through his Church: Repentance, Baptism, Faith, Hope, and Love.
P
panevino
Guest
are u sure “seventh day” in 2 sam 12 refers to the 7th day of the baby’s life?
perhaps it has a different signifigance
i note in numbers19 the following
which appears relevant to me regarding puritifcation from sin.
with purification of sin occuring to David in 2 Sam 12. (ie his sin was forgiven and then punishment/purification was through death of son)
*…
number 19:9 “A man who is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer and put them in a ceremonially clean place outside the camp. They shall be kept by the Israelite community for use in the water of cleansing; it is for purification from sin… 11“Whoever touches the dead body of anyone will be unclean for seven days. 12He must purify himself with the water on the third day and on the seventh day; then he will be clean. But if he does not purify himself on the third and seventh days, he will not be clean. *
notice how David washed on the seventh day.
im not trying to say that David was putting himself through this rite, just that the words ‘seventh day’ have other meanings
got to go again
J
JustaServant
Guest
Brian,
If infant Baptism is a a later innovation, where is the historical proof?
While I was still Baptist I searched long and hard through early church records to find some sort of ‘start date’, where I could point and say “That’s when it started.” I was unable to.
More importantly, where is the opposition to such an ‘innovation’?
If it was not taught by the Apostles, why (using thier logic) why was it accepted so readily?
B
Brian_Culliton
Guest
I do not make the requirements for salvation. Jesus said to us who believe, be baptized and so we are baptized in obedience to His commandment. If you are asking if a person must be baptized in water to be saved regardless of their circumstance, then the answer is no because it’s not the water that saves them it’s their faith in Christ.
Because we believe, our sins are imputed to Christ who suffered and died for us. Jesus referred to His suffering and death on the cross as His baptism (Mat. 20:23). We are declared innocent because of what He did. Infants who die are baptized in death and raised with Christ because because Christ was raised from the dead, and that is exactly what is signified in water baptism.
Every man will be judged according to his works. Can you tell me the works of an infant that would cause God to cast him into the fire?
B
Brian_Culliton
Guest
Searched long and hard did you? Maybe you should search this thread because this will be the third time I mention Tertullian, and I am sure it will be the third time someone tells me he was a heretic.
Infant baptism was certainly practiced in the third century, but I have found nothing explicit prior to then. Irenaeus’ comment, “all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men,” is not explicit at all. Do you believe Jesus was baptized at age thirty and crucified sometime in His forties? Don’t loose the context by your zeal to protect your adopted beliefs.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Then you need to look again because The Martyrdom of Polycarp clearly indicates that Polycarp was infant baptized and that predates the 3rd century by quite a lot.
The Case For Infant Baptism
B
bona_fides_1
Guest
How exactly does this exclude infants? There is no commandment not to baptise babies. Christ said “bring the children to me”. In the absence of other direction from Jesus why would you dare to presume that babies do not believe therefor they can’t be saved and therefor can not or should not be baptised? Did Jesus say “bring the children to me” or not? Has it occurred to you that Jesus might want us to bring the Children to Him in baptism because He has a special way of dealing with infants (and the mentally handicapped) too young to form their own conscience if we only just trust Him and bring the children to Him as He commanded? Does a child not have faith in its mother to feed it? If not then why would a baby cry when its is hungry if it did not have the capacity to know that somone very special and personal would take care of it?
Why would anyone take it upon themselves to read in the exact opposite of what Jesus commanded about baptism and about bringing the children to Jesus and NOT bring the child to Jesus in baptism? This sounds very risky and irresponsible. In fact it sounds exactly like a man-made doctrine and assumption. And history will bear out that it was a doctrine that did NOT exist in the early church and is directly traceable to new post reformation attitudes. In view of the history and the logic I think you really need to re-think your logic and your rationale here…
So, you are saying that “totally depraved” (protestant theology) souls are born with an innate supernatural power called “faith” that is a catalyst that leads to their being saved? I thought the Protestant belief was that 'it was all a finished work in Christ" and ONLY Christ has the innate power to save and there is nothing intrinsic to the human soul that can participate in salvation. Is faith a gift or not and from whence does it come - by birth or by divine destiny or by another church member or by random good luck?
And if you say “Faith comes by hearing the word of God” - what of those who are physically deaf or those who are spiritually deaf? And if a child can not “hear” then are you suggesting that there is a new way to be saved without faith - perhaps “absence of personal sin”? Is it grace or is it faith or is it absence of personal sin that saves? It sure seems to me that there is an impossible tautology in Protestant theology that goes circular on these principals.
So you claim that the stain of sin never goes away but by divine forensic decree the punishment is “imputed” to Jesus? But what of the gaping wounds in our souls? Are we to enter heaven with putrid sin that is hidden and “painted over” by the blood of Christ?
The Catholic teaching of course is that sins are completely and utterly blotted out, washed away and removed from the soul in baptism. The penalty is paid by Christ and the soul is entirely healed and made as new so that we each have a genuinely clean soul that is pure through and through.
You seem to be looking at judgment only in the negative or pessimistic sense. Did not Jesus really say we would each be rewarded according to out works - both good and bad works? How else does one merit the reward of heaven if not judged by our good works. Surely, having faith in Jesus is the work of God and is itself a good work is it not? So then, can you tell me the good works of an infant that would permit it to be rewarded with heaven if it has no faith and is not baptised and has nothing to show for itself except that is has no personal sin (your theology)?
BF
B
Brian_Culliton
Guest
Why, because he said, “Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Savior”?
Is that what you consider explicit proof for infant baptism?
M
mikeledes
Guest
Tertullian eventually fell into heresy (Montanism) and Ireneaus clearly identified regeneration with the sacrament of Baptism. So it is understood
that when he speaks of rebirth, he is talking about baptism.
God Bless,
Michael
P
panevino
Guest
irenaeus interprets John 3:3-5 ie “born again” / water&spirit " to refer to water baptism.
This has implications to his reference to infants in the quote you listed above.
P
Pax
Guest
Brian in Christ,
I know that you have been busy attempting to answer the points of others. I still hope that you will respond to my posts #75 and #76.
God bless.
I know that you have been busy attempting to answer the points of others. I still hope that you will respond to my posts #75 and #76.
God bless.
- Status