S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
I respect what you believe but I do disagree. Johns words were clear. REPENT AND BE BAPTISED. God Bless.
- Status
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
Church Militant:
God Bless.
Dont tell St.John that but ill let him know when I get there.
God Bless.
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
Church Militant:
God. Bless
Okay,so what happened to the girls,they were not circumsized?
God. Bless
C
Catholic4aReasn
Guest
Hi Randell!I was wondering if the bible had any passage where someone was baptising an Infant?
I think there is a passage where a Jailer had is whole family baptised. From that I think you could make the assumption that since there was no birth control that this person had several children of different ages who were all baptised (I am not sure of the correct verse)
Is there any other proof that babies were baptised?
The bible doesn’t specifically say that babies should be baptised, nor does it say that they should not or that only those able to repent should be baptised.
You’re right that scripture says that whole households were baptised (eg. 1 Cor 1:16), but it does not say that only households without children or only with children old enough to repent were baptised. Excluding babies from baptism is a Protestant tradition not found in scripture.
Yes, Peter said that people should “repent and be baptised (Acts 2:38) but who was he speaking to? Adult converts who COULD repent. The words of the NT are specifically addressed to adult converts. There were no cradle Christians at the time, ALL Christians were converts and repentence is necessary for those converting to Christianity. Peter then goes on to tell these converts that the promise of baptism is for them AND THEIR CHILDREN (Acts 2:39)”. It doesn’t say “only those children old enough to repent” but simply “your children”. If a provision was being made for only those children old enough to understand it surely would have been stated as in Neh. 8:2-3. The idea that infants are excluded from these children is a Protestant tradition not found in scripture.
Abraham was, in essence, a convert to Judaism. Faith came first, then circumcision. Thereafter, the babies of the circumcized Jews were circumcized at 8 days old. They didn’t need to wait until they were old enough to have faith in God and THEN get circumcized. Baptism is the new circumcision (Col. 2:11). It’s the new “seal”. By necessity, for adult converts such as the first generation of Christians to whom the NT was addressed, faith comes before baptism. But, like the Jews, thereafter the children of believers receive the “seal” as infants.
Since the bible doesn’t specifically state that babies should or should not be baptised we can look at early Christian writings to find out what they believed. You don’t find any writings indicating that babies had to be excluded but you do find writings indicating that they should be included.
The baptism of infants perfectly illustrates that salvation is a free gift. Babies can’t do anything to earn the grace received in baptism, not even repent. Since repentence is something that one must “do” it can rightly be called a “work”, yet we are not saved by works but by grace. Even babies.
In Christ,
Nancy
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
Hi Catholic. Thats the point,like you said ,repentence is something we must do . When we repent and recieve Jesus as Lord and Savior this is when we are baptised by the Holy Spirit. Like Jesus said, Water and Spirit. This is when our names get written into the book of life,at that exact moment. Our slate is clean by the blood of the lamb.Praise God. God Blesssalvation is a free gift. Babies can’t do anything to earn the grace received in baptism, not even repent. Since repentence is something that one must “do” it can rightly be called a “work”, yet we are not saved by works but by grace. Even babies.
In Christ,
Nancy
.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Dumb answer, and a dodge of my very valid point.Okay,so what happened to the girls,they were not circumsized?
Just acknowlege the loss & move on…
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Not true…you have stated a strictly protestant theological position that the early church did not believe or practice. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we have to “repent and recieve Jesus as Lord and Savior”, that is just some prot device for evangelism. Also this is just YOUR interp of what the Bible says.
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
Church Militant:
God Bless
Sorry its not a dumb answer.[please reread]. It may be a dumb question,but could you give me a dumb answer.Dumb answer, and a dodge of my very valid point.
Just acknowlege the loss & move on…
God Bless
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
Church Militant:
God Bless.
Okay,Do you want me to leave the light on for you.
God Bless.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Nope…you’d have to have somethig that I need instead of a load of stuff that I found wanting and left behind. However…I have left the light on for YOU.Okay,Do you want me to leave the light on for you.
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
Church Militant:
God Bless
But the real truth is im CM.those are my initials,so im leaving the light on for you.Nope…you’d have to have somethig that I need instead of a load of stuff that I found wanting and left behind. However…I have left the light on for YOU.
God Bless
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
You seem to be pointing to John 3:5 without actually paying attention to the text. While the verse reads “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit,” (NIV) you seem to be reading “…no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of the Spirit and, in the case he has enough mental capacity to be able to repent, also of water.” Jesus commanded rebirth of **water and **Spirit without listing any people he felt like exempting at the time. No where does he mention in his very straightforward guideline that rebirth of water is only for those who have reached the age of reason - this is something you are reading into other verses of Scripture based on your presuppositions.
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
Andreas Hofer:
God Bless.
Jesus said .Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptise them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost teaching them to carry out everthing I have commanded you. Kind of HARD thing to do to a baby.
God Bless.
F
Fiat
Guest
Dear SPOKENWORD:
When gentile converts came over into Judaism from some pagan background, three things took place. First, the head of the family offered sacrifices. Second, the males in the family were circumcised. Third, everyone was baptized. The tiniest children went through the “proselyte bath,” even sometimes on the day of their birth. Children were admitted to baptism even when only one parent joined Judaism. (Test. Of Levi 14:6, Mishnah, Pesahim 8:8, Sibyline Oracles 4:165-67; J. Jeremias, “Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries,” 1960, pp 37-40).
When Jesus, the fulfiller of Judaism, came to a people who for thousands of years had been admitting Jewish children into the covenant at the express command of God to Abraham, and when for a long time they had been admitting the children of the gentile converts by baptizing them along with all the rest of the family, the fact that the New Testament is silent with regard to infant baptism is formidable!!! If Jesus had meant to change this age old procedure, He would have mentioned it. Other changes from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, like circumcision and law keeping generated much debate and left traces throughout the New Testament (e.g., Acts 15).
In Acts 2:39, we read that the promise of baptism is not only for the adults there, but also “for your children.”!!! The most natural way for Jew to have understood Peter’s statement was that both he and his children were to be baptized.
I hope this helps!
Peace,
Fiat
When gentile converts came over into Judaism from some pagan background, three things took place. First, the head of the family offered sacrifices. Second, the males in the family were circumcised. Third, everyone was baptized. The tiniest children went through the “proselyte bath,” even sometimes on the day of their birth. Children were admitted to baptism even when only one parent joined Judaism. (Test. Of Levi 14:6, Mishnah, Pesahim 8:8, Sibyline Oracles 4:165-67; J. Jeremias, “Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries,” 1960, pp 37-40).
When Jesus, the fulfiller of Judaism, came to a people who for thousands of years had been admitting Jewish children into the covenant at the express command of God to Abraham, and when for a long time they had been admitting the children of the gentile converts by baptizing them along with all the rest of the family, the fact that the New Testament is silent with regard to infant baptism is formidable!!! If Jesus had meant to change this age old procedure, He would have mentioned it. Other changes from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, like circumcision and law keeping generated much debate and left traces throughout the New Testament (e.g., Acts 15).
In Acts 2:39, we read that the promise of baptism is not only for the adults there, but also “for your children.”!!! The most natural way for Jew to have understood Peter’s statement was that both he and his children were to be baptized.
I hope this helps!
Peace,
Fiat
P
Paul_W
Guest
John did not baptise people into the Catholic Church, nor any other Christian church. He called people to repent, to prepare themselves for the one who would follow him, i.e. Jesus. But being baptised by John did not automatically make a person a follower of Christ.
If you are a “John-the-Baptistian” then you should follow his directives to the letter, and ignore most of the rest of the New Testament.
If you are a Christian, then follow the example of all of the apostles, who were commissioned by Jesus to spread his message. The apostles were inspired by everything our Lord said and did during three years of public ministry, not just the “highlights” documented in the New Testament. From the earliest days, the apostles baptised whole families, even those who were too young to repent.
F
Fiat
Guest
Dear SPOKENWORD:
Also, when you insist that repentance must precede baptism and therefore that precludes infants from being eligible for baptism, you create an additional hurdle for yourself. You have to some how assert that the “age of accountability” is a Biblical concept.
Your Brother,
Fiat
Also, when you insist that repentance must precede baptism and therefore that precludes infants from being eligible for baptism, you create an additional hurdle for yourself. You have to some how assert that the “age of accountability” is a Biblical concept.
Your Brother,
Fiat
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
Yes br. Fiat,But God is in control. He will not allow one of these little ones to perish. I trust Him because He loves us to much that babies would perish.
God Bless
G
Gene_C
Guest
Hi all,
What circumcision was to the old covenant, baptism is to the new covenant. How do I know this? Colossians 2:11-12:
“11 In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature,not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.”
Were adult males circumcised? Yes. Were infant males circumcised? Yes.
For an excellent article on infant baptism, go to the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of American Web site at www.goarch.org.
This article convinced me.
Blessings,
Gene C.
What circumcision was to the old covenant, baptism is to the new covenant. How do I know this? Colossians 2:11-12:
“11 In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature,not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.”
Were adult males circumcised? Yes. Were infant males circumcised? Yes.
For an excellent article on infant baptism, go to the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of American Web site at www.goarch.org.
This article convinced me.
Blessings,
Gene C.
M
MariaG
Guest
Spokenword,
So do you think the Early Church in 200AD had already fallen into false teachings since they baptized infants?
God Bless,
Maria
So do you think the Early Church in 200AD had already fallen into false teachings since they baptized infants?
God Bless,
Maria
R
RBushlow
Guest
There is no prescription as to an age restriction for baptism in the scripture. Anything pretending claim such is simply dishonest. It is clear from historical records that the earliest Christians practices infant baptism.
God Bless.
God Bless.
- Status