Does the bible have any Infant Baptism passage?

[MrS]

I haven’t seen this commentary in this thread yet, so here goes…

We gain a much better understanding of what is meant by a scriptural passage if we understand of the intention of the source… the Jews often used what we refer to now as an idiom in their grammer … an understanding that is not written, but clear just the same.

Example, the passage stating that those who don’t work will not be fed. To take that literally, we would have to starve the infirmed and the babies… they don’t work, so they don’t eat,

But the idiom, the implication is “If you are able to work”, and you don’t work, you don’t get fed.

With this discussion on baptism: "If you are able to repent, and you don’t repent, you won’t get fed!!

SPOKENWORD takes the passages literally, hence his understanding of simply Repent and be baptized means, for him you have to be able to repent. The Catholic teaching is “if you are able”.

God’s mercy works for only the Catholic interpretation. He will take care of the infirmed, the mentally impaired, the babies, and all those who are temporarily or permanently unable to repent. Hence the passages of whole families (babies too, infirmed too, ) being baptized.

To withhold baptism from a child is terrible. To teach that one must do something (repent, say the sinner’s prayer, have an altar call etc) to be saved is unbiblical. Usually it is the claim that the Catholic “works” their way to salvation. Seems like this non-Catholic teaching of waiting until you can do something (repent) is faulty theology.

Lastly, baptism is something God does to us… not the other way around. We actually become sons of God, and heirs to heaven.

 

[SPOKENWORD]

MrS:

I

God’s mercy works for only the Catholic interpretation. He will take care of the infirmed, the mentally impaired, the babies, and all those who are temporarily or permanently unable to repent. Hence the passages of whole families (babies too, infirmed too, ) being baptized.

To withhold baptism from a child is terrible. To teach that one must do something (repent, say the sinner’s prayer, have an altar call etc) to be saved is unbiblical. Usually it is the claim that the Catholic “works” their way to salvation. Seems like this non-Catholic teaching of waiting until you can do something (repent) is faulty theology.

Lastly, baptism is something God does to us… not the other way around. We actually become sons of God, and heirs to heaven.

Thats not what im saying Of course God is going to take care of the infirmed,babies,and those unable to repent.I say you you have to be capable of repenting in order to be baptised in the Holy Spirit,excluding those that cannot.Jesus said, If you confess with your mouth and believe in your heart you will be saved.The Word of God has many IFS AND BUTS. IF you confess with your mouth and believe in your heart that Jesus is your Lord,you shall be saved.Its not a magical formular. God Bless

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Hi SPOKENWORD!

SPOKENWORD:

Thats not what im saying Of course God is going to take care of the infirmed,babies,and those unable to repent.I say you you have to be capable of repenting in order to be baptised in the Holy Spirit,excluding those that cannot.

We agree here. Those who cannot repent can still be baptised and receive the holy Spirit. Of course, at some point, those who were baptised and eventually become able to repent must do so.

Jesus said, If you confess with your mouth and believe in your heart you will be saved.The Word of God has many IFS AND BUTS. IF you confess with your mouth and believe in your heart that Jesus is your Lord,you shall be saved.Its not a magical formular. God Bless

Again, this must be understood that this is for those who are able to do so. If not, the confession is made by someone on the person’s behalf until the time that they are able to do so for themselves.

By the way, this confession with the mouth took place at the time of water baptism.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[SPOKENWORD]

Yes John preached repentence symbolized by water immersion. I agree its only Jesus baptism [Holy Spirit] that is active as in Eph.4 One Baptism] The question now how does one recieve this Holy Ghost baptism and when? It is recieved when one becomes born again. Just like in the story of Nicodemos. Born once from the flesh and the second birth by recieving the Holy Spirit. This happens when we repent and recieve Jesus as Lord and Savior.This is the first step in our walk towards the Kingdom. We become a new creation and the old dies away. We crucify our flesh daily and die to sin. We then become who Christ called us to be. Im sorry that many are confused by what I say.This is what I believe,if it goes against the Catholic church teachings ,then we are not in agreement. I dont claim to have it all right, its just my understanding. God Bless.

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Hi SPOKENWORD!

SPOKENWORD:

Yes John preached repentence symbolized by water immersion. I agree its only Jesus baptism [Holy Spirit] that is active as in Eph.4 One Baptism] The question now how does one recieve this Holy Ghost baptism and when? It is recieved when one becomes born again. Just like in the story of Nicodemos. Born once from the flesh and the second birth by recieving the Holy Spirit. This happens when we repent and recieve Jesus as Lord and Savior…

Paul specifically tells us that one is born again (dies and rises to new life) in baptism:

Romans 6:3-4 Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.

This is the most perfect explanation of what it means to be born again that scripture has to offer and Paul specifically says that this occurs when one is baptised. Elsewhere Paul also says that “whoever is in Christ is a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17)”. How does one get to be "in Christ? Paul tells us in Romans 6:3 that one is baptized into Christ.

John the Baptist’s baptism was one of repentence alone. It was merely symbolic of one’s intention to repent. This was nothing new. It didn’t suddenly appear with John the Baptist but had been practiced by the Jews for a long time as a ritual bath symbolizing one’s being made clean. Even the pagans practiced baptism. However, after the death and resurrection of Christ water baptism completely changed. Now, when one is “baptised into Christ (Romans 6:3)” one is born again (Romans 6:3-4) by becoming a dwelling place of God himself (John 1:33, Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:20-21).

Where do you believe that scripture teaches that one is made a new creation at the moment that one receives Jesus as Lord and Savior?

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[mercygate]

SPOKENWORD:

The question now how does one recieve this Holy Ghost baptism and when? It is recieved when one becomes born again. Just like in the story of Nicodemos.

The Nicodemus passage DOES talk about being born again; no problem there. But it conspicuously refers to baptism as well:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (Jn 3:5)

For Jesus, the Spirit came at “water baptism.” The fact that this is recounted in all four Gospels is extremely compelling support for the view that the Spirit is conferred at water Baptism (Mt 3:16, Mk 1:10, Lk 3:22, Jn 1:32).

 

[SPOKENWORD]

Catholic4aReasn:

Hi SPOKENWORD!

Paul specifically tells us that one is born again (dies and rises to new life) in baptism:

Romans 6:3-4 Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.

This is the most perfect explanation of what it means to be born again that scripture has to offer and Paul specifically says that this occurs when one is baptised. Elsewhere Paul also says that “whoever is in Christ is a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17)”. How does one get to be "in Christ? Paul tells us in Romans 6:3 that one is baptized into Christ.

John the Baptist’s baptism was one of repentence alone. It was merely symbolic of one’s intention to repent. This was nothing new. It didn’t suddenly appear with John the Baptist but had been practiced by the Jews for a long time as a ritual bath symbolizing one’s being made clean. Even the pagans practiced baptism. However, after the death and resurrection of Christ water baptism completely changed. Now, when one is “baptised into Christ (Romans 6:3)” one is born again (Romans 6:3-4) by becoming a dwelling place of God himself (John 1:33, Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:20-21).

Where do you believe that scripture teaches that one is made a new creation at the moment that one receives Jesus as Lord and Savior?

In Christ,
Nancy

One is made a new creation because our slate is clean and all our sins are forgiven.We have been saved by His Blood. This new creation is a result of the works of the Holy Spirit. I agree it is a process becoming a new creation. Thats why we become Christlike every day because we are dying to sin and crucifying our flesh. God Bless.

 

[SPOKENWORD]

mercygate:

The Nicodemus passage DOES talk about being born again; no problem there. But it conspicuously refers to baptism as well:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (Jn 3:5)

For Jesus, the Spirit came at “water baptism.” The fact that this is recounted in all four Gospels is extremely compelling support for the view that the Spirit is conferred at water Baptism (Mt 3:16, Mk 1:10, Lk 3:22, Jn 1:32).

This is when God chose to reveal the Blessed Trinity.Yes ,Jesus[son] became the[Holy] Spirit and the Father became Jesus {flesh] God Bless.

 

[mercygate]

SPOKENWORD:

This is when God chose to reveal the Blessed Trinity.Yes ,Jesus[son] became the[Holy] Spirit and the Father became Jesus {flesh] God Bless.

That’s amazing. I see it. One of those “obvious” trinitarian things that is only obvious to us who have 2000 years of history to tell us we have a Trinity, but nevertheless, it works! But Gabriel told Mary that Jesus would be called the Son of God – so that was already revealed. What you are saying here is that all three come together here, if I take your meaning correctly.

How is this view incompatible with the idea that the Holy Spirit is conferred at Baptism? It would seem to affirm the Trinitarian thrust of the Sacrament – “In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Hi SPOKENWORD!

SPOKENWORD:

One is made a new creation because our slate is clean and all our sins are forgiven.We have been saved by His Blood. This new creation is a result of the works of the Holy Spirit. I agree it is a process becoming a new creation. Thats why we become Christlike every day because we are dying to sin and crucifying our flesh. God Bless.

I agree.

Where do you believe that scripture teaches that one is made a new creation at the moment that one receives Jesus as Lord and Savior?

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

SPOKENWORD:

I personally believe it has nothing to do with age, But only when the child understands the purpose. God Bless.

And where is that explicitly stated in the bible. I want it worded something like “And do NOT baptise if the recipient doesn’t fully understand”

 

[SPOKENWORD]

mercygate:

That’s amazing. I see it. One of those “obvious” trinitarian things that is only obvious to us who have 2000 years of history to tell us we have a Trinity, but nevertheless, it works! But Gabriel told Mary that Jesus would be called the Son of God – so that was already revealed. What you are saying here is that all three come together here, if I take your meaning correctly.

How is this view incompatible with the idea that the Holy Spirit is conferred at Baptism? It would seem to affirm the Trinitarian thrust of the Sacrament – “In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”

Yes, The THREE come together, Aren,t you excited about this new 2000 year old revelation? How about this one,Jesus has been around since the Beginning for He was the Word.Another 2000 year old revelation. God Bless

 

[Church_Militant]

SPOKENWORD:

Hi.Fiat ,The truth is that there is biblical proof about children but I disagree about infants.Its all based on speculation. Jesus did say let the children come to me. Think about this statement. Children can approach Jesus by themselves,but ask you infant baby
to approach Jesus and that is not going to happen. Yes , this is in Gods hands not mine. With God all things are possible. God Bless.

WAIT a minute…isn’t that the same passage in The gospels where the women were bringing their babies to Jesus to have him lay hands on them? Here’s a scriptural evidence from Luke 18:15** And they brought unto him also infants, that he might touch them. Which when the disciples saw, they rebuked them.**

 

[catholicconvert]

In Gen. 17:14f the rite of circumsion was to be performed (as God told Abraham for his descendants to do) on infant males. St Paul (Col 2:11) equates Christian baptism with that OT rite. The rite of baptism makes one a Christian. It’s precedent for that is back in the Genesis text, where further down in the same chapter we’re told that infants who were NOT circumsized were specifically said to be outside the covenant. That circumsion was not devoid of importance is shown by Ex. 4:24 where God was about to kill Moses for neglecting the rite for his son. So, to God, the OT rite was not “just a sign or only a symbol” as many—but not all—of our Protestant friends like to say. With St Paul putting the OT rite and the Christian NT rite of baptism on equal terms, how trivial is baptism? If the OT rite carried spiritual benefits, how empty is the replacement NT rite? Incidentally, you may want to see Steve Ray’s good account Crossing The Tiber, which you can get from www.ignatius.com. He gives a good defence of the rite of baptism showing how our “symbol only” Protestant Christian friends have botched the meaning, leaving baptism only an empty egg-shell.

Danny House

 

[SPOKENWORD]

Church Militant:

WAIT a minute…isn’t that the same passage in The gospels where the women were bringing their babies to Jesus to have him lay hands on them? Here’s a scriptural evidence from Luke 18:15** And they brought unto him also infants**, that he might touch them. Which when the disciples saw, they rebuked them.

Hi CM. Is the laying on of hands the same as water baptism.? God Bless

 

[SPOKENWORD]

catholicconvert:

In Gen. 17:14f the rite of circumsion was to be performed (as God told Abraham for his descendants to do) on infant males. St Paul (Col 2:11) equates Christian baptism with that OT rite. The rite of baptism makes one a Christian. It’s precedent for that is back in the Genesis text, where further down in the same chapter we’re told that infants who were NOT circumsized were specifically said to be outside the covenant. That circumsion was not devoid of importance is shown by Ex. 4:24 where God was about to kill Moses for neglecting the rite for his son. So, to God, the OT rite was not “just a sign or only a symbol” as many—but not all—of our Protestant friends like to say. With St Paul putting the OT rite and the Christian NT rite of baptism on equal terms, how trivial is baptism? If the OT rite carried spiritual benefits, how empty is the replacement NT rite? Incidentally, you may want to see Steve Ray’s good account Crossing The Tiber, which you can get from www.ignatius.com. He gives a good defence of the rite of baptism showing how our “symbol only” Protestant Christian friends have botched the meaning, leaving baptism only an empty egg-shell.

Danny House

Hi Danny, Were the girls circumsized also? God Bless

 

[MariaG]

Spokenword,

Do you think the Early Church in 200AD had fallen into false teaching since they taught infant, regenerative baptism?

God Bless,
Maria

 

[breneriu]

Tell me if I’m wrong Paul W but, even though Jesus never left instructions on baptism he did tell Peter in Matt. 16:19 that what you prohibit on earth will be prohibited in heaven and what you permit on earth will be permitted in heaven.Therefore if the Catholic church permits infant baptism, should’nt it is permited in heaven?

 

[Church_Militant]

breneriu:

Tell me if I’m wrong Paul W but, even though Jesus never left instructions on baptism he did tell Peter in Matt. 16:19 that what you prohibit on earth will be prohibited in heaven and what you permit on earth will be permitted in heaven.Therefore if the Catholic church permits infant baptism, should’nt it is permited in heaven?

Brilliantly put sir! I had forgotten that …as have so many others…

 

[Church_Militant]

SPOKENWORD:

Hi CM. Is the laying on of hands the same as water baptism.? God Bless

NOPE…but the fact is that Jesus wanted those infants to be brought to him. You border on legalism w/ the way you insist on such a rigid interpretation of your Bible verses. You better go back and see how Jesus himself and the apostles quoted scripture about the messiah…most of that doesn’t expressly SAY it applies to the messiah…we only know that in retrospect and because it was pointed out to us by Jesus and the writers of the NT.

Since circumcision is a TYPE ( a foreshadowing) of baptism, then it holds true that infants should partake. Just as Jews make a commitment to raise their children in their faith , so also do Christians. (Don’ EVEN dodge the issue with those cracks about "What about the girls? You know better…to follow THAT line one would say that salvation is for males only…which is patently not the case.) The fact that the infant cannot make a profession of faith does not invalidate his entrance into Judaism…so also among Catholics (and Christians). Most non-Catholics don’t even consider baptism necessary for salvation! Do you? There is a very strong Biblical case for the necessity of baptism. The Catholic Church has the only viable answer to this issue (IMO).
Baptism of desire-St. Dismas (the good thief on the cross)
Baptism of blood-Martyrs who died for their faith before being baptised in water, (Would this possibly be grounds for he NT verse that speaks of baptism for the dead, maybe? A practice that St. Paul acknowleges but does not comment on.)
Then of course, Baptism of water.
To my mind no other church has a doctrine on baptism that is even nearly as scriptural as the Catholic Church. :clapping: :dancing: :yup: :bounce: