Help me defend infant baptism!

[quasimodo]

we seem to be at an impass here about the truth of infant baptism. Let us turn to scripture. Scripture tells us that the church is the pillar and foundation of truth, the very bulwark of truth. OK, fine. Lets turn to the protestant invisible Christian church - Hmmm, they seem to point in all directions. Many practice infant baptism, yet a few others don’t. Are we to then accept that the pillar and foundation of truth cannot do its job? Has the New Testament misled us? Perhaps not. The vast majority of Christians baptize children and a few insist on earning it by making a profession of faith first. We have the great cloud of witnesses that surrounds us . Their witness is for infant baptism. They matter because they are alive in Christ. Theirs is the God of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob … the God of the living, not the dead. Infant baptism worked for them, they practiced it. They did not insist on earning it through a profession of faith.

I’ll stick with consistent Christian practice and the Catholic Church. Those scripture passages (concerning John the Baptist) being dismissed are not only giving us a story of singular events, they are guides for us. Jesus said that the infants should not be kept from him. Today the Church is the Body of Christ (according to Paul.) Baptism is entrance to the Church, that is the body of Christ … the same Christ that did not want the children kept from him.

The NT full of another idea: The faith of one person affects the process of salvation of another. It is amazing how often this idea comes up, really. Just so, the faith of the parent begins the process of salvation for their children. You see, salvation is a process not an event…(at least Paul says it is.)

 

[NotWorthy]

I can’t help but repeat this post. If the Scriptures are vague about the practice of infant baptism (How long are we going to go back and forth on the household argument?), then look to the early church!!! During the time that the apostles were still alive, infant baptism was practiced! The only argument on infant baptism in the early church was how soon could it be done, 8th day or what.

I think the people that could personally ask this to the apostles know a little bit more about this than us.

Notworthy

 

[preacherman]

The bible says that when we reach the age of accountability (knowing right from wrong) then we must ask God (not man) to forgive us of our sins an infant that is just born does not need to be baptised to make it into heaven should that infant die before knowing right from wrong, I will not say infant baptism is invalid so muah as it is unnessercary.

 

[NotWorthy]

The bible says that when we reach the age of accountability (knowing right from wrong) then we must ask God (not man) to forgive us of our sins

Where does the Bible say this?

I see the Bible saying that Baptism replaces Circumcision (as being initiated into the Covenant). Circumcision was done on the child at 8 days old. The Early Church practiced Infant Baptism. The Early Church Father wrote on the merits of Infant Baptism.

The Denial of Infant Baptism didn’t come around til the 1600’s.

Which of these two practices (infant baptism vs. denial of infant baptism) seems to be a “Tradition of Men”?

an infant that is just born does not need to be baptised to make it into heaven should that infant die before knowing right from wrong, I will not say infant baptism is invalid so muah as it is unnessercary.

You are ignoring Paul’s teaching on Original Sin if you believe this.

 

[djrakowski]

The bible says that when we reach the age of accountability (knowing right from wrong) then we must ask God (not man) to forgive us of our sins an infant that is just born does not need to be baptised to make it into heaven should that infant die before knowing right from wrong, I will not say infant baptism is invalid so muah as it is unnessercary.

Preacher, as I asked in another thread (the one about infant dedication vs. baptism), I’d like to see scriptural proof of this “age of accountability” idea.

 

[NonDenom]

Neither can the severely mentally handicapped. Should baptism be denied them also?

Severely mentally handicapped people aren’t held responsible like those of us who know better.
In Him and Him Only

 

[preacherman]

NonDenom
Let me tell you this you may believe it or not but if
a person is born with a severe mental handicap and there is no hope except God heals them, they DO NOT NEED TO BE BAPTISED if they die they will be taken to heaven because they are not held accountable for their actions

 

[djrakowski]

Severely mentally handicapped people aren’t held responsible like those of us who know better.
In Him and Him Only

NonDenom
Let me tell you this you may believe it or not but if
a person is born with a severe mental handicap and there is no hope except God heals them, they DO NOT NEED TO BE BAPTISED if they die they will be taken to heaven because they are not held accountable for their actions

NonDenom and preacherman,

Where do you find these ideas in scripture?

 

[NonDenom]

NonDenom
Let me tell you this you may believe it or not but if
a person is born with a severe mental handicap and there is no hope except God heals them, they DO NOT NEED TO BE BAPTISED if they die they will be taken to heaven because they are not held accountable for their actions

UH, I believe I said that they are NOT held accountable.

 

[SPH1]

UH, I believe I said that they are NOT held accountable.

So, you then believe that there are entire classes of people who do not need Christ as savior? Who can come to the Father apart from Christ?

Your examples might get “saved”, but it is by Christ acting as their unseen savior. Nobody comes to the Father but by Christ.

 

[SPH1]

One possible approach to the Baptist/non-Denom types might be to show them all of the other Churches - Eastern Orthodox and Protestant - who baptise infants. I have some listed on my Common Ground page (hopefully my proof links still work):

catholic-view.com/commonground.html

 

[Mickey]

they DO NOT NEED TO BE BAPTISED

Nowhere does Scripture ever teach that a person does not need to be baptized. Infant baptism is not an innovation. It is the practice of the early Church. Catholic, Orthodox, and many protestant denominations continue to practice infant baptism.
It is adult believer’s baptism which is the recent innovation and it saddens me that there are denominations (and non-denominations) which adhere to this odd understanding of such a beautiful sacrament. I am not going to change anyone’s mind here (the lowly sinner that I am). But I pray that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ can open the minds and hearts of those who have been led astray.

Peace and blessings,
Mickey

 

[NonDenom]

So, you then believe that there are entire classes of people who do not need Christ as savior?

Who can come to the Father apart from Christ?

Your examples might get “saved”, but it is by Christ acting as their unseen savior. Nobody comes to the Father but by Christ.

Where in the world did I say that entire classes of people don’t need a Savior? Why are you putting words in my mouth?.

 

[NonDenom]

Nowhere does Scripture ever teach that a person does not need to be baptized. Infant baptism is not an innovation. It is the practice of the early Church. Catholic, Orthodox, and many protestant denominations continue to practice infant baptism.

It is adult believer’s baptism which is the recent innovation and it saddens me that there are denominations (and non-denominations) which adhere to this odd understanding of such a beautiful sacrament. I am not going to change anyone’s mind here (the lowly sinner that I am). But I pray that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ can open the minds and hearts of those who have been led astray.

Peace and blessings,
Mickey

First of all I never said that a person doesn’t have to be Baptized. I believe that a person who is able to understand what they are doing has to get Baptized.
Secondly, you believe in infant Baptism so why do you wait until the eighth day, what about children that die before then or the millions that have died from abortion. Are they just out of luck.
In Him and Him Only

 

[SPH1]

Where in the world did I say that entire classes of people don’t need a Savior? Why are you putting words in my mouth?.

I guess I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that certain classes of people - infants, mentally handicapped, etc. - have no sin and therefore do not need baptism.

So, then…we agree? Even infants and mentally handicapped need Christ as Savior? Christ is the only way that they can come to the Father?

 

[SPH1]

Secondly, you believe in infant Baptism so why do you wait until the eighth day, what about children that die before then or the millions that have died from abortion. Are they just out of luck.
In Him and Him Only

How would YOU say that newborn infants get saved? You apparently agree above that even they need Christ as Savior, that nobody can come to the Father but by Christ.

Is this correct? Or do you admit of certain classes who do not need Christ as Savior (who can come to the Father apart from Christ)?

 

[Mickey]

First of all I never said that a person doesn’t have to be Baptized. I believe that a person who is able to understand what they are doing has to get Baptized.
Secondly, you believe in infant Baptism so why do you wait until the eighth day, what about children that die before then or the millions that have died from abortion. Are they just out of luck.

First of all, I was not addressing you.
Secondly, did I ever say that babies and children who are not baptized are condemned to hell?

Don’t put words in mouth.

 

[NonDenom]

First of all, I was not addressing you.

Secondly, did I ever say that babies and children who are not baptized are condemned to hell?

Don’t put words in mouth.

Hey Mick
I wasn’t addressing you, I was addressing SPH1.
Therefore I did not put words in your mouth. Sorry if I mislead you.
In Him and Him Only

 

[Mickey]

Hey Mick
I wasn’t addressing you, I was addressing SPH1.
Therefore I did not put words in your mouth. Sorry if I mislead you.

Look at post # 54.
I am not a mind reader.

 

[jazzman]

Where in the bible does it say that infants need not be baptized?

In Mt 28:19, Jesus says to make deciples of all nations and to baptize them in the name of the Father, Son, and The Holy Spirit.
I haven’t been able to locate any words in the bible that exclude children. Additionally, the bible contains examples of people being healed by God’s Grace due to the faith of others. When infants are baptized, the faith of the parents acts in the place of the childs inability to reason. When the child is Confirmed, he speaks for himself. Confirmation and baptism are linked.
Why do we baptize infants? Why not just wait for confirmation?
Quite simply, it is because we believe that this is what Jesus asked of us. It’s as simple as that.
I respect all of our Protestant brothers. Catholics and Protestants need eachother in todays world more than ever. Christians of all denominations need to pray for eachother. A Catholic who is “proud” to be Catholic misses the point…only by the grace of God, which is unmerrited by us, have we been given the fullness of the Christian faith. I understand that protestants feel otherwise. But the fact remains that we are all Christians and if we are to beleive the same doctrines again it will only happen according to God’s schedule.