Where are the Bible verses to back up baby sprinkling?

[po18guy]

Let me start by saying I have rarely seen such paranoia in my life. If you think Protestant Pastors spend their time spreading lies and falsehood about Catholics, think again. In my 7 years as a Protestant ( not Baptist by the way ) I have NEVER heard a Pastor even mention the word Catholic from the pulpit or otherwise.Could you please enlighten me by referring me to the scriptural verses supporting your statement that triple" pouring "and triple immersion are the ONLY valid methods of Baptism.NLM

Please re-read the post. I spoke specifically of various Baptist congregations because, in my experience searching the web, they are some of the most egregious offenders against the truth. Now, I will happily grant that they do not do this knowingly. However, does truth matter?

Please re-read the post regarding the method of Baptism. It refers you to the Catechism, which the Apostles and their successors had the authority to establish. Jesus gave them the authority. That is in the bible.

Also consider this: The bible itself tells you that it is incomplete (Luke 3:18, John 20:30, John 21:25, Acts 2:40 and 1 Corinthians 11:34) If you demand to live by everything in the bible answer me this: Do you still have both hands, both eyes and both feet? If so, it appears that YOU do not follow the bible. (Mark 9:47).

What I am reacting to is the accusing attitude of your OP. It came off as an accusation rather than an inquiry.

 

[estesbob]

Where are the Bible verses to back up baby sprinkling?

What is baby sprinkling?

 

[estesbob]

I also was baptised after I left the Cathoilc church.It was based on MY understanding of the commitment I was making.I BELIEVED , I REPENTED and I ACCEPTED Jesus as my Lord and Saviour and by Rising and publicly being baptised I committed to living my life as a Christian.** It was an EXTRAORDINARY experience**.One I would HIGHLY recommend.NLM

I am sure it was-that is almost always the case when one trades the truth for emotion.

 

[jokerman]

this is a loaded question. the Church doesnt need verses, She has the authority granted Her by Christ Himself to bind and loose. If you want a verse for that its Matt 16:18-19.

 

[estesbob]

this is a loaded question. the Church doesnt need verses, She has the authority granted Her by Christ Himself to bind and loose. If you want a verse for that its Matt 16:18-19.

Actually i think its found in the same chapter as altar calls and the sinners prayer are,

 

[David_Eckel]

:tiphat:

If you look on baptism as a form of healing and if you look on infant baptism as the healing of a child based not on his own faith but based on the faith of his parents, then support for infant baptism can be found in many of the healing miracles of Jesus, such as the raising of the synagogue leader’s daughter from the dead (Matt 9:18-19, 23-25), the exorcism of the Canaanite woman’s daughter (Matt 15:21-28), and the raising of the widow’s son from the dead (Luke 7:11-15). Even, the healing of the centurion’s servant (Matt 8:5-13), where the healing was not based on the servant’s own faith but on the faith of his master, the centurion, can be used to back up the practice of infant baptism.

Todd, that was an excellent exigesis!

 

[MercyMia]

So I guess this begs the question of where in scripture you see someone being born into a Christian household, being reared Christian, reaching the magical and elusive age of accountability (12…or 13 is it? I seem to have forgotten, so can you provide the book, chapter and verse for that fact? Thanks!) and then choosing to be baptized?
The idea of repenting and then being baptized applies to adult converts - those are the people you see repenting and being baptized in the New Testament. This still applies today. Entire households where baptized, with no mention of the children being put off until they reached the “age of accountability.” Nowhere is baptism referred to as an adult privilege. At what point does the stain of original sin plaster itself onto an adult person? It is sudden, you wake up one morning and you have sin? Or does it apply in small coats? It just doesn’t make sense that a certain age the fall takes its effect on individuals. It was a collective fall, collective of all souls of man kind. If not, why were Adam and Eve’s children fallen too? Wouldn’t they have been spotless until they reached this “age of accountablity” too?

 

[bmadamsberry]

Let me start by saying I have rarely seen such paranoia in my life. If you think Protestant Pastors spend their time spreading lies and falsehood about Catholics, think again. In my 7 years as a Protestant ( not Baptist by the way ) I have NEVER heard a Pastor even mention the word Catholic from the pulpit or otherwise.Could you please enlighten me by referring me to the scriptural verses supporting your statement that triple" pouring "and triple immersion are the ONLY valid methods of Baptism.NLM

It’s not paranoia. I went to a Protestant Church for 20 years of my life (I still go because I know some of the older folks who are like my grandparents and so it’s the only time I get to see them), and I have heard Catholic fear spilling into the congregation all 20 years. In fact, when I went to RCIA for the first time, I had to make sure that it was a Catholic Church because they were telling me that the Church believed things that my Protestant Pastor said they believed differently about.
So, there ya go.

 

[po18guy]

Let me start by saying I have rarely seen such paranoia in my life. If you think Protestant Pastors spend their time spreading lies and falsehood about Catholics, think again. In my 7 years as a Protestant ( not Baptist by the way ) I have NEVER heard a Pastor even mention the word Catholic from the pulpit or otherwise.Could you please enlighten me by referring me to the scriptural verses supporting your statement that triple" pouring "and triple immersion are the ONLY valid methods of Baptism.NLM

Sure! Matthew 28:19. Now, since Jesus instituted the Sacrament of Baptism, and taught his Apostles to Baptize, do you think they got it right? Do you suppose that this was passed on from the Apostles to those who followed them?

 

[mark_t_cassidy]

wmscott Personally I don’t think GOD cares about the method used for baptism . I don’t believe he is that petty. But I do believe it is dangerous for an infant to be baptised with the parents believing that his ticket has been punched to heaven. Because baptism does not save a person, faith in Jesus does.

 

[po18guy]

Personally I don’t think GOD cares about the method used for baptism.

God in Christ cared enough to teach it and pass it on.

But I do believe it is dangerous for an infant to be baptised with the parents believing that his ticket has been punched to heaven. Because baptism does not save a person, faith in Jesus does.

Baptism by itself only cleanses you of sin and is your entry into the Church. What one does with his or her faith afterwards is also crucial. As to Baptism, Peter believes it saves you. Please see 1 Peter 3:21 and following. Also Acts 22:16. Paul also believes that it saves through the washing away of sins. Nothing unclean can enter Heaven, according to Revelation 21:27.

So, the question becomes why did Jesus teach both faith and baptism? Could it be because both are needed? I don’t think Jesus said or did anything that did not have eternal consequences.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Where are the Bible verses to back up baby sprinkling?

Where does the Bible teach that we have to prove EVERYTHING from the Bible? Seriously…where?

As for baptism by immersion only, why do you cling to something that the earliest Christians did not insist upon?

The Didache (ca. AD 70)

After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. If you have no living water, then baptize in other water, and if you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Before baptism, let the one baptizing and the one to be baptized fast, as also any others who are able. Command the one who is to be baptized to fast beforehand for one or two days (Didache 7:1 [ca. A.D. 70]).

 

[Randy_Carson]

You forgot to mention when Peter baptised Cornelius and his household (Acts 10). However, I don’t see any mention in any of your citations of how old the youngest member of the household was. On the other hand, I see plenty of evidence where people believed first, then they were baptised (such as the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8, Cornelius in Acts 10, and even Paul’s instructions to the jailer in Acts 16). I have thought very carefully about what I believed when I was baptised in the Catholic Church, and the best I can come up with is “I believe the guy in the dress is really annoying.” I was baptised properly after leaving the Catholic Church (with full knowledge of what I was doing, and believing on the Lord Jesus Christ as my Lord, God and Saviour).

Actually, you were “baptized” a second time…something which is not scriptural since the Bible speaks of “one Lord, one faith, one baptism”.

In other words, you denied what God did for you the first time (how offensive is that?) and simply got wet the second time.

Whew!

BTW, my sister, a former Baptist, non-denominational type, has been baptized three times now…once as an infant and twice as an adult when she had “full knowledge of what [she] was doing”. So, which of these baptisms would you say “took”? Her second or her third?

Neither. She was born again the Bible way when she was baptized as an infant.

 

[Randy_Carson]

You forgot to mention when Peter baptised Cornelius and his household (Acts 10). However, I don’t see any mention in any of your citations of how old the youngest member of the household was. On the other hand, I see plenty of evidence where people believed first, then they were baptised (such as the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8, Cornelius in Acts 10, and even Paul’s instructions to the jailer in Acts 16). I have thought very carefully about what I believed when I was baptised in the Catholic Church, and the best I can come up with is “I believe the guy in the dress is really annoying.” I was baptised properly after leaving the Catholic Church (with full knowledge of what I was doing, and believing on the Lord Jesus Christ as my Lord, God and Saviour).

One other point…we should not be surprised to see mostly adult baptisms in the Bible since the NT era was primarily focuses on first-generation beleivers. However, whole households and large crowds were baptized.

A few examples:

The Church Begins to Preach Baptism

Acts 2:38-39
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

Peter did not say, “Every one of you adults”; he said, “Every one of you” without qualification and added “the promise (of the Holy Spirit) is for you and your children”. Baptism and the Holy Spirit are frequently connected throughout the Bible (cf. Ez. 36:25-27, Mt. 3:16, Jn. 3:5).

Acts 10:47-48
Then Peter said, 47"Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." 48So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius which probably included infants and young children. There is not one word in this passage (or any other in scripture) about baptism being limited to adults.

Acts 16:15
13On the Sabbath we went outside the city gate to the river, where we expected to find a place of prayer. We sat down and began to speak to the women who had gathered there. 14One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. 15When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home.

Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word “household” comes from the Greek word “oikos” which is a household that includes infants and children. Further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia’s faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents’ faith, not the children’s faith.

 

[jmcrae]

I have no bones to pick with anyone but this is how I see it. 1) Throughtout the N T people were called to repent and be baptised. Infants cannot repent.2) Baptism was always by emersion, sprinkling was never mentioned.

What do you mean by “sprinkling”?

We do have a Rite of Sprinkling in the Catholic Church, but it isn’t done during Baptism itself - rather, it is done during the Easter Season, to remind those already baptized of their baptismal commitments.

In the Catholic Church, we typically baptize by pouring water over the person’s head three times. This is far from sprinkling - the person does get good and wet, at least on the head.

1. In Luke 18: 15-16 Jesus touching the children has nothing to do with baptism and you know it.

It has to do with who is welcome to join the Church, and since Baptism is the first Sacrament of Initiation - that is to say, the means by which we become members of the Church - we can certainly look to Jesus’ attitude toward children and see that He would certainly have wanted them to be baptized, right along with their parents and other family members - His demonstration shows clearly that Christianity is not supposed to be an “adults only” enterprise.

Lastly Lydia and Stephanas households that were baptised by Paul does not mention weather infants were in those households and does not state that any were baptised.

Considering that this took place many, many centuries before the invention of birth control, it stands to reason that a household with married couples in it is very likely also to have children in it. In any case, even if one converting couple happened to be naturally infertile, it boggles the imagination that every single one of the three thousand households converting to Christianity were all infertile.

 

[FCEGM]

One other point…we should not be surprised to see mostly adult baptisms in the Bible since the NT era was primarily focuses on first-generation beleivers. However, whole households and large crowds were baptized… . .

Yup. Scott Hahn makes the point in one of his audio-tape studies that in the ancient world of those societies where circumcision was practiced it was the Jews alone who circumcised infants, whereas the other societies waited until the boy was about to enter manhood, thus it was a rite of passage associated with fertility. For the Jews, though, circumcision (and later Baptism with the Christians) was a sign of a covenant entered into with God. So you have to wonder how early Jewish Christians would see the denial of entrance into the New Covenant for their infants to be an improvement on the Old Covenant with its circumsion of male children into that Covenant. If the New Covenant surpasses the Old, why would it exclude children of believers when children had formerly been included? Fortunately, they didn’t have that concern.

 

[jmtowle]

regarding nlm’s post # 25

I’m 59 and was confirmed in the 6th grade @ age 12 which I thought was the universal age or grade for confirmation. I grew up in Chicago, so maybe they did things differently but I thought the Baltimore Catechism followed a timeline regarding Sacraments that was universal among Catholic grammar schools.

That said, times have changed and so has the thinking on the appropriate age for confirmation. I teach a confirmation class at our parish and it’s a two year process that begins with freshman and concludes with sophomores, ages 15 & 16.

The Catholic Church is a living entity and forever shaping and being shaped by it’s members. Vatican II is the most contemporary proof of this assertion.

The argument against infant baptism seems to me to be counter productive and illogical.
If baptizing an infant “could” guarantee that child’s eternal salvation, why would you want to block or prevent that possibility?

Is it possible that infant baptism could do damage to that person’s eternal soul? If you think it will, where is the bible verse explicitly forbidding such a practice?

I think the Catholic Church took the prudent action regarding infant baptism using the entirety of Sacred Scripture and the Wisdom of the Holy Spirit as it was infused into the minds of the original Apostles and early Church Fathers.

Just my opinion but that’s part of the reason I remain an active participant in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

May the Peace of Christ be with us all, always

JT

 

[awantz]

So, what if a baby dies before it is baptized?

 

[jmtowle]

originally posted by awantz

“So, what if a baby dies before it is baptized?”

Only God can and will answer that question. It may be safe to assume that all infants go to heaven if they die prematurely or pre birth but the reality is that no one knows with absolute certainty. With that in mind, the Church’s position of better safe than sorry seems prudent.

May the Peace of Christ be with us all, always

JT

 

[awantz]

originally posted by awantz

“So, what if a baby dies before it is baptized?”

Only God can and will answer that question. It may be safe to assume that all infants go to heaven if they die prematurely or pre birth but the reality is that no one knows with absolute certainty. With that in mind, the Church’s position of better safe than sorry seems prudent.

May the Peace of Christ be with us all, always

JT

I ask, because I lost one child prebirth and I lost another 47 minutes after birth. I was taught that the children are saved through the faith of his/ her parents. I was just wondering what the Catholic church believes. Thanks for your response.