C
Chris-WA
Guest
If there is no specific prohibition against it in the bible than I fail to see how one could justify a certain age for baptism on a biblical basis.
- Status
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
I think that the concept of infant baptism is foreign to LDS members because they do not accept the doctrine of original sin. If there is no original sin, then baptism is only efficacious in removing one’s own sins, which, presumably cannot be made until one knows that one is doing wrong. The LDS church seems to arbitrarily pick 8 years as the turning point at which one becomes responsible for one’s acts and thereby in need of baptism. Although the age seems like an arbitrary cutoff point, the logic is consistent with a denial of original sin.
Catholic doctrine - which acknowledges the consequences of original sin - sees the efficacious effect of baptism upon infants who are thereby born again into new life in Christ regardless of their consciousness of personal sin.
Just my humble opinion.
T
tkdnick
Guest
Robert in SD:
I would agree this number seems totally arbitrary (though it is in their D&C and presumably a revelation from God). The thought that anyone below the age of 8 cannot consciously choose to do wrong is incorrect. I know 2, 3, 4, 5, 6…year olds who knowingly and willingly lie, sneak, etc. You can’t tell me that when a 5 year old sneaks some cookies, eventhough his mom told him not to, and then lies about eating them, that he doesn’t know what he’s doing is wrong.
F
flameburns623
Guest
It’s sort of the way some folks interpret the constitution: “Everything which is not commanded is forbidden”. As opposed to the idea that “Everything which is not forbidden is permitted”, more widely held among Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and Reformational denominations. If you want to argue for or against the ‘Biblical position’, the arguments get rather involved and probably would not fit well with the purpose of this specific sub-forum.
Eight was chosen within the LDS Church by special revelation. Perhaps because of the tendency of proud parents to want to argue that THEIR child is certainly smarter than the norm and therefore should OF COURSE be presumed to have reached the age of accountability at age six or five or three or . . . ???
At some point in this race towards ever-younger baptisms one ends up baptising virtual infants–kids barely able to lisp, leading to the idea of paedobaptism (infant baptism). The BofM and D&C clearly fall on the side of baptism only of persons truly old enough to grasp the abstract concepts of sin, atonement, forgiveness, to at least some degree. In other words, Mormons largely accept the anabaptist position. This involves more than a sense of what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’.
It is not simply important that small children ‘know wrongness’ to some extent but that they also understand these other ideas sufficiently to have some awareness of a spiritual need for a Savior. That they know things are wrong not simply the way my dog knows certain thngs are wrong–because those things make me unhappy or will lead to some sort of temporal consequences–but because the child grasps the eternal consequences of wrong behavior. Generally this level of abstract thinking DOES take some time to develop. If you read the passages I cited in context, I think you’ll get a better idea of what issues the LDS Church was seeking to address.
Since paedobaptism is such an early practice,it is difficult to imagine it was not also an apostolic practice, but anabaptism is a widespread position held not simply by Mormons but by many Evangelicals and fundamentalists. Most of these groups would be very reluctant to baptise children much younger than eight as well, except in rare and unusual circumstances.
Of course, for many Evangelicals, baptism is not a ‘sacrament’ per se anyhow–it is a symbolic act which is in no way meritorious in itself. It is the ability to have ‘saving faith’ which is much more important to such Protestants. So there would be no urgency for non-Mormon Protestants to baptise children. But that issue would belong in another sub-forum. For Mormons, baptism IS an impotant ordinance, at least for those who attain the age of accountability.
C
catholic-rcia
Guest
At six years old my teacher brought out an obsidian rock to show the class. The black rock that looks like glass. She told us that it was formed by Volcanic action where sand got so hot that it melted into this rock form. I being six years old was fascinated; I had to have that rock. I asked the teacher, I told the teacher “I have to have that rock, I want that rock” She told me that it was hers. I thought about stealing it but I decided that I might get caught. So I began to plan another strategy.
That weekend my brother and my Father were going to my Aunt Evelans cabin at Lake Tahoe California. It was an hour and half drive so I had a lot of time to think about how I was going to get an obsidian rock. I asked my father if he would get me one, he said he would try. After I asked him 204 more times within about 30 minutes he got mad, he yelled at me “I will never get you that rock, he told me to shut up about the rock.” “Alright I will have to figure out another way to get it”
As we arrived at the cabin it came to me, a voice told me that all I would have to do is find some charcoal, some matches, something that will burn like wood, and then get the charcoal as hot as a volcano could get it. There was plenty of sand around to heat up but charcoal seemed to be the better choice because it was already in the shape of a rock and it was black.
So after everyone settled in for the weekend I began my mission. I was obsessed with Obsidian. I found some matches in a drawer and some charcoal in a bag. I did not want anyone to know what I was doing so I went to the back of the cabin and found a corner with two trees that blocked anyone from seeing me. Then the same voice I heard earlier told me exactly what to do, all I had to do was listen. It was like I had a best friend with me. It said “Make a little fire pit next to the cabin wall so the fire would be protected from the wind." Then it told me to gather a whole lot of old dry pine needles and put them into the fire pit. That was easy because there were so many pine needles on the ground that all I had to do was put some rocks on top and make a circle. The voice said “Good thinking” Then I lit the needles and placed the charcoal in the middle. I waited, but then something started to go wrong. The fire started coming out from around the rocks and it began to get bigger and bigger. Then my dad yelled from the front of the cabin that it was time for lunch. I knew I had a pretty big problem but the voice said “just go eat, it will be alright” I knew that was not right, but I had to have faith otherwise I would probably get caught. So I wiped my memory clean from this ordeal and went in to eat. As we were eating my brother pointed to the back window and started yelling “Fire! Fire!” Then on cue I started to yell “fire!fire!” as well. I thought I could just blend in!
Well my Aunt lost a quarter of her Cabin on that day and everyone was trying to blame it on me, a mere six year old. I did what I felt was the best thing to do given the situation. I looked them all in the eye, with tears and said. “I did not light that fire!” I remember when we returned home I ran to my mom telling her that everyone thinks I lit Aunt Evelans cabin on fire. She embraced me and told me that she would get to the bottom of this. Everything else is just a haze from that point on. I did eventually confess to the fire a few years later, 32 to be exact, I think it was after I was Baptized Catholic. But my dad just looked at me and laughed and said “I already knew” .I don’t know that if I was baptized as an infant if I would have been a bit smarter but I do know that at six I knew what I was doing. I knew it was wrong. But then again it was not me that told me to do it right? I just listened to the voice and did what I was told.
If anything is to be learned from this is that if you are LDS maybe you should suggest changing the age. I would suggest for your church it be 5, but to be safe make it happen as soon as they are born. Or right before they learn how to listen to voices or light a match.
God Bless
That weekend my brother and my Father were going to my Aunt Evelans cabin at Lake Tahoe California. It was an hour and half drive so I had a lot of time to think about how I was going to get an obsidian rock. I asked my father if he would get me one, he said he would try. After I asked him 204 more times within about 30 minutes he got mad, he yelled at me “I will never get you that rock, he told me to shut up about the rock.” “Alright I will have to figure out another way to get it”
As we arrived at the cabin it came to me, a voice told me that all I would have to do is find some charcoal, some matches, something that will burn like wood, and then get the charcoal as hot as a volcano could get it. There was plenty of sand around to heat up but charcoal seemed to be the better choice because it was already in the shape of a rock and it was black.
So after everyone settled in for the weekend I began my mission. I was obsessed with Obsidian. I found some matches in a drawer and some charcoal in a bag. I did not want anyone to know what I was doing so I went to the back of the cabin and found a corner with two trees that blocked anyone from seeing me. Then the same voice I heard earlier told me exactly what to do, all I had to do was listen. It was like I had a best friend with me. It said “Make a little fire pit next to the cabin wall so the fire would be protected from the wind." Then it told me to gather a whole lot of old dry pine needles and put them into the fire pit. That was easy because there were so many pine needles on the ground that all I had to do was put some rocks on top and make a circle. The voice said “Good thinking” Then I lit the needles and placed the charcoal in the middle. I waited, but then something started to go wrong. The fire started coming out from around the rocks and it began to get bigger and bigger. Then my dad yelled from the front of the cabin that it was time for lunch. I knew I had a pretty big problem but the voice said “just go eat, it will be alright” I knew that was not right, but I had to have faith otherwise I would probably get caught. So I wiped my memory clean from this ordeal and went in to eat. As we were eating my brother pointed to the back window and started yelling “Fire! Fire!” Then on cue I started to yell “fire!fire!” as well. I thought I could just blend in!
Well my Aunt lost a quarter of her Cabin on that day and everyone was trying to blame it on me, a mere six year old. I did what I felt was the best thing to do given the situation. I looked them all in the eye, with tears and said. “I did not light that fire!” I remember when we returned home I ran to my mom telling her that everyone thinks I lit Aunt Evelans cabin on fire. She embraced me and told me that she would get to the bottom of this. Everything else is just a haze from that point on. I did eventually confess to the fire a few years later, 32 to be exact, I think it was after I was Baptized Catholic. But my dad just looked at me and laughed and said “I already knew” .I don’t know that if I was baptized as an infant if I would have been a bit smarter but I do know that at six I knew what I was doing. I knew it was wrong. But then again it was not me that told me to do it right? I just listened to the voice and did what I was told.
If anything is to be learned from this is that if you are LDS maybe you should suggest changing the age. I would suggest for your church it be 5, but to be safe make it happen as soon as they are born. Or right before they learn how to listen to voices or light a match.
God Bless
F
flameburns623
Guest
If anything your story shows the temporality of your thinking at that age–you lacked the ability to foresee future consequences to any great degree. Just as a dog might steal a piece of dark chocolate, even though chocolate is toxic to dogs, so you were focused upon obtaining an obsidian rock without any thought to how your actions might cause harm to yourself or others… When things went afoul you became focused upon avoiding possible temporal consequences.
Those who would argue for the anabaptist position would say that until you could truly grasp that your actions were not really ‘wrong’ but ‘sinful’–i.e. that wrong behavior had long-term eternal consequences–baptism would in no way have benefitted you. Better to have used the water on the fire than on the boy who built the fire.
T
tkdnick
Guest
So my question to someone of this belief would be, “What makes you think an 8 year old understands this?” I don’t think someone at that age can really understand that concept. I don’t think even some teenagers understand that concept. There’s probably adults who don’t get that.
C
catholic-rcia
Guest
(Acts 16:15). “the same hour of the night . . . he was baptized, with all his family” (Acts 16:33) “I did baptize also the household of Stephanas” (1 Cor. 1:16).
Definition of “Household” in Greek
We know that the Greek word oikos, translated “house” or “household,” has traditionally included infants and children in its meaning for several reasons. There is no evidence of this word being used either in secular Greek, Biblical Greek,or in the writing of Hellenistic Judaism in a way which would restrict its meaning only to adults. The Old Testament parallel for “house” carries the sense of the entire family. The Greek translation of the original Hebrew manuscripts (completed in 250 B.C.) uses this word when translating the Hebrew word meaning the complete family (men, women, children, infants). Similarly, we know that the phrase “he and his house” refers to the total family; the Old Testament use of this phrase clearly demonstrates this by specifically mentioning the presence of children and infants at times.
Baptism is a gift to the whole family at any age, to cloth yourself in the blood of Christ. It is not earned by an age of reason. It is a free gift for the entire household of God to heal from our fallen nature. It’s all about healing. Christ forgave us our sins on the Cross, now we spend a lifetime of healing from that sin through the Sacraments. Not to gain an admission, or to be worthy, or to succeed, it is to heal. Baptism brings us into that death, into that resurrection; it is freely given in the apostolic Church. You would be hard pressed to find a Christian in the ancient church that was not baptized as an infant. Accept for those who came to the water when it was first made available to them. Then those in turn had their whole households baptized into the Christian family. There was one family, one church, no other alternatives. Then those who were baptized after it was made available baptized their children from that time forward. It has always been that way, from the beginning. The change came from break away sects in the fifteenth century who began to mis interpret this gift as to set themselves apart from the One Holy Catholic Church. Baptism was no longer a free gift, but rather was performed at an age of reason which really makes no sense. Unless it is to join a Church.
Definition of “Household” in Greek
We know that the Greek word oikos, translated “house” or “household,” has traditionally included infants and children in its meaning for several reasons. There is no evidence of this word being used either in secular Greek, Biblical Greek,or in the writing of Hellenistic Judaism in a way which would restrict its meaning only to adults. The Old Testament parallel for “house” carries the sense of the entire family. The Greek translation of the original Hebrew manuscripts (completed in 250 B.C.) uses this word when translating the Hebrew word meaning the complete family (men, women, children, infants). Similarly, we know that the phrase “he and his house” refers to the total family; the Old Testament use of this phrase clearly demonstrates this by specifically mentioning the presence of children and infants at times.
Baptism is a gift to the whole family at any age, to cloth yourself in the blood of Christ. It is not earned by an age of reason. It is a free gift for the entire household of God to heal from our fallen nature. It’s all about healing. Christ forgave us our sins on the Cross, now we spend a lifetime of healing from that sin through the Sacraments. Not to gain an admission, or to be worthy, or to succeed, it is to heal. Baptism brings us into that death, into that resurrection; it is freely given in the apostolic Church. You would be hard pressed to find a Christian in the ancient church that was not baptized as an infant. Accept for those who came to the water when it was first made available to them. Then those in turn had their whole households baptized into the Christian family. There was one family, one church, no other alternatives. Then those who were baptized after it was made available baptized their children from that time forward. It has always been that way, from the beginning. The change came from break away sects in the fifteenth century who began to mis interpret this gift as to set themselves apart from the One Holy Catholic Church. Baptism was no longer a free gift, but rather was performed at an age of reason which really makes no sense. Unless it is to join a Church.
C
catholic-rcia
Guest
What about the severe mentally ill? Do you have to be smart to receive Baptism? Do you have to know what you are receiving in order to receive it? If some one is brain dead lying in the hospital should we visit them even though they do not know we are there? I for one am very glad that Gods ways are not our ways. This gives me great peace.
M
majick275
Guest
You bring up an interesting point. The LDS declare those of “insuffcient mental capacity” to be “Not Accountable” and therefore are considered like children under 8 to not require baptism. They will however “allow” people in this category to be baptized if they seem to understand it and express a desire for it.Thus LDS effectively restrict baptism to those over 8 of sufficient mental capacity.
F
flameburns623
Guest
Please understand that I am not actively LDS: I am Anglican. And Anglicans baptise infants. I was raised in the Independent Christian Churches, a sect which practices only ‘adult’ baptism, (meaning what Mormons call the ‘age of accountability’). I’m a one-time convert to Mormonism, but no longer a believer in the same. I think I therefore have some insight into the reasoning, though you are asking me to defend a position I don’t actually support. I am attempting to provide a bit more careful analysis of why some sects, including the LDS, baptise only those who are mature enough to have some sense of the signification of the act of baptism.
I think I need to stress again that for the vast majority of Evangelicals, baptism DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE IN ANY WAY TO ONE’S SALVATION. If one smuggles into this discussion the unspoken assumption that baptism is sacramental–the idea of ‘baptismal regeneration’–then you are assuming things that Evangelicals simply don’t assume. For Evangelicals and Fundamentalists, broadly speaking, it is the excercise of ‘saving faith’ which is vital to one’s relationship with God. All other “Christian” activities–taking communion, baptism, Bible-reading, attending worship–are acts of obedience by the already-regenerate, providing evidence (but not absolute proof) of God having regenerated the individual. For the LDS, even ‘regeneration’ is not a needful concept, since they reject the idea of Original Sin.
Where you are seriously misreading me is in assuming that I am suggesting that baptismal candidates need a Th.D. in order to be saved. I was very careful in how I worded my prior post: I stressed that the anabaptists believe children need “some” concept of sin, atonement, salvation, redemption, etcetera, NOT that they must be able to execute a dissertation on the topic and defend it before a panel of theologians.
My point is that anabaptists feel that a rudimentary understanding is needful in order to excercise saving faith. A sense of past, present, future, that is truly capable of grasping to some degree the signification of the act of baptism. Some capacity for abstract reasoning–not to the level of being able to engage Dr. RC Sproul or Dr. Scott Hahn in an extended debate, but sufficient to express certain concepts in at least a limited fashion. At least as well as ‘Forest Gump’ or ‘Gomer Pyle’ could express such ideas, to borrow fictional characters as illustration. And responsible adults in the LDS Church, or in Protestant churches with similar practices, determine the ability of a child to grasp these concepts by a very simple technique: they ask the child basic questions and guage maturity by the child’s ability to answer those questions. Oddly enough, Roman Cathoics do a similar thing–in Confirmation preparation classes.
The age of eight, by the way, is purely arbitrary among the LDS–it is what their ‘scriptures’ tell them is the appropriate age. Why do Roman Catholics confirm at the age of 12? I was asked to make a ‘profession of faith’ in a Lutheran Church/Wisconsin Synod Vacation Bible School, when I was about six. (Lutherans also baptise infants, by the way, and I was NOT yet baptised. So I am uncertain why the stress upon a profession of faith. One would have to ask a Lutheran). So there is nothing magical about the age of eight, except among Mormons.
To the best of my knowledge, the unbaptised mentally ill are left to the mercies of God even in Roman Catholic doctrine. Likewise the unbaptised brain-dead. More to the point–an unbaptised, severely retarded child who NEVER attains even the power of speech would–to the best of my understanding of RCC doctrine–be as fully assured of salvation as an unbaptised aborted fetus or an unbaptised infant. Whether this implies that all three would go to ‘limbo’ or to Heaven depends upon which Catholic, in which century, one happens to ask. For Protestants generally and for those of anabaptist persuasion in particular, the problem does not arise–where there is no ability to commit actual sin, God can be trusted to show mercy. The ‘sins of the fathers’ (presumed to include Original Sin) ‘will not be visited upon the heads of the children’.
T
Tmaque
Guest
For me it all comes to down to our nature. Are we inherently sinful(inclined towards sin) or not? Is it impossible for us not to sin without divine intervention? I think it is impossible. If that is a fact then whether a child gets baptized at 8 years or 8 months makes no difference. The baptism isn’t intended to remove sin that the child is personally responsible for in either case. What many LDS don’t understand is that Catholics(and EO) believe that baptism is necessary to repair our corrupted nature. It heals us from the inherited disease that came with the fall. Since all people, even babies, have inherited this perverted nature, baptisms are necessary for all, even babies.
While LDS believe there was a fall, and that fall brought death into the world, I don’t think they accept the fact that we have inherited a corrupt, diseased, perverted, nature that must be cleansed through baptism whether we personally sin or not.
While LDS believe there was a fall, and that fall brought death into the world, I don’t think they accept the fact that we have inherited a corrupt, diseased, perverted, nature that must be cleansed through baptism whether we personally sin or not.
P
paul_barlow
Guest
i think you need to know about our temples to understand the work we do there.
we do not baptise children who died before their 8th birthday. we seal them to their parents. the child does not need any other work because they are saved by the fact they are innocent of sin and they are living in the celestral kingdom.
T
tkdnick
Guest
paul barlow:
So a child under the age of 8 is incapable of doing something wrong?
T
tkdnick
Guest
Flame,
Sorry for the confusion. I was not trying to argue against you or contradict you or anything like that. I was posing a hypothetical question to a person who believed in the manner you described. I’m aware that that is not your belief.
Your quote:
Those who would argue for the anabaptist position would say that until you could truly grasp that your actions were not really ‘wrong’ but ‘sinful’–i.e. that wrong behavior had long-term eternal consequences**-**-baptism would in no way have benefitted you.
My question to someone of that belief (anabaptist):
What makes you think an 8 year old understands this? I don’t think someone at that age can really understand that concept. I don’t think even some teenagers understand that concept. There’s probably adults who don’t get that.
P
paul_barlow
Guest
you have to be accountable. somebody with a serious learning disorder that means that they can not judge what is right or wrong
does not need baptism because they are innocent in the sight of the lord and are thus saved by the saviours sacrifice.
P
paul_barlow
Guest
our children are only baptised when they are ready maybe your church could learn from us on this point. the age of 8 is the earlist a child can be baptised its up to the child,parents and bishop to judge when the right time is. But the child has to want it. now those little babies in your cdhurch i still wonder how they are chosing to follow chirst. What gives you the right to take away there choice.
P
paul_barlow
Guest
sorry but i find yours much harder to understand or justify
M
majick275
Guest
Well as a former veil worker I know quite a lot about the work done in the temples. I just hadn’t done any baptisms for the dead in so long that I couldn’t remember how children in that category had been handled. Just had a specific question about one part of the practice. I understand the LDS doctrine on Jesus atonement saving all unbaptized babies, etc. I find it in conflict with the Bible but I understand it.
I also restate my curiosity about nephite culture compared to “modern” culture and the nephite “scripture” making 8 the age of accountability. Just seems like it would be difficult to claim that nephite 8 year olds and todays kids would share the same level of accountability.
Of course on that I question the whole thought that some mystery occurs on a childs 8th birthday that basically consigns them to Satan unless baptized. Baptism is required for ALL but even LDS beleive in repentance/forgiveness AFTER baptism. This would indicate that baptism is truly a one time ordinance/sacrament that changes the individual so that they are CAPABLE of receiving Gods forgiveness. The forgiveness for one’s own personal sins is an ongoing process in both LDS AND Catholic doctrine. Just as no Catholic believes that the baptism they received as an infant washes away the sins they comit as an adult (without sacramental reconciliation at least) No LDS beleives that their baptism at age 8 washes away their adult sins either. (without appropriate repentance)
This seems to me at least to show that baptism is a fundamental requirement that should be done as soon as possible in life. As people grow and mature THEN they can repent of their personal sins. (Catholic children tend to start participating in the sacrament of reconciliation at the same age as LDS kids get baptized)
Furthermore I think the LDS belief in baptism needing to be an “informed decision” really applies more to confirmation. In that case it makes more sense to me to wait until the child is TRULY ready and willing rather than age 8. (Many Catholics are into their later teens before they are confirmed.) While an 8 year old can usually tell right from wrong very few (if any) can really “know” if they believe in the complete doctrine of ANY church.
I also restate my curiosity about nephite culture compared to “modern” culture and the nephite “scripture” making 8 the age of accountability. Just seems like it would be difficult to claim that nephite 8 year olds and todays kids would share the same level of accountability.
Of course on that I question the whole thought that some mystery occurs on a childs 8th birthday that basically consigns them to Satan unless baptized. Baptism is required for ALL but even LDS beleive in repentance/forgiveness AFTER baptism. This would indicate that baptism is truly a one time ordinance/sacrament that changes the individual so that they are CAPABLE of receiving Gods forgiveness. The forgiveness for one’s own personal sins is an ongoing process in both LDS AND Catholic doctrine. Just as no Catholic believes that the baptism they received as an infant washes away the sins they comit as an adult (without sacramental reconciliation at least) No LDS beleives that their baptism at age 8 washes away their adult sins either. (without appropriate repentance)
This seems to me at least to show that baptism is a fundamental requirement that should be done as soon as possible in life. As people grow and mature THEN they can repent of their personal sins. (Catholic children tend to start participating in the sacrament of reconciliation at the same age as LDS kids get baptized)
Furthermore I think the LDS belief in baptism needing to be an “informed decision” really applies more to confirmation. In that case it makes more sense to me to wait until the child is TRULY ready and willing rather than age 8. (Many Catholics are into their later teens before they are confirmed.) While an 8 year old can usually tell right from wrong very few (if any) can really “know” if they believe in the complete doctrine of ANY church.
T
tkdnick
Guest
paul barlow:
This isn’t taking away their choice to follow Christ or not. That is a choice that everyone must make repeatedly every day. What it does do is wipe away the stain of original sin, allowing us to be more connected to God through our entrance into His covenant family relationship. It’s still a personal choice whether to accept it or not. And I can tell you that I know of kids in the LDS church don’t always want it. One mom even admitted to a Catholic friend of mine that her kids had no choice. They were being baptized when they turned 8, and the truth was that they didn’t understand it anyway.
- Status