Infant baptism

[Orr v'emet]

No. Not sure what you mean by "obey God". The obedience is the parents responsibility. So, no need to get "re-done" later.

[Work in Progress]

No. Not sure what you mean by "obey God". The obedience is the parents responsibility. So, no need to get "re-done" later.

[Work in Progress]

Our relationships with God are personal and not resulting from my parents obedience....if you get what I'm saying.

I do, but those comments make me wonder if you get what I'm saying. I clearly stated that our relationship with God does NOT result from our parents obedience, nor is it dependant on any other person on our behalf. I simply said that God made a convenant with the father of our faith - Abraham - you can read it in Genesis- and that we continue on in that promise today and are obedient to the command of God to put the 'sign' on our children. You really haven't answered any of that, or any other points, and I wonder if you are even considering any other responses that don't line up with what you have always been taught and believed, so I don't know if it's fruitless to continue on. It's frustating and hard not to be offended when someone posts a topic for discussion, but then ignores points that don't line up with what they have decided is 'right'. The topic was clearly stated as a question up for discussion/debate, so I'm at a bit of a loss I guess. Were you wanting to discuss other avenues of belief in this area, or just stating what you think is the right belief? Not being smart, just bewildered.

[Leonard]

Jesus Christ Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

Well, if we asking if infant baptism is regenerative, that changes the conversation a little!

Even if baptized as an infant, EVERYONE must come to a time of personal decision. Every individual must decide if they really want to obey Jesus Christ more than they want anything else in life.

The person baptized as an infant can not become an unbaptized person, but they still have to make a choice to live for and with Jesus. And although it is out of keeping with most of my Orthodox Brethren, I still say that if a person's conscience is only clear by being re-baptized as an adult, then by all means they should do so....but DO NOT MAKE THAT DECISION LIGHTLY...the historical and theological implications of a 'rebaptism' are immense, and ought only be entered into after thorough investigation.

With a blessing,

Leonard, a sinner.

[Work in Progress]

Even if baptized as an infant, EVERYONE must come to a time of personal decision. Every individual must decide if they really want to obey Jesus Christ more than they want anything else in life.

Amen, Leonard!

I don't think anyone here would say that baptism=salvation, infant or otherwise, but it does get tiring defending oneself against the accusation that you believe it does - no matter how many times and ways you state your belief to the contrary. I often wish people could get past their prejudices in that area and what their Pastors are falsely telling them and listen - THOSE WHO BELIEVE THE SCRIPTURE COMMANDS US TO BAPTIZE OUR CHILDREN DO NOT, I repeat DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IT "SAVES" THE CHILDREN AND MAKES THEM CHRISTIANS..

Sorry, don't mean to rudely yell, I just wanted to emphasize it, since I've been fighting that prejudice on this board for over two years.

[Khristeeanos]

For those who believe that the early church didn't believe that baptism is for the remission of sins, I don't know what to say.

Mark 16:16 says that one must believe before they are baptized. I personally don't see how an infant can believe, so why baptize?

[Guest shiloh357]

Our relationships with God are personal and not resulting from my parents obedience....if you get what I'm saying.

I do, but those comments make me wonder if you get what I'm saying. I clearly stated that our relationship with God does NOT result from our parents obedience, nor is it dependant on any other person on our behalf. I simply said that God made a convenant with the father of our faith - Abraham - you can read it in Genesis- and that we continue on in that promise today and are obedient to the command of God to put the 'sign' on our children. You really haven't answered any of that, or any other points, and I wonder if you are even considering any other responses that don't line up with what you have always been taught and believed, so I don't know if it's fruitless to continue on. It's frustating and hard not to be offended when someone posts a topic for discussion, but then ignores points that don't line up with what they have decided is 'right'. The topic was clearly stated as a question up for discussion/debate, so I'm at a bit of a loss I guess. Were you wanting to discuss other avenues of belief in this area, or just stating what you think is the right belief? Not being smart, just bewildered.

I fail to see any New Testament commandment for infant baptism. Maybe I missed something?

With regard to Abraham...

Those born to Abraham, starting with Isaac, were children of promise, because Isaac was the Son of the promise made to Abraham. Isaac of course, is a type of the Messiah. Those descendants were required to be circumcized as a sign of the covenant they were born into.

A child born naturally into the world is not born into the New Covenant. Immersion into water is symbolic of entering the New Covenant. The sign of Baptism (water immersion) is ONLY for the members of the New Covenant, and not for anyone else. This is in keeping with the OT picture of circumcision being ONLY for those belonging to the Abrhamic covenant.

I see nothing wrong with baptizing an infant for dedicatory purposes, but to say that this is in keeping with the commandment given to Abraham goes beyond the pale of Scripture. It is a nice tradition, but cannot be considered a part of biblical prescription.

There two types of Baptism. There is the true baptism that takes place at the moment of salvation as seen in the following verses.

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? [4] Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.

And there is water immersion which is "baptism" in that it is symbolic of the inner change that has taken place in the new believer. It is symbolic of the description given in Rom. 6:3-4).

[Work in Progress]

For those who believe that the early church didn't believe that baptism is for the remission of sins, I don't know what to say.

Mark 16:16 says that one must believe before they are baptized. I personally don't see how an infant can believe, so why baptize?

Dime, you believe that the "early church" began in the New Testament.

However, there are millions of believers who believe the church began with Abraham. And they have just as much solid Scriptural evidence to back that belief as those who believe it started in the New Testament.

[Khristeeanos]

Dime, you believe that the "early church" began in the New Testament.

However, there are millions of believers who believe the church began with Abraham. And they have just as much solid Scriptural evidence to back that belief as those who believe it started in the New Testament.

I am talking about the "Law of Christ" that The Apostle Paul refered to twice in his letters (1 Cor. 9 and Gal. 6).

We are under this Law and therefore must obey Christ's commands if we want to be saved.

[Khristeeanos]

There two types of Baptism. There is the true baptism that takes place at the moment of salvation as seen in the following verses.

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? [4] Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.

And there is water immersion which is "baptism" in that it is symbolic of the inner change that has taken place in the new believer. It is symbolic of the description given in Rom. 6:3-4).

How can this baptism in Romans 6 be "the true baptism that takes place at the moment of salvation" (I assume you mean confess with mouth?) when it clearly describes a burrial and resurrection, something that can only be water immersion?