@italo
so what you are saying is that one  dont have to believe to inherit Enternal Life according to(John3:16).or one dont have to be born of water and the Spirit to enter The Kingdom of God(John3:5).?that by pouring water upon an infant he/she now have access to God's Kingdom?is that what your Bible tells you?
Broda,there's no catholic or a catholic church in the Heavens of our Lord Jesus Christ,
The bitter Truth is there's no infant Baptism,from Genesis to Revelation in the Bible nothing whatsoever is said about infant Baptism.
You guys are simply helping the Holy Spirit on our own.

@italo, those verses are over interpreted, i cant qoute each as i will like to address each of the matter in the in a better manner for more clearity.

Now can you tell me one verse in the Bible that says infants should not be baptized?

I ve not find any verse that back up infant baptism, we are all learning to the glory of God, in as much as i did not find one backing it, I do sure find many verses that made it clear than, Baptism is for Adult. A person who is wise enough to decide for himself, he know the difference btw good and bad, he can commit or avoid sin.

Here is one verse that could enlighten u, each time the bible speaks of baptism, it never say children, read this.

(Acts 8:12) "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women."

Did u hear the word believe befor the word baptise came? and did u hear children mentioned? (NO),Ok let me proceed.

Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3 - these texts show the circumcision of eight-day old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant - Col 2:11-12 - however, baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. Therefore, baptism is for babies as well as adults. God did not make His new Covenant narrower than the old Covenant. To the contrary, He made it wider, for both Jews and Gentiles, infants and adults.

God told Abraham in (Genesis 17:10–12) that every male among u shall be circumcised, and "infant" should be circumcired at the 8th day. U can see that God was very specific, Abraham and others did circumcised?Then after, it was continued with infants as that was the original order from God.
God cannot make a convenant without a clear specification.

In the case of Baptism, there is a trace of specification/symbol, (Baptism is an act of FAITH) An infant cant ve faith.
If u say that circumcision was replaced by baptism and the both is a sign of faith, u are saying that infants ve faith.

In order words, u can teach him/her the word, make him understands, then he decides if he belief, then get baptised.
Isn't it very easy and unritual to sprinkle water? is sprinkling of water same are been buried in water?
Lets take it gradually, we shall arrive by his grace.

Jesus commission teaches tht his condition for salvation is 2 fold. "Belief and baptism."
Belief witout baptism is an empty claim witout proof. and baptism without belief is a ritualistic waste of time.

When certain christians in Rome felt that freedom from Mosaic law gave them the liberty to sin freely, Paul denounced such thinking from then as wrong! Paul says:. "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! how shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?" .
"Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?" (Rom. 6:1-3). Paul says it's in "baptism".

"Therefore, we were buried with Him by baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life" (6:4). The bold is our target, we ve to know why this word keeps coming out each time the scripture speaks about baptism.

We can see that baptism is not a mere "sacrament," so designated by men, neither is't a wrk that "earns" salvation as many thinks. It is a statement of our "faith" in the saving blood of Jesus Christ.
Baptism is an act of faith that emulates the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. An other verse:

(Colossians 2:12) 12:Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Do we understand the word buried? if yes, so why will many church sprinkle infants on the head and call it baptism.
all the verses i ve found never say a thin like this. When the Bible speaks of baptism it tells us of adult men and women who make a deliberate choice like in (Acts 8:12 qouted above).

They wanted to obey the Lord Jesus and be baptized. They were completely covered in water. This is the baptism of Bible times. Another good example to prove is found in Acts 8. Philip talked with an Ethiopian eunuch.

"(Acts 8:35)Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. . No doubt, while they talked, small amout of water can be found on their journeys.
It would ve been easy for Philip to sprinkle water on the eunuch's head, like its done today.

But the eunuch, who believed the words Philip preached about Jesus, was not baptized until "they came to some water" (U can read from verse 36-39). The eunuch then said, "Look, here is water: what is to prevent my being baptized?" So "they both went down Into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. When they came up from the water . . . the eunuch . . . went on his way rejoicing".

Notice, they both "went down into" and "came up from" the water. This is same as buried and rise in Christ. The eunuch was a mature person who believed the things preached by Philip concerning Jesus Christ. He was completely covered by water.

U cant that Baptism is not something u do in someones place. It is not in method used for circumcision convenant that was well specified to infants. So, i must conclude that, Baptism was never in anyway mention to infant as in circumcision.

folaski:

Like i said earlier baptism is an initiatory rite. It is a way of bring children and dedicating them to Christ. Jesus in mat 19:14 admonished us to bring them. When they now get to the age of accountability,they will come to confess their faith with their own mouth. Then you say they became born again. Their god parents are to support the biological parents to train the children in the ways of the Lord. If that has been bastardised in some churches is another thing. Baptism however is not a pericusit for salvation. You must confes Jesus to be saved ,that should be our focus not issues that divides us.

Baptisem is to be completely covered by water. God chose immersion in water because it is a very powerful way of showing us that our sins must be forgiven. Believers realise that they need saving from sin and require God's grace. they go under the water in baptism, and die to an old way of life.
They come up out of the water to a new life. In baptism, believers identify with the death of Jesus Christ, who died for us. Be clear about it please.

Jesus in mat 19:14 admonished us to bring them. When they now get to the age of accountability,they will come to confess their faith with their own mouth.

Is this how u interpreted this verse? Ok so What happen if they refused to confessed with their own moth. DAD MUM, it wasn't my choice, but urs

folaski:

OP:Is infant baptism a sin?

If the Bible tells us specifically who to baptize, and if infants are not included in those instructions i.e., if the gospel teaches individual responsibility and personal accountability - then the practice of baptizing babies should be abandoned. I am not in position to tell u if it is sin, rather, the scripture.


So, everything we do must be done by Jesus' authority (Col. 3:17).
The scriptures provide us to all good works (2 Tim. 3:16,17), if our practice is not included in God's word, it must not be a good work. in other words, If a practice is not authorized in the New Testament, then it must be human in origin and therefore not pleasing to God (2 John 9; Gal. 1:6-9; Matt. 15:9; Prov. 14:12; etc.)

i.chuka:

@italo
so what you are saying is that one  dont have to believe to inherit Enternal Life according to(John3:16).or one dont have to be born of water and the Spirit to enter The Kingdom of God(John3:5).?that by pouring water upon an infant he/she now have access to God's Kingdom?is that what your Bible tells you?
Broda,there's no catholic or a catholic church in the Heavens of our Lord Jesus Christ,
The bitter Truth is there's no infant Baptism,from Genesis to Revelation in the Bible nothing whatsoever is said about infant Baptism.
You guys are simply helping the Holy Spirit on our own.

I was once a Catholic, but thank God i didn't partake in the infant baptism stuffs.
I was made to understand many things that are not even biblical.
I once have same way of bible understanding like this. Good example of catholic post:

Ye, I think it's better to be baptized when you're older cos by then you know what you want, what religion you want to belong to, what church you want to attend, etc. Jesus got baptized when he was an adult, 30? Not sure. However, I don't think he meant we should be baptized at the age he was.

As a Christian parent you might choose to do it when your kid is much younger, to be on the safe side. If he dies as an infant you sort of automatically assume he is sinless.

I think it's up to the parents.

Ordinary Catholics might not be so adept at quoting chapter and verse.

Ye but seeing as God knows all maybe these babies would have grown up to be something else so it's safer to baptize them to sort of cleanse them in a way.


I'm not a religious person so the best I can do for my child would be infant baptism.

A typical catholic way of thinking.


But finally, she came up with this:,

kelz88:

I'm Catholic, truss me I know what baptism is about.


I don't think a person's age at baptism is a big deal. Some people are baptised as kids, grow up, know what faith they want to belong to, etc, become born again and all that and get baptised again. Each to their own.

I don't see anywhere in the bible where baptism was restricted to adults.

How will the bold reasoning translate baptism?

2 Timothy 3.16 says the Scriptures are 'useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.'

Psalm 119.27 says, 'Let me understand the teaching of your precepts; then will I meditate on your wonders.'

i.chuka:

@italo
so what you are saying is that one  dont have to believe to inherit Enternal Life according to(John3:16).or one dont have to be born of water and the Spirit to enter The Kingdom of God(John3:5).?that by pouring water upon an infant he/she now have access to God's Kingdom?is that what your Bible tells you?
Broda,there's no catholic or a catholic church in the Heavens of our Lord Jesus Christ,
The bitter Truth is there's no infant Baptism,from Genesis to Revelation in the Bible nothing whatsoever is said about infant Baptism.
You guys are simply helping the Holy Spirit on our own.

To be born of water and spirit simply means to be baptized. There's no baptism without the Holy Spirit. Eg, when Jesus was baptized the Holy Spirit came upon him.

And what I'm saying is that the Kingdom of God can be made accessible to those to young to believe through the faith of their parents. And you have seen in 1Cor 7:14 that the faith of even one parent can sanctify a child. Does a sanctified person not have access to the kingdom of God?

Baptism is not a ticket to heaven, though it opens the way to heaven. "Except a man is born of water and spirit, he shall not enter the kingdom of heaven" does not mean 'once a man is born of water and spirit, he must enter the kingdom of heaven'. They are two different things and if you can't understand that, you'll keep having problems. You can be baptized and still go to hell, depending on how you live your life.

And my broda, there's catholic church on earth as it is in the heavens of our Lord Jesus Christ. All the saints are part of our family, all the Angels and even the holy souls in purgatory. The Church is the bride of Christ and will be reunited with Christ in a beautiful way at the wedding feast of the lamb as revealed in Revelation.

If you say there is nothing like infant baptism then I want you to mention the names of those in the household of Cornelius who were baptized in Acts 10: 47-48 and give me their ages; also those of Lydia's household in Acts 15:16 (names and ages), so that we may know if infants were among them or not.

plappville:

I was once a Catholic, but thank God i didn't partake in the infant baptism stuffs.
I was made to understand many things that are not even biblical.
I once have same way of bible understanding like this. Good example of catholic post:

Ordinary Catholics might not be so adept at quoting chapter and verse.

A typical catholic way of thinking.


But finally, she came up with this:,
How will the bold reasoning translate baptism?

So when were you baptized in the Catholic Church?

I can't answer to posts that are as long as 3rd Mainland Bridge. Talk about things one at a time and my response is here waiting for you.

But for a start, maybe you can help out ichuka and answer the question I asked at the end of my last post.

@italo
so you are calling our Lord Jesus Christ a liar,by your last post to me,that one can enter Heaven without Baptism?
Is that what your Bible tells you?
The problem is that you dont even know the mean of that word"Expect one is born of water and the Spirit he can not enter the Kingdom of God"John3:5.
You should have asked,and let someone will educate you,

There is nothing wrong with baptising a baby. It is a symbolic expression of faith on behalf of the parents, and no harm is done. If the child grows up and chooses to be baptised again, he/she can go ahead.

E no dey too much for body

@I.chuka, I don't know whether your problem is English Language or common sense.

Where did I say 'one can enter heaven without baptism'?

Pls quote me!

@italo
« #19 on: Yesterday at 10:04:05 AM »

I can't answer to posts that are as long as 3rd Mainland Bridge. Talk about things one at a time and my response is here waiting for you.

why? is it not very important to be clear with this?scroll back to your Post #19, its as long as 3rd Mainland Bridge, but yet i took my time to go through thoses verse. If i had not dont tht, how will i be able to tell u they ve no backup of infant baptism? It is very easy to post many verses of the bible without putting in clear context of what the verse mean. I advise u read through it.

@italo:To be born of water and spirit simply means to be baptized.

And what are to be done before baptism, how does the apostles in the bible apply this methods?
Will an unbeliever who never heard of the word, belief in baptism?

Posted on: Today at 07:37:22 AM Posted by: Thelstan
Insert Quote
There is nothing wrong with baptising a baby. It is a symbolic expression of faith on behalf of the parents, and no harm is done. If the child grows up and chooses to be baptised again, he/she can go ahead.

E no dey too much for body 

Back this up with the bible plz.

I know my post was very long - that was copy and paste from a catholic website (though I read everything through before posting it). And I did that only because your earlier posts were very long.

No, you didn't answer to every one of the verses - it would take you a lifetime to do so, and you still won't be able to disprove them.

Now I asked some specific questions: when were you baptized as a catholic? And name d members of lydia's and cornelius' households that were baptized in the book of acts, let's see if there were infants there or not.

plappville:

Back this up with the bible plz.

Cornelius' household - Acts 10:1-11:18; 15:7-11

God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34) so the same token applied to the entire household.

My point is that baptism is a symbolic expression of faith. I am not saying the baptism of a baby saves it. It just shows an intention of dedication of the child to God. Even if infants are dedicated to the Lord, when they grow up they will still have to make their personal decisions.

Some people believe baptism can save a baby, but I disagree; and I disagree also that it can even save an adult. But that is my own view.

And tell us the ages of the members of those households

Just readin coments

Why not think about ourselves, our salvation cos' we cannot buy salvation for others (than dabbling into things we ourselves dont understand). I doubt if there is any righteous person, if there is, that's the person i'll sure be convinced about his views.

whether you believe in infant baptism or not, it is not a guarantee to salvation but our personal life with God. Needless discussing this. of course, we free to interpret it the way we feel should be interpreted.

I do not believe in infant baptism but i believe in FREE WILL.

The infinite wisdom of the Almighty makes sure the right child goes to the right mother i.e law of attraction.

To be honest i think dedicating one's child to the Most high is a noble step but choosing to serve the Most high is a decision that child must take by himself when he or she becomes an Adult. Having said that if a child is well taught he hardly departs from it when he does he usually returns to that right path.

Now having said the above if you argued with me on the way to nurture my child , it might result to a head butt from me to you. Where does removing the iroko in your eye before the speck in your bro's eye start at and end at.

I understand concern , but it must be voiced in a way that the mum understands that this is only a concern and the last decision is hers i.e the child is hers.

No body knows it all o. That Baptism may be helpful to the child symbolically who knows, OP muddle small small, no need acquring enemies as a result of "hhjbhhki"

Self righteousness is eatting up our society yet no body knows for sure who is going to heaven for sure, after all grace no ni o

Personally I don't care when one gets baptized neither did I care about what people do with their spiritual lives. But I have to say something here for the record. I come from a place in the East where culture demands that infants have to be initiated at a tender age for them to be fully accorded the status of son/daughter of the soil. People come from as far as Europe to get those rite done even Christians. It was a tradition in my place up till a point; before then I could tell you that most youths from my place are not really doing fine for themselves both away and abroad. Also once in a while you start hearing negative gist that someone as been chosen by the gods that he/she needs to come home wherever he/she is based to come and serve the gods. Looking back to those "dark age" and "dark rites" I have to come to realize one thing, when you initiate someone into something that has to do with the spirit I think it has effect most people will not believe that. That does not mean that the person will be saved or not but then O would rather have my child initiated into christiandom at at infancy. If he/she grows up and choose do to otherwise no biggy. So I really don't see anything wrong with infant baptism. For the parents on this forum that are saying you have to give your child the right to choose, I am sure that in most cases you choose for your kids believing you know what's best for them. So if catholic parents think they know what's best for their kids and that's giving them infant baptism I don't see anything wrong with that. After all it is called freedom of religion.

@italo
Well done, man.

people must know that until a child attains the age of reason, it has no will and no conscience and no belief. Its will is the will of its parents. So is its conscience and its faith. Otherwise, why does God punish children for the sins of their fathers?

We must also understand that not all that is relevant to life and morality is to be found in the bible. Where does scripture talk about smoking? Yet many Christians consider it a sin to smoke. Where does scripture say: unless you accept Jesus as your PERSONAL LORD AND SAVIOUR, you can not be saved? Yet we preach these words as though they were scriptural truths.

And for those who find it convenient to say, 'I don't believe this' or 'I don't believe that', please note that belief, or lack of it, does not alter truth. I may not believe that snow can fall from the sky because of where I live. It doesn't alter the reality of snow. Personal belief is immaterial to truth.

[size=75pt] No wonder the bible says my people perish for lack of knowledge.
Sometimes it baffles me how we view this God, my question is; If u were to be God the creator of the whole universe, would u send an infant who die to hell simply because he was not baptized as a child?
Of course i know u woild'nt, so if mortal as wicked and evil minded as u are would'nt do such how much more God almighty who loves mortals unconditionally even beyond their greatest immaginations, which he demonstrated by pratically giving out his most cherished and precious gift in person of his son Jesus christ to die a shameful death like a common criminal in order to pay the full prize for man's redemption, how on planet earth would u expect such a loving God to send an innocent infant into hell for not being baptize as if it was the child's fault.

Infant baptism are men's doctrine, it has no scriptural backing, just as the doctrine of porgatry never had.
But it's unfortunate that most christians prefer the doctrine of men than that of God.
But the word of the lord cannot be broken, u cannot sow death and reap life.
This doctrines are not just from men but from HELL itself,
There's only one path to life and that's the path of truth and not of deciet.
Unfortunately many christian have ended up in HELL as a result of deception and many more are still roaming that path.
The world's most powerful spell is the spell of deception.
Study the word and show thyself approved.
[/size]

^^^^

Na wa for your size 75 red font o. Haba.

A question was asked earlier "If Jesus was without sin, why was he baptized?" OP, still waiting for your answer.

I trust we Nigerians for our religious bigotry!!
The question should be, do people baptized as adult live more exemplary christian principles than those baptized as infants?  

Some of us talk( abi type) as if we go to heaven and see ur neighbor that does not quote the bible as fast as U do, U will question God.
My next question is " Who wrote or compiled the bible in its present form?"  Some of us are trying to be more Christian than Christ himself.
It is not by adapt quotation of the bible or d lack of it, but how U treat the "unbelievers" and ur brethren that define ur Christianity.

Why no argue how to live ur christian principle outside ur church(i.e in ur offices, shops n dark corners of the world) n off the pages of blogs.
Get real Nigerians!!!!

Referring to Ԃ orignator of Ԃ conversation. Can Ʋ answer why sm pple baptize frm one chur to Ԃ oda. Each chur request for baptism? ‎​Ãlso, who made you the judge ova oda beliefs? Rem since Ʋ kw all in Ԃ bible bt refuse kw dis quote'do not judge for Ʋ shall nt be judged'. You ve no right to critize beliefs at all! I can't be answerable to you on what I believe in. Save dt crusade to urself.

Where r all d proposers of infant baptismdespite d fact that all catholiks here cant pin point a place were an infant was baptised in d bible let me ask y'all this questions, since catholiks feel that a person must be baptised to be saved so thats d reason why they baptise new born jejune babies here are some questions for u, did d criminal that was hung besides Jesus wen impaled need to be baptised b4 bein saved, d truth is baptism like you all said is an initiatory process for 1 who wants to be a christian, but that doesnt apply to tuddlers who cant think and make decisions on there own, do we all remember d example of d ethiopian eunuch that philip preached to and baptised, d eunuch had to study and make up his mind to get baptised, a baptised christian had d sole responsibility of spreadin d gospel and also makin disciples for christ, how wil an infant accomplish that task, bein a baptised christian was a weighty responsibility,
I heard some1 makin comparisons wit d early circumcision d jews practised to baptism in christianity,
Catholiks 4get that bak then in isreal wen once u were born u automatically become a servant of God thru circumcision which was a must, thats becos God was dealin with just isreal alone, d circumcision issue was annuled after christs death, thru peter gentiles and d rest of d world culd nw enjoy a good relationship wit God nt by birth but by baptism as thosewho can make decisions to want to follow christ, we are not under d d mosiac law but under christs law, and baptism @ no time was performed on kids, becos infants who culdnt speak culdnt hav been able to preach d gospels to other potential christians,

@all:
Thank God Jesus didn't make Christianity as theological as this. SO MANY IRRELEVANT ARGUMENTS ESPECIALLY AMONG THE CHRISTIANS IN RELIGION SECTION. Today its baptism, tomorriw tithes, next week prophecy.

WHY NOT LOVE GOD AND YOUR NEIGHBOUR, AND DO WHAT YOU FEEL IS RIGHt,

We waste productive tym on irrelevant issues. When it comes to catholics Ʋ guys re at Ԃ issue. Why nt face ur beliefs while we face ours. Since ur told Ʋ dt ur belief will take Ʋ to heaven, so be it! Catholic till I die! Dt day Ʋ won't be judged bt ur chur bt by ur deeds.

scrap religion and their bigot minded followers

[b]By Don Matzat. Why is it that many Christians become so upset over the doctrine of infant Baptism? After all, baptizing infants has been a part of historic Christianity since the first century. Could the issue be one of pride? It is difficult for some Christians to embrace salvation as a free gift of God with no strings attached. They cannot put away the notion that there is something they must do or have already done to merit eternal life.

In this edition of the Issues, Etc. Journal we will examine the doctrine of infant Baptism biblically, theologically, and historically. While I know that many of you who read this journal are not proponents of infant Baptism, I am merely asking you to examine the issue with an open mind. May God the Holy Spirit grant you understanding.

What does the Bible teach about the Baptism of infants? Are infants to be included or excluded from Baptism?

There is no doctrine that has caused more unrest, disagreement, and at times angry responses from opponents than the doctrine of Baptism. Those within denominations who baptize infants are put into the position of having to defend the practice, even though the baptism of infants is rooted in the history of the Christian Church and practiced by out 75 percent of Christendom. The response of the adversaries is often angry.

One evangelical radio network discontinued broadcasting The Lutheran Hour after the speaker made a presentation on infant Baptism. In an earlier issue of this journal I spoke about Baptism of my granddaughter and stated that God applied the full righteousness of Jesus Christ to this "empty" infant. I received some angry letters from Baptist pastors who no longer wanted to receive the Issues, Etc. Journal because of my stance on infant Baptism.

The fact of the matter is that those who reject and even disdain the Baptism of infants promote a "Believer’s Baptism" are in the minority and actually out-of-step with the historic position of the early Christian Church. They promote an understanding of grace and faith that is of recent origin. In fact, their theology arrogantly suggests that the mode of Baptism received by church fathers the likes of Athanasius and Augustine and by the Reformers Luther and Calvin was not proper. In this regard, Martin Luther writes:

   Now if God did not accept the Baptism of infants, he would not have given any of them the Holy Spirit nor any part of him; in short, all this time down to the present day no man on earth could have been a Christian. Since God has confirmed infant baptism through the gift of the Holy Spirit. . . our adversaries must admit that infant Baptism is pleasing to God. For he can never be in conflict with himself, support lies and wickedness, or give his grace and spirit for such ends. (Tappert: Book of Concord, [St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959] pp. 442-3).

Even though the title of this article is In Defense of Infant Baptism, the truth of the matter is that those who reject the Baptism of infants are the ones who should be in the position of defending their stance. While infant Baptism is rooted in the history of the early Christian Church, the so-called "Believer’s Baptism" originates in the post-Reformation Anabaptist movement of the sixteenth century. But be that as it may, the fact still remains that any theological position has to find its basis in Scripture. So, what does the Bible say about the Baptism of infants?

What Does the Bible Say?

Those who reject the Baptism of infants accurately point out that the Bible does not specifically command that infants should be baptized nor are there any specific examples in the Book of Acts of an infant receiving Baptism.

While this is true, it is not difficult to explain. The Book of Acts deals with first generation adult converts to Christianity. The Bible does not tell us what these first Christians did with their children as far as Baptism is concerned. In order to definitively answer that question, we must look into the writings of the early church fathers.

Yet, the Bible is not silent in the matter. What you see in the Word of God concerning the Baptism of infants depends upon how you approach the Word. When searching Scripture in order to answer the infant Baptism question, the issue is not whether or not there are any specific references including children and infants in Baptism. Rather, the issue is whether or not there are specific references in Scripture excluding children and infants from Baptism. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is an inclusive message. "God so loved the world," and Jesus commanded us to "baptize all nations." Obviously, infants are a part of the world and represented in all nations.

The reasoning used by those who reject infant Baptism was the same reasoning used by the Supreme Court in dealing with the abortion issue. The Court was faced with the question of whether or not a fetus is a person who is guaranteed the right to life under the constitution. Should the unborn be included or excluded from the rights of personhood? Since they were unable to answer the question, rather than potentially erring on the side of inclusion, they excluded the unborn and made abortion legal.

Those who reject infant Baptism claim that there is no biblical warrant for including infants and children in Baptism. But the real question is, does the Bible specifically exclude infants and children from Baptism? Definitely not!

In Mark 10: 14 our Lord Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." The Greek word for children in this text is paidia, which means babes in arms. What means other than Baptism has God provided whereby little children can be brought to Jesus? Baptism is the only way we know of. If you want to obey the command of the Lord Jesus concerning your little children, have them baptized!

In addition, there are five references in the New Testament to the Baptism of entire households. Peter baptized the household of Cornelius (Acts 11: 14). In Philippi, Paul baptized the household of Lydia and the household of the jailer (Acts 16: 15, 33). He also baptized the household of Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue in Corinth. In his first epistle to the Corinthians, he speaks of baptizing the household of Stephanas (1: 16). The Greek word for household is oikon and refers to all the inhabitants of the house including slaves, servants, infants and children. Can anyone seriously suggest that within the households of Cornelius, Lydia, the Jailer, Crispus and Stephanas there were no children or infants present?

In addition, if the members of these households had converted to Judaism, all the males would have been circumcised. This included infants who were at least eight days old. In Colossians 2: 9-12, the Apostle Paul compares the effect of circumcision with the effect of Baptism.

While there are no specific references to infant Baptism in the New Testament, there is every reason to believe that children and infants were included. As you will see when you read Pastor Kastens’ article Infant Baptism in Early Church History, the witness of the early church fathers is very clear. Children and infants were included in Baptism.

But Can Infants Believe?

Those who reject infant Baptism practice what they call a "Believer’s Baptism." On the basis of Mark 16: 16 ("Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved.", they claim that a person must believe and be able to confess his faith before receiving Baptism. According to this way of thinking, since infants are unable to believe and confess, they are excluded from Baptism. Only those who have reached the "age of reason," or the "age of accountability" are baptized.

This position is specious for a number of reasons.

First of all, Mark 16: 16 is not speaking chronologically. In other words, the text is not saying first believe and then be baptized. The verbs "believe" and "baptized" are participles. Any Christian who has been baptized as an infant can confidently say, "I believe, and I have been baptized." The commission of our Lord Jesus in Matthew 28: 19-20 commands us to make disciples by "baptizing and teaching." If we read this text chronologically, we would contend that teaching follows Baptism. But, it is not intended to be chronological.

The opponents of infant Baptism teach that a person must first believe, confess their faith, be saved. and then baptized. From this perspective, Mark 16: 16 should read, "Whoever believes and is saved will be baptized," rather than "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved."

Second, the issue not whether or not an infant can believe. Infants are not baptized because they believe. They are baptized because of the clear Word, command and promise of God. They are baptized on account of God’s grace, not on account of their faith. Martin Luther writes, "For my faith does not constitute Baptism but receives it" (Tappert: p. 443).

Third, to claim that a person must reach the "age of reason" or the "age of accountability" before receiving Baptism is to claim that there is something within the person that is able to cooperate with the grace of God. This is called synergism, a theological perversion that places man into a cooperative relationship with God in the salvation process. In some cases, the proponents of a "Believer’s Baptism" fall into the trap of Pelagianism, an early heresy that denied that man is dead in his trespasses and sin and therefore unable to contribute anything to his salvation - not even his human reason and understanding. Concerning the role of human reason, Martin Luther wrote:

"My friend, what good does reason do when faith and God’s Word are concerned? Is it not a fact that reason most violently resists faith and the Word of God so that because of it, no one can come to faith or put up with God’s Word unless reason is blinded and put to shame? A man must die to reason and become a fool, so to speak, yes, and must become more unreasoning and irrational than any child if he is to come to faith and accept God grace. (Plass: What Luther Says, [St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959], Vol. 1, p. 51)

Do those who suggest that human reason is a necessary ingredient for faith to exist also believe that when they are sleeping and their reason is inactive they have lost their faith?

Faith is a miraculous gift of God worked in the heart by the Holy Spirit without human cooperation. If God can bring a stubborn, unbelieving adult to faith through the preaching of the Gospel, would anyone foolishly suggest that he is unable to work the same miracle in the heart of a passive infant through the vehicle of Baptism?

Grace First!

I have on numerous occasions discussed if not debated the subject of infant Baptism with callers on my daily radio program. The scenario is always the same. The opponent of infant Baptism is put off by the fact that we teach and confess that an infant can become a believing Christian by God’s grace through Baptism. The issue is, "Is that all they have to do is be baptized?" The focus is always on what the person is doing or not doing and never on what God is doing and able to do.

Those who teach a "Believer’s Baptism" are usually also proponents of Arminian decision theology. They spend more time talking about the fact that they went forward, made a decision, and got saved than upon the grace of God in Christ Jesus. Those who focus upon what they have done in order to be saved will be invariably put off if not angered by the truth of infant Baptism.

Paul writes in Ephesians 2: 8-9 that we are saved by grace through faith, and it is not of our doing. Grace comes before faith. Baptism is a pure administration of the grace of God in Christ Jesus.

I knew a young couple who had affiliated with a Lutheran Church but did not embrace the practice of infant Baptism. They were both products of the "Jesus Movement" in the 1960’s and 1970’s and had been baptized in a river. After seriously studying the issue under the guidance of their pastor and especially reading the infant Baptism defense in The Book of Concord, they changed their minds and had their three children baptized. The father explained his change of mind by saying, "We thought we were saved by faith through grace rather than by grace through faith. According to the Bible, grace precedes faith. Therefore, we brought our children under the grace of God."

A Wonderful Gift!

Infant Baptism is a wonderful gift of God. While it is most certainly true that the practice has been abused, as Luther put it, "Precisely because infant Baptism has been wrongly received it has existence and value. The saying goes, ‘Misuse does not destroy the substance, but confirms its existence.’ Gold remains no less gold if a harlot wears it in sin and shame" (Tappert, p. 444). The very fact that infant Baptism has been abused indicates its value.

Opponents of infant Baptism are quick to point out that millions of people have been baptized as infants and have never really "come alive" or grown in their relationship with the Lord Jesus. This may indeed be true, but this is not the fault of infant Baptism since the alternative is also true. Millions have been baptized as infants and have in faith laid claim to the benefits of Christ’s death and resurrection and lived victorious Christian lives.

If the issue here is which method is more successful in making Christians, one might ask the question as to the spiritual condition of the hundreds of thousands of people who have gone forward, made a decision and got saved at the Billy Graham crusades over the past 50 years. What percentage of these people have remained true to their commitment and become alive, victorious Christians?

The issue is not my opinion or your opinion or which method is more effective. The issue is: What does the Bible say? Scripture is very clear: Infants and children are not to be excluded from Baptism. By Don Matzat

@i.chuka: i have seen your  posting about being born of water and the spirit but you seem ignorant of the meaning of the water in the context of the text. the water means the word of GOD and that is in consonance with ephesians 5:26 and John15:3 typing is a bit difficult with a phone so read them for yourself. baptism is a physical representation i repeat representation of our sharing in the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. when you initiate you entier household into the catholic i.e. universal Church am not talking of a denomination, you stand them in good stead for salvation. it is a form of dedication to God. when the babies are brought up in the ways of the Lord, when they grow up they will come to confess Jesus Christ with their own mouth (proverbs 22:6)and then they will be confirmed (baptised in the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands in accordance with the apostolic practices.) pls note that the most important thing for salvation is to confess Jesus Christ with your mouth that He is Lord. remember the robber nailed to the cross with Jesus. note what Jesus told him when he acknowledge the saving grace in Christ. what will you say about an adult that gave his life to Jesus and died ? pls where the spirit of God is there is liberty. Jesus has handed the key of the kingdom of God to us,we should not shut it against anybody by our ignorance.

I don't understand why people like the poster, who professes to be christian, spend their time condemning what they don't like about the practice of other christians rather than seeking for God's discernment over their own beliefs.

There is no verse in the bible that says, ‘You must baptize infants'.  Similarly, there is no verse that says, ‘You must not baptize infants'.

How the poster then knows that infant baptism is unblibical and therefore a sin is beyond me.  How can it be a sin to take your child to a church and profess in front of the congregation that you will raise them according to the scriptures.  If you don't believe in doing that then just don't and stop calling it sinful.

Is it biblical to post on NL?  Show me where it says so in your bible.