Replies

There is no biblical instance of child baptism. All the baptisms that were done were done for willing believers. The author quotes Luke chapter 18 to claim that Jesus was baptizing babies, but let’s quote it and also passages from the other gospels regarding the same incident.

Luk 18:15-16 And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. (16) But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

Mat 19:13-14 Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. (14) But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

It was a practice of the Jews to have their children touched and blessed by the Rabbi. Jesus was not baptizing babies like the Catholics do. He was touching and blessing them.

Now, as for the claim that baptism is required for salvation, the first thing that comes to mind is the Thief on the cross. The statement by Christ over and over again is that one must have faith in Him in order to be saved. This is a message reinforced constantly, from prayer to healings to even raising men from the dead. “Your faith has made thee whole.” Comparatively, there is no emphasis on Baptism as a means to salvation. One would think if it was absolutely necessary, it would be mentioned every time Christ brought the subject of salvation up. Instead, the emphasis is always on the inner man, the heart, and while baptism is a physical act and a sign, it does not spiritually cleanse you from sin. Salvation is an instantaneous act, and obedience a sign of that new born fruit within you.

John 11
25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

Rom. 3:22, “even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction.”
Rom. 3:26, “for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”
Rom. 3:28, “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.”
Rom. 4:5, “But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness.”
Rom. 5:1, “Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,”
Gal. 3:8, “And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham.”
Gal. 3:24 , “Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith.”
Eph. 2:8, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.”

1Co 1:17-18 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. (18) For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

Catholics make everything mechanical, as if by performing these rituals they are somehow making themselves holy. They ignore the core of the message and the real spirit of Christ which demands worshipers in spirit and in truth, not men who are obsessed with the outward appearance. “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel.”

Now, as for the claim that baptism is required for salvation

I can almost guarantee you that some Catholic will try to appeal to I Peter 3:21 to disprove you.

Which would only demonstrate how little they understand the verse, in context.

The verse makes it clear ("not the putting away of the filth of the flesh") that baptism doesn't "wash away sins" (flesh means more than just the body, but "fleshiness," contraposed to godliness or spirituality, as Paul often used it.)

Baptism is also referred to as a "figure" (the LIKE figure, indicating that both the example of Noah, as well as baptism, are types, or pictures, of the cleansing that comes through Christ) - it is a typology indicated to convey the efficacy of something else other than it, itself.

What baptism pictures is explicitly told to us - the resurrection of Christ, see also Romans 6:4, Col. 2:12. Baptism is a picture of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ being played out or identified with in the life of the believer who has put his or her trust in Christ (note: this picture also suggests that the Scriptural pattern for baptism is bodily immersion, not sprinkling, anointing, christening, etc.) A person is saved by trusting in the the saving work of Christ. Baptism is a picture of this, just as Noah in the ark was a typological picture of the external demonstration of his faith in God - i.e., all the world can see Noah had faith, because he was the one God used to build the ark, and which god used to rescue him and his family. Likewise, a believer who submits to believer's baptism is showing openly their faith in God.

The salvation of the "good thief" (actually an unspecified type of criminal) in understood by RCs as exampling "baptism by desire" which is as close to sola fide (yet not by a faith that is alone) as Rome gets, and they also hold that this took the place of purgatory, which is another issue. But as regards paedobaptism, the Holy Spirit clearly provides the requirements for baptism:

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. " (Acts 2:38)

"And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. " (Acts 8:36-37)

It is incongruous that the Holy Spirit would not provide at least one clear example of infants being baptized, especially considering the critical salvific importance, and reliance on tradition is an admission of the lack of actual Scriptural support for it.

In addition, while Rome charges that “parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth,” yet church “father's” as Tertullian preferred waiting, if possible, until one could understand before they were baptized (a “credo-baptist” direction).

"And so, according to the circumstances and disposition, and even age, of each individual, the delay of baptism is preferable; principally, however, in the case of little children...Let them 'come,' then, while they are growing up; let them 'come' while they are learning, while they are learning whither to come; let them become Christians when they have become able to know Christ." - Tertullian (On Baptism, 18)

Gregory Nazianzen:

"Be it so, some will say, in the case of those who ask for Baptism; what have you to say about those who are still children, and conscious neither of the loss nor of the grace? Are we to baptize them too? Certainly, if any danger presses. .For it is better that they should be unconsciously sanctified than that they should depart unsealed and uninitiated.... But in respect of others I give my advice to wait till the end of the third year, or a little more or less, when they may be able to listen and to answer something about the Sacrament; that, even though they do not perfectly understand it, yet at any rate they may know the outlines; and then to sanctify them in soul and body with the great sacrament of our consecration. For this is how the matter stands; at that time they begin to be responsible for their lives, when reason is matured, and they learn the mystery of life (for of sins of ignorance owing to their tender years they have no account to give), and it is far more profitable on all accounts to be fortified by the Font, because of the sudden assaults of danger that befall us, stronger than our helpers." (Orations, 40:28)

There is more provided on this here.

Moreover, V1 requires that her magisterium never “receive and interpret them [the Holy Scriptures] except according to the unanimous consent of the fathers,” (http://www.ewtn.com/library/councils/v1.htm#3) yet there is also significant disagreement about what tradition and or Scripture teaches regarding some things, even among those who make it equal (or as the same) as Scripture.

It is also of noted that it is held that we know relative little of what all that the “fathers” wrote, while in exegesis of Scripture as regards such things as celibacy versus marriage, even such a scholar as Jerome shows poor exegesis and how one can make passages to support a teaching of tradition.

“There is no biblical instance of child baptism.”

~ ~ ~

Paul says Baptism replaces circumcision. Col 2:11-12.
Circumcision took place on the eight day after a baby’s
birth.

In whom also you are circumcised with circumcision not made by hand, in despoiling of the body of the flesh, but in the circumcision of Christ: [12] Buried with him in baptism, in whom also you are risen again by the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him up from the dead.

Babies are included, as children...

Acts 2:38-39
[38] But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. [39] For the promise is to you, and to your CHILDREN, and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.

http://www.drbo.org