Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RickyJ
I offer the following explanation and biblical support for infant baptism:

Why are infants and young children baptized?

They are baptized for the same reason adults are baptized—because of the command and promise of God. What is promised in Baptism is given to all who receive it; therefore, infants and young children also have the promise of God. They, too, are made children of God. They, too, are included in the words "all nations" (Matt. 28:19). Jesus specifically invites little children to come to Him (Luke 18:15-17). But most important, as sinners, infants need what Baptism gives.

By His word, God created all that is seen and unseen. By His word, our Lord Christ called a dead man from the tomb (John 11:43-44). The unborn child, John the Baptist, leaped in his mother's womb when he heard the word of God (Luke 1:41-44). Why is there any doubt that in and through the Word and the promise of Baptism, God works a similar gift of faith in the infant? If we misunderstand Baptism to be our work, then we will always cast doubt on it. When we recognize that it is not our work, but God's gracious promise and work, we realize that infants are to be baptized and receive the treasures offered in and through Baptism.

Sadly, there are individuals and church bodies that deny Baptism to young children and infants. They do not believe that these little ones need what Holy Baptism gives. They do not believe what the Bible teaches so clearly, namely, that God saves us through Baptism. As a result of these false teachings, they deny both to themselves and to others the power, blessing, and comfort of Holy Baptism. That is tragic, for it is a most serious offense against God to deny what He plainly declares in His Word: "The promise is for you and your children" (Acts 2:39) and "Baptism now saves you" (1 Peter 3:21).

You may surely interpret differently, but your need to take a nasty tone makes me wonder what your purpose is. As for man-made religion..........did it ever occur to you that most people that belong to a particular denomination do so simply because they agree with its doctrine? If it is strictly Bible-based it is no different than you reading the Bible in solitude and taking from it what the Holy Spirit gives. Your need to pounce on the beliefs of others is an odd way of promoting yourself as a Christian. Why the big chip on the shoulder?

I believe in infant baptism but I really have no need to come here and rant at you because you don't or haven't baptized your children.

Lastly, I must ask why you and many others measure what God can do in man's terms. For those who believe baptism should happen at an age of accountability, what is that age? Is it written in the Bible that age X is the proper time? You know it doesn't and as the words above explain, baptism is from God and not our act. God must not adhere to a criteria that man has decided upon.

I don't intend to carry on this debate with you because it is your wish to argue. It's puzzling to me but maybe it is because you feel a need to validate yourself. That's too bad !!!! Consequently I won't reply to you anymore and have only posted this to address your question to me. Good-bye

258 posted on 11/03/2001 9:01:36 AM PST by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies ]


To: Southflanknorthpawsis
Thanks for your post on Baptism, from Luther's Smaller Catechism, right? Also thanks to Rev. Henrickson for his contributions as well.

I think a lot of the Baptist/Bible (i.e. Zwinglian) Christians have a misunderstanding of why the earliest Reformers had the ideas that they did on Baptism and the Lord's Supper. I've heard it put that Luther "held out a fig leaf" of compromise with the Roman church on this--on the contrary, he had a fully developed Biblical rational for his positions on the 2 sacraments--based on God's word, not any political considerations.

One thing that one should be careful of though is not to lump Calvinists/Reformed/Presbyterians with the Zwinglians--being one I know our views are not as strong as Luther's, but certainly more than the fully representational/memorial views on the subject by Zwinglian Baptists & Bible (etc.) Protestants. As an evangelical Presbyterian my pastor has always described the sacraments in terms of God's covenant--symbols and much MORE (without defining how much more) than symbols--significantly different from how Zwinglians see them.

Since most American evangelical Christians are Zwinglian in belief (whether they know it or not), its good for them to see the Biblical basis of orthodox Lutheran (go LCMS!!!) teachings.

264 posted on 11/03/2001 12:05:19 PM PST by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson