Replies

all have sinned, including infants. we have received the practice of baptizing infants from the Apostles, so of course i “support” it. all Christians should “support” infant baptism.

Infants have not sinned, but they have a sin nature and are under the curse of all humanity. The grace of God through the blood of Christ is sufficient to cover infants or anyone for that matter who is unable to "come to the knowledge of the truth" and receive Jesus as Savior. Some of the "Early Church Fathers" believed unbaptized infants went to Hell. Then some came along, thinking that was too harsh of a merciful God, and invented "limbo" as the place these infants spent eternity. Though apart from the presence of God, they were thought to enjoy "some" semblance of joy. Now, the CCC has dropped the word Limbo from the vernacular and confesses they really don't have any idea where unbaptized "innocents" spend eternity.

I agree with Dartuser, Scripture is extremely clear that we are baptized in the Holy Spirit when we by faith trust and receive Jesus Christ as our Savior and Redeemer. The water ritual comes after such a faith commitment is made but is not what saves in the first place.

So no, all Christians shouldn't support baptism for infants. As signs of the parents or guardians making a commitment to raise the child in the "nurture and admonition of the Lord" and to "dedicate" the child to God is one thing. But to insist that babies MUST be baptized to be saved is NOT Scriptural NOR is it something the Apostles taught.

like so many other areas, this post is not historical, orthodox, biblical Christian doctrine.

please show me where in the Scriptures:

1. where anyone is “baptized in the Holy Spirit” when by faith trust and receive Jesus Christ as our Saviour and Redeemer?
2. where anyone was told to go thru a “water ritual” after they have been saved.
3. how can #1 and #2 be seperate when Paul tells us in Ephesians there is only one baptism?
4. when in history did people teach this “two” baptism theory?