Infant baptism redux

Since it is off topic and we have been warned not to go off topic here is the new topic.

I understand that you were only using baptism as an example, yet there is merit in what you are trying to say that I think CL does not or will not understand concerning Baptism.
I was reading Matt. 18:!0 where it says “See that you never despise one of these little ones.” when I read this it reminded me of the Baptism and whether or not one should baptize children. Well I may be wrong about what I just quoted as to its meaning but it suggested to me that Jesus in implying hat we are not to for go the children which then I could in all honesty believe that to Baptize children could be intended. I saw nothing in Scripture that says that say not to baptize Children so I think that those who think that baptizing children are wrong in their thinking and interpretation.

Most of the arguments against infant baptism used (That I have encountered):

*Acts 2:38 And Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. *

As an indication that the infant has no ability to repent. Whenever I asked: How did the infant sin, that repentance is warranted? Silence follows…

What I find completely funny is that on the next verse it reads:

Acts 2:39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him.”


Another example of cherry picking verses out of context and forcing it into their “tradition”. What I find amazing is when they try to make the argument that infant baptism wasn’t practiced in the Early Church.

Those who have the most difficulty with infant baptism (Evangelicals, Baptists etc.) do not even believe Baptism itself is important or necessary. :shrug:

I have noticed from talking to protestants is that they like to quote Scripture verses out of context, the cherry picking to either to say so there or its words to live by. it is the poorest approach to Scripture study and many have done just that because they consider them to be the most logical approaches. they search Scriptures for a text to prove a moral point that one has already decided on. Usually it seeks to make its point at the expense of the other person. It tends to flaunt one’s own knowledge of Biblical references and to suggest that the Bible quoter is somehow more moral than the person whose knowledge of Scripture’s words is less and is so often quoted out of context.
The so there method misses qu8otes. it views the Bible as a collection of religious proofs, the last word in any debate. it holds the Bible text to be the answer to all the theological, historical, and scientific problems that confront mankind. Need an answer to the problem of man’s origins? Well, we have the first chapter of genesis, says the o There!, person and so the biologists and archaeologists in quest of truth can put away their microscopes and shovels. From trifling to the transcendent, the answer hides in a verse or two. No problem is too9 large or too small the Bible has the solution. So There!

I think that when a person uses or quotes averse from Scripture it needs to be the context of what the sacred author ids saying to make the point not just to take it out of context because it somehow fits what the pre-conceived notion is. So I agree with you.

The topic of infant baptism is NOT one of my strongest topics in Catholic theology, but I will be watching this thread with great interest.

I wonder if crochet lady will venture in and discuss with us? I do hope she does.

This was a good thread on this subject:

Infant Baptism - Laying out the facts

crochet lady, when it comes to baptism of infants. One versus, if you have any understanding of Jewish tradition, and a remembrance that Christianity is NOT a new religion, it is the fulfillment of Judism, makes the argument an open and shut case.

Colossians 2:11–12
In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Baptism, is the new circumcision, and when where people circumcised? The 8th day, (IE they where infants).

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit