infant baptism


#1

I would like someone who baptizes infants to show me in the bible where there is support for this. thanks


#2

someone please answer


#3

They cann’t


#4

Well, I’m not a bible expert, but I believe there are plenty of places where it says ‘so and so AND ALL HIS/HER HOUSEHOLD’ were baptised’ - doesn’t say ‘so and so and all the adults of his/her household’.

Show me in the Bible where it says only adults were ever baptised? And that the early Christians never baptised children?
Besides which, I’m sure there are PLENTY of threads dealing with this topic better than I can at the moment. Click ‘search’ at the top of the page and type in ‘infant baptism’.


#5

[quote=allischalmers]They cann’t
[/quote]

Just like you “cann’t” spell? :rotfl:

MRRY79 I would like someone who baptizes infants to show me in the bible where there is support for this. thanks

MRRY79 someone please answer

(This is a forum not a chat room so don’t get your shorts in a wad. :rolleyes: )

Did you bother to read any of the CA Library on Infant Baptism?

"Infant Baptism

Fundamentalists often criticize the Catholic Church’s practice of baptizing infants. According to them, baptism is for adults and older children, because it is to be administered only after one has undergone a “born again” experience—that is, after one has “accepted Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior.” At the instant of acceptance, when he is “born again,” the adult becomes a Christian, and his salvation is assured forever. Baptism follows, though it has no actual salvific value. In fact, one who dies before being baptized, but after “being saved,” goes to heaven anyway.

As Fundamentalists see it, baptism is not a sacrament (in the true sense of the word), but an ordinance. It does not in any way convey the grace it symbolizes; rather, it is merely a public manifestation of the person’s conversion. Since only an adult or older child can be converted, baptism is inappropriate for infants or for children who have not yet reached the age of reason (generally considered to be age seven). Most Fundamentalists say that during the years before they reach the age of reason infants and young children are automatically saved. Only once a person reaches the age of reason does he need to “accept Jesus” in order to reach heaven.

Since the New Testament era, the Catholic Church has always understood baptism differently, teaching that it is a sacrament which accomplishes several things, the first of which is the remission of sin, both original sin and actual sin—only original sin in the case of infants and young children, since they are incapable of actual sin; and both original and actual sin in the case of older persons.

Peter explained what happens at baptism when he said, “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” (Acts 2:38). But he did not restrict this teaching to adults. He added, “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” (2:39). We also read: “Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name” (Acts 22:16). These commands are universal, not restricted to adults. Further, these commands make clear the necessary connection between baptism and salvation, a connection explicitly stated in 1 Peter 3:21: “Baptism . . . now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

Then there is the evidence from the early church’s own writings…Early Teachings on Infant Baptism

"Baptism is the Christian equivalent of circumcision, or “the circumcision of Christ”: “In him you were also circumcised with . . . the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead” (Col. 2:11–12). Thus, like circumcision, baptism can be given to children as well as adults. The difference is that circumcision was powerless to save (Gal. 5:6, 6:15), but “**aptism . . . now saves you” (1 Pet. 3:21).

The first explicit evidence of children of believing households being baptized comes from the early Church—where infant baptism was uniformly
upheld and regarded as apostolic. In fact, the only reported controversy on the subject was a third-century debate whether or not to delay baptism until the eighth day after birth, like its Old Testament equivalent, circumcision! (See quotation from Cyprian, below; compare Leviticus 12:2–3.)

Consider, too, that Fathers raised in Christian homes (such as Irenaeus) would hardly have upheld infant baptism as apostolic if their own baptisms had been deferred until the age of reason.

For example, infant baptism is assumed in Irenaeus’ writings below (since he affirms both that regeneration happens in baptism, and also that Jesus came so even infants could be regenerated). Since he was born in a Christian home in Smyrna around the year 140, this means he was probably baptized around 140. He was also probably baptized by the bishop of Smyrna at that time—Polycarp, a personal disciple of the apostle John, who had died only a few decades before."**

Pax tecum,


#6

This is pretty easy, especially since all of Christianity baptized babies until fairly recently…

Baptism is the new Circumcision. So as we see that God commanded us to be circumcised in the old covenant. Jesus established the new covenant which replaced circumcision with Baptism. Since we believe in salvation by God’s Grace this is also expressed in baptizing babies, especially since there is no prohibition in baptizing babies in the Bible. The prohibition of baptizing babies is a recent tradition usually expressed in Baptist faith traditions, some small groups beforehand did but never to the extent of modern Baptists
ondenoms and their spinoffs…

There have been many threads on this sort of thing and since the Catholic Church came before the Bible we don’t just pick it up and base our beliefs off of it. Our beliefs come from the Apostles, the Bible came afterward, so our beliefs are substantiated by the Bible but not on an approach that the Bible is all there is, since the faith existed first before the Bible.

catholic.com/library/infant_baptism.asp

God Bless
Scylla


#7

[size=4]The Martyrdom of Polycarp[/size]

" CHAP. IX.–POLYCARP REFUSES TO REVILE CHRIST.

Now, as Polycarp was entering into the stadium, there came to him a voice from heaven, saying, “Be strong, and show thyself a man, O Polycarp !” No one saw who it was that spoke to him; but those of our brethren who were present heard the voice. And as he was brought forward, the tumult became great when they heard that Polycarp was taken. And when he came near, the proconsul asked him whether he was Polycarp. On his confessing that he was, [the proconsul] sought to persuade him to deny [Christ], saying, “Have respect to thy old age,” and other similar things, according to their custom, [such as]," Swear by the fortune of Caesar; repent, and say, Away with the Atheists." But Polycarp, gazing with a stern countenance on all the multitude of the wicked heathen then in the stadium, and waving his hand towards them, while with groans he looked up to heaven, said, “Away with the Atheists.”(5) Then, the proconsul urging him, and saying, “Swear, and I will set thee at liberty, reproach Christ;” Polycarp declared, **“Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?” **

Martyr (A.D. 69-155). Looks like he actually lived during the writing of the New Testament

" Polycarp - A Father of the Christian Church
Polycarp is a celebrated figure in the history of Christianity. A direct pupil of the apostle John, Polycarp lived between 70 and 155 A.D., connecting him to both the biblical apostles and the age of the early church fathers. Several ancient sources document the contributions of Polycarp to Christianity, including his letters written to the church at Philippi, in which he encourages the members to remain strong in their faith and to flee from materialism. He also instructs the members in the proper handling of financial dishonesty that was creeping into the church. Polycarp served as the bishop of the church at Smyrna (modern day Izmir), and was recognized as one of the early combatants of Christian heresies. He rejected the teachings of Marcion, an influential heretic who tried to create a “new brand” of Christianity by redefining God and rejecting Old Testament teachings. In his well-known thesis, Polycarp combats Gnostic heresies that were beginning to spread throughout the Christian church." Even that from an n-C source…HERE

If the man was 86 when they killed him for his faith, then that tells you that he was infant baptized. Oh and who was it that discipled him and his friend Ignatius of Antioch? St. John the Apostle himself. Gosh…maybe they were actually baptized by St. John! :eek:
Pax tecum,


#8

Acts 16:15 “And when she was baptized, with her household, she besought us, saying, ‘If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay.’ And she prevailed upon us” [cf. 18:18].

Acts 16:33: “And he took them to the same hour of the night, and washed their wounds, and he was baptized at once, with all his family.”

1 Corinthians 1:16: “I did baptize also the household of Stephanas.”

I think its safe to infer that households and families included infants even thought it does not specifically say so.


#9

[quote=MRRY79]I would like someone who baptizes infants to show me in the bible where there is support for this. thanks
[/quote]

Infant Baptism
Jn 3:5; Mk 16:16 - baptism required for entering heaven
1Cor 15:21-22 - in Adam all die, in Christ all made alive
Mk 10:14 - let children come; to such belongs the kingdom
Lk 18:15 - people were bringing even infants to him…
Col 2:11-12 - baptism has replaced circumcision
Jos 24:15 - as for me and my house, we will serve Lord
Mt 8:5ff. - daughter healed because of centurion’s faith
Mt 15:21ff. - daughter healed because of Canaanite woman’s faith
Lk 7:1ff. - just say the word, and let my servant be healed
Acts 16:31 - believe in Lord Jesus you & house will be saved
Acts 16:15 - she was baptized, with all her household
Acts 16:33 - he and all his family were baptized at once
1Cor 1:16 - I baptized the household of Stephanas

source:
geocities.com/thecatholicconvert/biblecheatsheet.html

See also:
scripturecatholic.com/baptism.html#baptism-III


#10

forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=100536

It’s a bit long and personal, but I hope it helps.


#11

The real question is, where does it say they CAN’T?


#12

[quote=imroc]The real question is, where does it say they CAN’T?
[/quote]

Exactly. Something this important would have definitely been clarified in the Bible somewhere along the lines of “no infants shall be baptised, as they have not reached the age of consent”. Instead we see “whole households” were baptised with no qualifiers. Seems pretty clear to me infants were baptised in the time of the Apostles.


#13

[quote=imroc]I hardly doubt that “whole” households contained just teenagers and adults back then. Especially since Trojan and Planned Parenthood haven’t taken hold of those societies yet.

And I hardly believe that the mentioning of ONLY adults was meant as an apologetic work for protestants that would come well over a dozen centuries later.
[/quote]


#14

This is pretty easy, especially since all of Christianity baptized babies until fairly recently…

This is fairly significant. By what authority did their churches declare this change? Why isn’t it universally held among protestant sects? Why do they recognize other protestant infant baptisms yet take exception to catholics doing it? Are those other protestants not christian now? Or are they still considered under the invisible umbrella of the church(es)? (Baptists are in their own world here though see Heb 6 :4-6 crucifying Christ again, i.e. illumination (enlightened) is baptism)

Peace and God Bless
Nicene


#15

Just one other thing to add, Scripture tells us that God does not change, Psalms for example. The Jews were brought into the covenant by circumcision on the 8th day. (interestingly, what day did Christ rise from the dead?) Those babies did not need nor could they have read or understood Gods covenant, they were just brought into it via their inheritance.

There were Jews who chose to abandon God afterwards, harlotry etc. (Gods covenant is likened to marriage according to the prophets) But God remained faithful through those remnants faithful to Him.

In the New Covenant, does God change? Does he now say, “In order for you to be brought into my covenant you have to be an adult, read and understand scripture.”? Or is the way He keeps His convenant unchanging because God does not change?

There will be Christians who choose to abandon God, does this mean God abandons His covenant?

Such is the will of God, He is faithful, does that mean man will be?

Peace and God Bless
Nicene


#16

[quote=imroc]The real question is, where does it say they CAN’T?
[/quote]

I agree with this. It doesn’t matter if you are a child or an adult. We baptize as we can. Usually it is done as an infant, but if you are an adult who never was baptized, then you go through catechesis and get baptized then.


#17

I wonder if this whole string has answered MRRY79’s query.


#18

[quote=MRRY79]I would like someone who baptizes infants to show me in the bible where there is support for this. thanks
[/quote]

I know you don’t want to hear this but I must ask show me where in the Bible it says “DO NOT Baptize Infants” or where in the NT the Apostles tell the crowds “Take you infants and little children home, infants and little Children DO NOT need Baptism” ???

You will find Christ saying “DO NOT hinder the little children from coming to Me.” You will find several places where “whole families” are Baptized. You will find the Jewish tradition of presenting infants in the temple on the 8th day after birth for inclusion into the people of God.


#19

I think it’s rather obvious that since the NT, infants were baptised. The earliest of Church Fathers wrote specifically about it. It was practiced by the early protestants and was never an issue until recent history. With all this evidence piled up FOR infant baptism, I think it is the one who doesn’t baptise infants who needs to defend their position. In reality all odds are against those who hold children back from the Body of Christ, His Church.


#20

[quote=MRRY79]I would like someone who baptizes infants to show me in the bible where there is support for this. thanks
[/quote]

A good protestant apologist always starts with a false premise,
Then, asks questions surrounding the false premise.
The false premise here is assumed:
“The bible MUST support, explicitly, any and all practices of the Church.”

Now, if we can locate THAT in your bible you may have a vaild premise. But since you cannot locate it without pretzel logic, the premise is wrong to start with.

However, YOUR bible DOES command women to wear headcovings in worship, and such was the 100% practice for all worshipping christians from the beginning even through Calvin who was a leading reformation spokesman and I suppose you follow his theology quite closely.

**So, where is YOUR bible support to eliminate women’s headcovering in worship?
**
Here’s your problem premise pushed on Catholics: All Catholics must find a BCV for any practice or discipline.

When in fact that is your false belief that you propose for all with NO BCV to back it up., and no authority to interpret anyway.


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