Why have the believers replaced baptism by immersion with infant baptism by sprinkling?

Answer 1

This is from Smith's Bible Dictionary:

It is well known that ablution or bathing was common in most ancient nations as a preparation for prayers and sacrifice or as expiatory of sin. In warm countries this connection is probably even closer than in colder climates; and hence the frequency of ablution in the religious rites throughout the East. Baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is the rite or ordinance by which persons are admitted into the Church of Christ. It is the public profession of faith and discipleship. Baptism signifies--

A confession of faith in Christ;
A cleansing or washing of the soul from sin;
A death to sin and a new life in righteousness. The mode and subjects of baptism being much-controverted subjects, each one can best study them in the works devoted to those questions. The command to baptize was co-extensive with the command to preach the gospel. All nations were to be evangelized; and they were to be made disciples, admitted into the fellowship of Christ’s religion, by baptism. (Matthew 28:19) It appears to have been a kind of transition from the Jewish baptism to the Christian. The distinction between John’s baptism and Christian baptism appears in the case of Apollos, (Acts 18:26,27) and of the disciples at Ephesus mentioned (Acts 19:1-6) We cannot but draw from this history the inference that in Christian baptism there was a deeper spiritual significance.

This comes from the Greek word "ba/ptisma" which is defined as "immersion, submersion". So, people have interpretted what it means and have changed it to fit what they believe. Tsk, tsk.

Answer 2

It's certainly debatable that it has happened this way and not the other way around. Anyway if water baptism is just a symbol then it cannot be that important. If however it is needed for salvation then the method could be important.

There is no point arguing from language as this is unclear. There is no point in arguing from scripture as this is also unclear and some denominations also cite church tradition.

Child baptism is usually defended on a covenantal basis whilst adult as a symbol of belief (those that pratise child baptism usually use confirmation (laying on of hands) to symbolise belief and receiving of the Holy Spirit.

The method immersion or sprinlkling again really depends on what is being symbolised death and rebirth or the pouring out of the Holy Spirit.

Who on earth understands the arguments whether it should be in the name of Jesus or in a triune formula?

My personal belief is who cares? Most of the arguments are just about show getting "new converts" to ones own little tribe. It's what is in the heart that counts.

Answer 3

In the time of Christ all Christains was completely immersed in water in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, as time went on the Catholic religion, in about 312 AD made sprinkling a tradition to try to say this is the same thing as complete immersion, Baptized means put under completely, So we can see the Catholic taechings are wrong, because they began to change God's word. Baby baptism came in also from the Catholic Church. They claim that if a baby is baptize in their church, that the baby is now saved. But let see what the bible actually says, St. Mark 16:16 He that (BELIEVETH) & is Baptized shall be saved. Look closely Baptism does NOT save you, First you have to believe, How can a little baby believe. So this tradition came through the Catholic Church a pagan teaching.

Answer 4

Because baptism is in the water and the intent, NOT the amount of water or the position of the person being baptized. In a pinch, anyone, even a non-Christian, can baptize and any liquid will do. All that's necessary is the intent to baptize and a drop of liquid.

The Catholic Church regards as valid baptisms made by atheists with a drop of gin (no fooling) because the intent to baptize was there in both the atheist and the person wishing baptism. This is NOT the recommended procedure. Just an emergency case. The baptized died a few moments later of his injuries. (car accident). His atheist buddy related the details to the cops and then to a priest. The baptism was accepted.

Answer 5

Some have and some haven't. I was sprinkled as a youth, but later immersed. Baptism, to me, is an outward sign of faith. It is hard for me to understand infant baptism. I understand baby dedication. Some say it is a covering until the child is old enough to get baptized.
Some believe baptism is mandatory for salvation, but I don't believe it this way.

Answer 6

Each protestant religion chooses baptism in different ways. Some of them even allow you to be baptized numerous times while others believe that you are baptized for life with the first one.
Infant baptism - we agree to raise our children up in Christ - the children get the training right from the get go. Others choose when they want to be baptized from children all the way up to dying great grandparents. They are both acceptable. The Baptist faith and others believe in immersion while the Methodists believe in sprinkling (usually with holy water). Baptist say the only way you are baptized is through immersion any other way doesn't count. So in answer to your question - it really depends on which religion you participate in as to which way baptism is performed.

Answer 7

Your question cannot be taken as a blanket phrase for all Christians, for there are still those who practice baptism by immersion...

As for the practice of infant baptism (regardless of method), was only fully defined in the Decree for the Armenians, as part of the Exultate Deo of Pope Eugene IV in the Council of Trent. However, the acceptance of this doctrine is very questionable for many reasons, including the following...

- Many of the Biblical references used to justify infant baptism (such as Matthew 19: 14, Luke 18: 15, Acts 16: 15, Acts 16: 33 and 1 Corinthians 1: 16) are either speculating that infants were included or stretching the meaning of these verses too far.
- Many of the early Christian leaders have written doctrines condemning the practice of infant baptism or of its inefficacy.
- The clearer Biblical references to baptism all refer to those who either chose to receive Christ, receive baptism or received the Holy Spirit prior to their inevitable baptism.

To date, the greatest proponent of infant baptism remains the Catholic Church. Of all Christians not aligned to Catholicism, majority are against infant baptism.

Answer 8

Infant baptism has never been mentioned in the Bible.Infant Baptism is not biblical.

Baptism should only take place after a person is born again by accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

Answer 9

All magnificent factors different than one. comprehensive immersion baptism replaced right into a prepare of the early Church and an apostolic custom. The very be conscious "Baptism" skill immersed and limitless early Church records consult with baptism with the help of immersion, one such occasion is the "Didache" additionally we've the archaeological evidence of Baptismal fonts in many early church homes, all of that are patently the dimensions appropriate for comprehensive physique immersion. Having stated this, comprehensive immersion isn't the only way a individual may be baptized, there are rather some exceptions and out of doorways of the "Catholic" faith, that being "wide-unfold", no longer "Roman Catholic", none have the authority in Christ to baptize as they have not have been given any anointed priesthood so of their case the act isn't something extra desirable than a gesture and public demonstrate. quote- "David, my factor is that the Bible does not checklist the approach of Baptism. specific the Catholic Church has practiced this from the beginning up yet we are no longer Bible purely instructors and this methodology or the different isn't interior the Bible. they do no longer look to be being actual to their heretical doctrine of Sola Scriptura. My question is why?" My apologies, I study your question to point you have been suggesting that it replaced into unbiblical for any to have comprehensive immersion baptisms. lower back my apologies.

Answer 10

denominations like the catholic church and others for some reason think that it the actual baptism that saves us and gives us eternal life so they baptise babies in the fear that they'll die before they grow up and they wont go to heaven... this is not the case. all children who havnt the capability to decide to follow christ for themselves go to heaven (even every adult who for example live in countries where they havnt been able to hear the good news about christ go automatically to heaven when they die) My church (baptist) refuse to baptise children under 12 because they cant make a proper decision as children... baptism, even though is is extemly specail, is just a public testimony to your faith and to show god and everyone else how important he is to you... being totally imersed is a symbol of your sins being washed away and forgotten by god because you have accepted him and accepted his son as lord of your life....