is infant baptism wrong?

Question

i am just wondering. why does others say that infant baptism is wrong? God ask the apostle to make the people his follower. so what's wrong with infant baptism? is God choosy about the age of people? isn't it that the son/daughter of 2 christian is assumed christian?

how about these verses?

(Luke 18:15-16), and Peter declared: "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. For the promise is to you and to your children"

"Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19:14).

Answer 1

The bible verses you quoted are the ones I would use as well.

But for me, Christianity is so much more than parroting Bible verses...

Equal doses of Scripture, Tradition and Reason work best when researching such a divisive subject. The argument never arose until the Middle Ages. Not until the 1520s did the Christian Church experience opposition specifically to infant Baptism. Under the influence of Thomas Muenzer and other fanatics who opposed both civil and religious authority, original sin and human concupiscence was denied until the "age of accountability." Although there is no basis in Scripture for this position, a considerable number of Swiss, German and Dutch embraced the Anabaptist cause. So offensive was this position that Roman Catholics, Lutherans and Reformed alike voiced strong warning and renunciation. It was considered a shameless affront to what had been practiced in each generation since Christ’s command in the Great Commission (Matthew 28: 18-20) to baptize all nations irrespective of age.

Before that time...The Church ALWAYS Baptized infants.

Look at what the Fathers of the Church have said since the beginning:

Irenaeus



"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).


Hippolytus



"Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).


Origen



"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).


Cyprian of Carthage



"As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

"If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another" (ibid., 64:5).


Gregory of Nazianz



"Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]).

"‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid., 40:28).


John Chrysostom



"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).


Augustine



"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).


Council of Carthage V



"Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians" (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).


Council of Mileum II



"[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration" (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]).

Answer 2

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called."

Infant baptism is not a new thing. There are non-biblical documented sources starting in the second century telling of infant Baptism.

There are even several passages in the Bible where whole households were baptized. This would include everyone who lived there, men, women, children, and infants.

Acts 16:15, "After she and her household had been baptized"

Acts 16:33, "then he and all his family were baptized at once."

Acts 18:8, "came to believe in the Lord along with his entire household, and many of the Corinthians who heard believed and were baptized."

1 Corinthians 1:16, "I baptized the household of Stephanas"

St. Paul wrote that baptism has replaced circumcision (Col 2:11-12), and in Judaism circumcision was performed primarily on infants.

With love in Christ.

Answer 3

Jesus Himself said that no-one, repeat NO-ONE can enter the kingdom without being reborn through the waters of baptism. That's pretty specific. That's why baptism of infants has been the practice of the Christian Church from the very beginning. We know this from Scripture, which tells us repeatedly that whole families were baptized together. Obviously this frequently included young children. We know this from the writings of the earliest Church Fathers, second and third century. We know this from history. Surely if the Church had introduced infant baptism at some later date, there would have been a heated debate on such a major change, with many people writing on both sides of the issue. In all of history we don't find a single word about the introduction of infant baptism. Because it was never introduced. It has been the norm since apostolic times.

What non-believers in infant baptism have to face is the reality that their non-belief is a recent tradition of men, not a part of Christianity as Christ founded it. They feel this way because of their inadequate concept of what baptism actually is. Manmade churches have reduced baptism to a mere symbolic gesture which people do to demonstrate their faith. Obviously an infant would not be capable of this, since he/she doesn't have any faith yet. However, the true Christian Church, the one founded by Jesus Christ on the Apostles, has always seen sacraments as an action of God within us, through which we receive an outpouring of special graces. This is just one of so many ways that manmade denominational religion has abandoned what Christ gave to His Church. It is really very sad.

Answer 4

It seems to me that the biblical pattern is that a person always get baptized FOLLOWING his or her conversion experience (see Acts 16:29-34) for one of many examples.) Moreover, household baptisms such as the one described in Acts 16:33 do not specify the presence of any infants. Having said that, it is certainly permissible and right for young children who have trusted in Christ to get baptized.

Answer 5

I would not say it is wrong, but you cannot find 1 single scripture that says to baptize infants.
Baptism is an outward expression of your inward faith, so you must be old enough to make the decision to follow Jesus or not in order to be a Christian.
Baptism does not save you, it is only symbolic of leaving your old life of sin and beginning a new life with Jesus.

Nobody is born a Christian, as I said earlier, you must be able to make the choice for yourself. You cannot get to Heaven on your parents coat tails. Each and every person is responsible for their own salvation.

If baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, explain the thief on the cross. Jesus said to him, "surely today you will be with me in paradise." How did the thief have time to get baptized when he was dieing on the cross already?

Answer 6

Baptism is a symbol of the dedication one makes to do God's will. No infant could make such an informed decision but yes, the Bible says that the children are safe because of the parent's belief and not even both of them, but even just one parent. This is true until the child is mature enough to make their own decision.

Answer 7

The older church doctrines are not studied, scholarly paintings thrown within the trash can as though the theology we have now heard thus far is any larger. But if you are interested, you're asking the identical query the Heidelberg Catechism addressed over four hundred years in the past, Question #seventy four. The reply is Yes, Infants as good as adults are in God's covenant and are his individuals. They, at least adults, are promised the forgiveness of sin via Christ's blood within the Holy Spirit who produces religion. Therefore, via baptism, the mark of the covenant, babies must be bought into the Christian church and must be exotic from the youngsters of unbelievers. This used to be performed within the Old Testament via circumcision, which used to be changed within the New Testament via baptism. Plenty of Scripture references, however they have lengthy when you consider that been changed via what looks to be way more attractive.

Answer 8

Infant Baptism is wrong because it is not a Bible teaching, and no one can show you anywhere in the Bible where an infant was ever baptised. It is a Catholic teaching and some protestant denomination have adopted it also, but it is not right. Your reference is not right, I think it is Acts 2 you are quoting. And it has nothing to do with children being bapized. The children mentioned in that verse are linage not babies.
No, being born to Christian parents does not make you a Christian. Christians come by believing in Jesus Christ, something that infants cannot do yet.

Answer 9

Because yes Luke says that but they cant repent they havent even sinned as and infant and a baptism is serious and part of repenting is knowing how i did live my life was wrong God but I want to change and be your follower and live my life in accordance to you and that is a decision that a baby cant make and Jesus was saying let them come to me he did not say baptise them he say let them hear me and learn about him because you do need to teach them from infancy and teaching them and when they come of age to understand and want to dedicate there lives then they can but that decision should be made by them because you never know how that child is going to turn out or if it will reach there heart that religion so they should make the decision and you cant find anywhere in the bible where it says that Jesus baptised a baby or any of the disciples but you do see how Jesus thought children where important

Answer 10

I think that there is nothing wrong with the catholic baptisim of infants becuase that is just the parent's promise that they will religously nurture and influence their children as long as they are in their care, and when they are older, they are confirmed, meaning they still want to be a part of their "religion" and that they believe it themselves. I do not believ in baptizing them, because it has not been their choice, and I do not think they should be baptized by their own will until they are old enough to understand the concept and decide for themselves what they believe and if they agree with the faith they have been nrought up in, or whichever they are being baptized into.

Answer 11

Nowhere in the New Testament do we find someone baptized that does not believe, repent and confess. When a baby can do all of that, yes, they can be baptized, dipped, plunged or immersed in water. The followers of Jesus did not recognize sprinkling or pouring.

Jesus also said if we do not become as a small child we cannot enter the kingdom. The young child is sinless and we are to be the same way to be pleasing to Him.