Nope. I think it is imperative:
Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3 - these texts show the circumcision of eight-day old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant - Col 2:11-12 - however, baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. Therefore, baptism is for babies as well as adults. God did not make His new Covenant narrower than the old Covenant. To the contrary, He made it wider, for both Jews and Gentiles, infants and adults.
Job 14:1-4 - man that is born of woman is full of trouble and unclean. Baptism is required for all human beings because of our sinful human nature.
Psalm 51:5 - we are conceived in the iniquity of sin. This shows the necessity of baptism from conception.
Matt. 18:2-5 - Jesus says unless we become like children, we cannot enter into heaven. So why would children be excluded from baptism?
Matt 19:14 - Jesus clearly says the kingdom of heaven also belongs to children. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.
Mark 10:14 - Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. Jesus says nothing about being too young to come into the kingdom of God.
Mark 16:16 - Jesus says to the crowd, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." But in reference to the same people, Jesus immediately follows with "He who does not believe will be condemned." This demonstrates that one can be baptized and still not be a believer. This disproves the Protestant argument that one must be a believer to be baptized. There is nothing in the Bible about a "believer's baptism."
Luke 18:15 – Jesus says, “Let the children come to me.” The people brought infants to Jesus that he might touch them. This demonstrates that the receipt of grace is not dependent upon the age of reason.
Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized.." Protestants use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.”) This, contrary to what Protestants argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.
Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants.
Luke 1:59 - this proves that "teknon" includes infants. Here, John as a "teknon" (infant) was circumcised. See also Acts 21:21 which uses “teknon” for eight-day old babies. So baptism is for infants as well as adults.
Acts 10:47-48 - Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius, which generally included infants and young children. There is not one word in Scripture about baptism being limited to adults.
Acts 16:15 - Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word "household" comes from the Greek word "oikos" which is a household that includes infants and children.
Acts 16:15 - further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia's faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents' faith, not the children's faith.
Acts 16:30-33 - it was only the adults who were candidates for baptism that had to profess a belief in Jesus. This is consistent with the Church's practice of instructing catechumens before baptism. But this verse does not support a "believer's baptism" requirement for everyone. See Acts 16:15,33. The earlier one comes to baptism, the better. For those who come to baptism as adults, the Church has always required them to profess their belief in Christ. For babies who come to baptism, the Church has always required the parents to profess the belief in Christ on behalf of the baby. But there is nothing in the Scriptures about a requirement for ALL baptism candidates to profess their own belief in Christ (because the Church has baptized babies for 2,000 years).
Acts 16:33 - Paul baptized the jailer (an adult) and his entire household (which had to include children). Baptism is never limited to adults and those of the age of reason. See also Luke 19:9; John 4:53; Acts 11:14; 1 Cor. 1:16; and 1 Tim. 3:12; Gen. 31:41; 36:6; 41:51; Joshua 24:15; 2 Sam. 7:11, 1 Chron. 10:6 which shows “oikos” generally includes children.
Rom. 5:12 - sin came through Adam and death through sin. Babies' souls are affected by Adam's sin and need baptism just like adult souls.
Rom. 5:15 - the grace of Jesus Christ surpasses that of the Old Covenant. So children can also enter the new Covenant in baptism. From a Jewish perspective, it would have been unthinkable to exclude infants and children from God's Covenant kingdom.
1 Cor. 1:16 - Paul baptized the household ("oikos") of Stephanus. Baptism is not limited to adults.
Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:2 - Paul addresses the "saints" of the Church, and these include the children he addresses in Eph. 6:1 and Col. 3:20. Children become saints of the Church only through baptism.
Eph. 2:3 - we are all by nature children of wrath, in sin, like all mankind. Infants are no exception. See also Psalm 51:5 and Job 14:1-4 which teach us we are conceived in sin and born unclean.
2 Thess. 3:10 - if anyone does not work let him not eat. But this implies that those who are unable to work should still be able to eat. Babies should not starve because they are unable to work, and should also not be denied baptism because they are unable to make a declaration of faith.
Matt. 9:2; Mark 2:3-5 - the faith of those who brought in the paralytic cured the paralytic's sins. This is an example of the forgiveness of sins based on another's faith, just like infant baptism. The infant child is forgiven of sin based on the parents' faith.
Matt. 8:5-13 - the servant is healed based upon the centurion's faith. This is another example of healing based on another's faith. If Jesus can heal us based on someone else’s faith, then He can baptize us based on someone else’s faith as well.
Mark 9:22-25 - Jesus exercises the child's unclean spirit based on the father's faith. This healing is again based on another's faith.
1 Cor. 7:14 – Paul says that children are sanctified by God through the belief of only one of their parents.
Exodus 12:24-28 - the Passover was based on the parent's faith. If they did not kill and eat the lamb, their first-born child died.
Joshua 5:2-7 - God punished Israel because the people had not circumcised their children. This was based on the parent's faith. The parents play a critical role in their child's salvation.
2007-01-15 12:30:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Yes, I agree with a passion.
I don't believe religion is wrong or "brainwashing" in most cases. I simply believe that one's spirit or soul is not only the most precious possession, but the one part of a person over which they have complete control and ownership. To think that you have the right to wield power over another person's spiritual life - even your own child's - is the ultimate in arrogance. I would go so far, even, as to call it abusive.
People will thumbs-down me, but that is honestly how I feel. How dare anyone seek to control the soul of another? No matter how much you think you're doing them a "favor," it's wrong. A better favor would be to teach by example and give the person the freedom to think and choose for themselves.
Having said this, I don't appreciate your tone. I was certainly not born into my religion; many people leave their family's faith to seek other paths. You need to learn how to ask a good question and then shut up, rather than ask a good question and ruin it by sounding like an a-hole.
2007-01-15 12:42:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by Huddy 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with you that people should be able to make their own decisions. In fact, the only way to get into Heaven is to accept Jesus in your heart, and just walking the walk alone won't get you into Heaven. But I do believe that if you think your religion is the right one, that you should raise your children to be the same as you. I also believe that you should force religion on anyone, but show them what your religion is like, and let them decide for themselves. When I have my child, I will raise her to be a Christian, but I will let her make the final decision once she is old enough to choose.
2007-01-15 12:29:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Faith 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes.
My husband and I have already made a decision. We won't be raising our children within a religion. Instead, we will teach them about all religions and about science.
That way, when they're adults, they will be able to make an informed decision on whether a religion is right for them and which one is the best for what they believe.
Btw, I'm Eclectic Wiccan (strongly leaning towards Atheism. As ever) and he's a Methodist Ministers son.
His father agrees with us even though he's a Minister with a Masters Degree in Divinity.
2007-01-15 12:32:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
We are humans. We teach our young what we believe and what we want them to know. So is it 'wrong' for parents to do that? No. Parents can and should do what they think is best. That is our job.
So, then we need to figure out when they have a capacity to decide for themselves... shall we try to apply some arbitrary date? or perhaps wait until they ask the questions? Very hard question to answer.
So, even as an atheist, I basically have to answer 'no'.
2007-01-15 12:33:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by justr 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its up to the parents to raise their child into a system of manners and morals, and it is legitimate for a parent to pass on the religion to the children. Regardless, everyone will question their beliefs when they mature and they will think for themselves. Children need to be led though, you can't just let them do whatever they want or they will get in tons of trouble before they know how to fix it. But when they mature they can make their own mistakes and learn how to deal with it.
2007-01-15 12:32:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Every parent on this Earth is responsible for feeding, caring, teaching the small baby into an older child. We as parents have the right and it is our duty to teach our little ones in the way they should go and that means our own beliefs. Jesus was 12 years old when he could make his own decisions. So when any child becomes old enough to go his/her own way, they can . Babies and small children can not make their own decisions. Evidently your not a parent or you would know that every parents duty is to care and teach your child. When we feed our small toddlers and our pets. We don't let our small toddler decide he/she should be on the floor, eating like the family pet. We as parents teach ours to eat like us. Whe a child, baby gets old enough they can choose the path, they want to take. But until that time and age , they need to do as the parents want them to do. Children can not decide. We need to guide them.
2007-01-15 13:19:49
·
answer #7
·
answered by Norskeyenta 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Children follow the traditions of their parents. The Israelites did it and God's apostles did it. Is it brainwashing? I don't know but our parents raised us with values and religion, is a part of life. When we grow up, we can make a personal decision if we choose to continue this tradition.
2007-01-15 13:03:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by cynical 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
What are your beliefs? Are you not going to teach them to your child as early as possible, especially the things you believe are most important? Then why would you even ask this, as though people of strong faith don't really think it's very important?
And for the record, my parents arent religious... somehow, for some reason, I found God on my own.
2007-01-15 12:33:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by impossble_dream 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think its to be expected AND excepted. Not that I agree with it or like it. I teach my children that GHOSTS and ANGELS and DEMONS do not exist. I want that freedom. I dont want to leave that door open at all. It has nothing to do with attempting to destroy their awe and mystery of life either. I just dont want the possible mental problems along with it. for my kids sake and mine.
As they get older then I will show them that I cant know such things with 100% certainty.
2007-01-15 12:36:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes I have felt this way for a long time also. If you love your kids let them make their own decisions when they are old enough to think for themselves, don't brainwash them. Of course if this was done most religions would die out.
2007-01-15 12:28:50
·
answer #11
·
answered by Andastra 3
·
1⤊
1⤋