Why are babies baptized?the bible clearlystates that is is wrong...?

Question

so the bible says that the person who is being babtized into christ must declare that they believe he is their savior. So how can babies make that choice...its not up to the parents, but if they do babtize them as babies, then the babie has not "accepted" christ into their life. some churches say that the parents sins are passed down through birth, i will believe you when you find me a bible verse that says that that is OK.

Answer 1

All early Christian writers understood baptism to be necessary for salvation (baptism is being "born again of water and the Spirit"), and all early Christians baptized infants.

Peter explains what happens at baptism Acts 2:38: "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." Peter wasn't talking only about adults: "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" (v. 39).

In Col 2:11-12, Paul explains that baptism has replaced circumcision: "In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by 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."

With rare exceptions, only infants were circumcised in Judaism. If Paul meant to exclude infants, he would not have chosen circumcision as a parallel for baptism.

Does the Bible ever say that babies or young children were baptized? In Acts 16:15 we read that Lydia "was baptized, with her household." In Acts 16:33, the Philippian jailer Paul and Silas had converted "was baptized, with all his family." In 1 Cor 1:16, Paul wrote, "I did baptize also the household of Stephanas."

If whole households or families were baptized, the children too were included. Certainly there were children younger than the age of reason in some of the households that were baptized. Given the New Testament pattern of household baptism, any exceptions to this rule for infants would have been made explicit.

Conclusion: The New Testament evidence supports infant baptism, and the other writings for the early Christians prove it conclusively.

Cheers,
Bruce

Answer 2

1) In most sects that baptize babies, this baptism is done to assert a) their inclusion into the sect b) the forgiveness of original sin (but not *necessarily* the consequences thereof).

2) The bible does *not* clearly state that this is wrong. Indeed, the bible makes *no* claim whatsoever that this is wrong. The bible does not even *imply* that this is wrong. Really.

3) "so the bible says that the person who is being babtized into christ must declare that they believe he is their savior"
The bible does not make this claim.

4) "some churches say that the parents sins are passed down through birth"
Not the parents' sins, but Adam and Eve's!!!

Scripture taken from the New American Standard Bible, (c) Copyright The LOCKMAN Foundation 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1988 Used by permission.

Psa 51:5
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
And in sin my mother conceived me.

Rom 5:19
For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

Don't forget the consequences of original sin, which we still suffer: death, painful pregnancy, laboring to survive. The punishment for these sins is lifted (in a delayed manner) when we are forgiven (i.e. when we receive salvation, we know that we have attained a life without these penalties of sin).

And, of course, anyone who has a child of even 5 years old (I would suggest as young as 2 years old) knows that that child knows *some* right from wrong, and *still* chooses to do the wrong that that child *knows* is wrong. Thus, it is (plainly) in our nature to be sinful.

Therefore, infant baptism is used (by those sects which practice it) as a ceremony asserting the forgiveness of the sinful nature with which we all are born. Individual sins (sins of commission or omission) must be repented of individually in most sects (except for *some* of the "once-saved-always-saved" sects, some of which teach that all of someone's sins, past and future, have already been forgiven once they have attained salvation and been baptized).

5) Of course, there is no verse that says that it is OK to baptize infants. There is also no verse that says that it is *not* OK to baptize infants. The point is strictly a matter of interpretation, tradition, or faith in the teachings of one's sect, since scripture is silent on the matter.

Jim, http://www.jimpettis.com/wheel/

Answer 3

The bible doesn't actually say that it's wrong, but then it doesn't have anything in it to say it's right, either. I was baptized as an infant, and I was rebaptized as an adult because I felt the need to be. God put it on my heart, so I figured it was the right thing to do.
Baptism does not get you into heaven. Only the blood of Jesus can wash away your sins. Baptism is an act of obedience, and a public display of your faith. It represents the death and resurrection, which is the basis of our faith.
My mom gives this argument: (not saying I agree with her) A baby is baptized, then when the child turns 13 or 14, they are "confirmed" in their faith, by taking confirmation classes and being confirmed in the church(she's not catholic, by the way) Anyway, the only problem I see with this is it is not, then a personal commitment because it is telling someone when they need to do it, instead of it being something they choose to do personally. I was also confirmed in a church, but, truthfully, I never understood it really, and it wasn't my choice. I believe it should be personal with God. I am with you on this in that I find no basis for it in the Bible. God Bless

Answer 4

Baptizing babies is basically to make the parents feel better in my opinion. There is no verse that says to baptize babies. No one is without sin, but babies don't know the difference. Stop and think about it. A baby has to be fed, clothed, changed; they rely solely on their provider. They are innocent and don't know that there is good or wrong in the world. So how can they accept Christ when they don't know who he is. It's a parent's job to teach their child and by baptizing a baby, they think their job is done.

Answer 5

"Believer's baptism" isn't in the Bible, either. Mark 16:16 states: "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." One does not have to be a believer to be baptized. The order in which it happens -- baptism first, or believing first -- is not spelled out, only that both are required.

Parents baptize their children to set them apart for God, just as the Hebrew parents circumcised their sons to set them apart in a covenant relationship with God. They raise them as believers; that is part of the commitment they make on behalf of the child at baptism. When the child is of an age of accountability, he or she is confirmed. This is indeed their "believer's baptism" -- in the Holy Spirit.

Answer 6

Not sure why some are baptized in other religions, but I know in other cases it's not really a salvation thing, they are just sprinkled with water. It's like a baby dedication where the parents agree to raise their children in church and teach them the bible and all that good stuff.

Answer 7

OK, so the kids are innocent. Then leave 'em home with a babysitter, it's absolutely pointless to bring them to church. They are already saved, no struggle involved, they have absolutely no need for the Christian life.

Or, since the kid is saved, abortion absolutely ensures that your child will be in heaven. No choice necessary for them if they never get to the age of reason, no risk of Hell at all, just eternal bliss.

Hey, how about that circumcision in the Old Testament? No need for that, either. Jacob I loved, Esau I hated, but if Esau had died as an infant, wellllll, ok, I guess I owe him Heaven 'cause them's the rules.

I had my daughter baptized as an infant, a sinner like me, and I brought her to the gathering of struggling sinners every week to worship. She was marked with an address in God's kingdom, just like our own address. She didn't know it as a baby, but she was brought up as one who belonged to God, in His family as in mine.

It is God who accepts or denies baptism, as he did circumcision in the OT. "Making a choice first" IS scriptural, as conversion to Judaism would have been for adult believers -- circumcision following. But from that point forward, the believer's (male) children were to be circumcised.

Baptism, same thing. The early church had lots of new believers, and they would have been adults, following the same course of action, being baptized themselves, and then having their children baptized. This logically explains Jesus' commandment to be baptized AND the thief on the cross. Taken as the "new circumcision," God can accept or deny, love or hate the kids before they were even born. Baptism is in GOD's hands, not ours.

Answer 8

It also says people had their WHOLE HOUSEHOLDS BAPTIZED---THAT MEANS SLAVES AND EVERYBODY. Their children were worth far more than their slaves so they would especially have had them baptized. Ya know what? There is Atheism and all kinds of pure crap just running rampant and it is awful funny that this increase has run parallel to the current "no baptism" junk put out by people like you. First we deny our children the baptism that wards off the advances of the Evil One by giving people a conscience then we introduce all kinds of evils to them and then we stand there and scratch our heads why they act like they do---.

Answer 9

Actually, the bible never says anything of the sort. Jesus gives specific instructions on how to baptize, using the trinitarian formulation. (Matthew 28:19)

The bible DOES say, however, of the jailer to whom Paul said, "Do not harm yourself, for we are all here", that "He and his entire household were baptized." (Acts 16:34) Households in this day and age always, ALWAYS included babies. Childless families simply did not exist in the age.

The fundamentalist creed "accepted Christ into your life" is not found anywhere in scripture.

As to the silliness posted above that kids cannot later "turn to Christ on their own"... um, is that not what Confirmation is exactly for? You know, the whole reciting the creed and rejecting Satan thing?

Answer 10

Of cause One can change from Methodist to something else...you're a free agent..if you wish to join another church denomination then do so and if you choose to be Scriptually baptised by Full Immersion in a church that practices this then do so...you DONT have to stay in the church you were brought up into.Its Your decision!