Question about baptism:?

Question

Why do some denominations believe that a baby can be saved via baptism when the bible clearly states that you must believe in order to be saved?

Answer 1

Infant baptism removes the stain of original. Baptism 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."

Paul notes that baptism has replaced circumcision (Col. 2:11–12). In that passage, he refers to baptism as "the circumcision of Christ" and "the circumcision made without hands." Of course, usually only infants were circumcised under the Old Law; circumcision of adults was rare, since there were few converts to Judaism. If Paul meant to exclude infants, he would not have chosen circumcision as a parallel for baptism.

This comparison between who could receive baptism and circumcision is an appropriate one. In the Old Testament, if a man wanted to become a Jew, he had to believe in the God of Israel and be circumcised. In the New Testament, if one wants to become a Christian, one must believe in God and Jesus and be baptized. In the Old Testament, those born into Jewish households could be circumcised in anticipation of the Jewish faith in which they would be raised. Thus in the New Testament, those born in Christian households can be baptized in anticipation of the Christian faith in which they will be raised. The pattern is the same: If one is an adult, one must have faith before receiving the rite of membership; if one is a child too young to have faith, one may be given the rite of membership in the knowledge that one will be raised in the faith. This is the basis of Paul’s reference to baptism as "the circumcision of Christ"—that is, the Christian equivalent of circumcision.

Answer 2

Not automatically saved, but rather marked as one of God's own. It's up to God as to whether He will call them unto Himself. But a Christian home will raise the children accordingly, knowing that God also loved Jacob but hated Esau when they were both circumcised. Praise God anyway, but those children are marked and brought up to be members of the Kingdom. Infant baptizers bring their children to the Lord in the fear of Him and place them in the shadow of the cross, and to just wave their status into the air because they're supposed to be saved anyway, does not fit with God's wrath in the Old Testament and killing non-Israelite infants while keeping His own safe from harm.

Some Christians believe that infant baptism is a completely valid replacement for circumcision, and if you can put aside your own lenses of interpretation for a minute and look through the eyes of covenant theology, you'll at least see that this is not a wild interpretation of baptism. There is a weight of evidence behind what paedobaptists believe that makes infant baptism a very reasonable belief.

EDIT: JTB's mention of the thief on the cross can then be interpreted the same way as Jacob & Esau. God (Jesus) accepted the non-baptism in the same way Esau's circumcision was not accepted. The focus is always on God's prerogative, not man's act of obedience. This doesn't let non-baptism off the hook. Those who love the Lord, want to obey.

Answer 3

I can't speak for other faiths, but in the Catholic Church, it is the belief that the parents and godparents take on the responsibility to teach a child and raise the child to follow the laws of God. When we reach the age of 15 or so, we go through the sacrament of Confirmation, which is our opportunity to renew the vows that our parents made for us at Baptism. This is our way of standing up and saying that yes, we believe, and we are making the choice now that we are old enough to understand.

Answer 4

I agree. Remember Jesus said that John's baptism was with water, but His was with the Holy Spirit.

Answer 5

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." Mark 16:16


Note here in John 1:29 the word "sin". It does not say sins at this time.Until that time we were born into sin because of Adam.Jesus was baptized of John that day for original sin.When John was reluctant to baptize "..Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness....." Matthew 3:15.Man was restored that day back to the righteousness of Adam.And just as Adam was faced with a decision to obey God so are we when the day comes that we are 'accountable'.Then we are to "Repent and be baptized" as told by Peter, Acts 2:38.A baby cannot repent, nor does it need to.

"The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." John 1:29.

Answer 6

That is a false teaching of the catholic church, You first have to repent, then be baptized by complete immursion in water in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that is the way ALL the Apotles baptized, The pope claims to be a successor of Peter, No he is Not, Peter was a married man & Peter never baptized anyone using the titles of father, son & holy ghost. Matt. 28:19 It says in the NAME(singular) of the father & of the Son & of the Holy Ghost, & there is only one redemptive name, & that is Jesus Christ. Father, is not a name but a title to a name the same for Son & Holy Ghost. No one can find anywhere where any Apostle Baptized using those titles, but you can find them baptizing everyone in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, You see, those Apotles had a revelation of what that name was. Acts 2:38

Answer 7

The Bible also clearly says that you will only be saved if you do the will of God, but you have personally found it easier to "just believe".

Has it occurred to you that the Bible says many irreconcilable things, and that you pick and choose as much as others do?

Answer 8

They have made their own traditions. You are right. The first comes faith and then baptism. I believe Jesus would have been baptized as a baby if that was going to be requirement. And then they should be baptized as soon as baby's head comes out in the delivery, why to wait for couple of weeks or months if it is that serious.

Answer 9

Exactly!

First of all-Baptism is strictly a NT concept.

Now-what was the message of John the Baptist? REPENT & be baptised.

What was the message of Jesus? REPENT.

What was the message the Apostles? REPENT & be baptised.

What does a little baby have to repent of? It is incapable of anything, except of simply living.

Also there is NO SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE of ANY child being baptised in the Bible!

Answer 10

It is so nice to see all of these brilliant theologians sharing their 'vast' education and wisdom.
And it is amazing that they have managed to figure out everything they need to know, even though the millions who have spent lifetimes serving God were never able to achieve the enlightenment that these few here on Y!A seem to have.
Maybe they should all get together and start their own church.

Answer 11

Amen!! A baby cannot be saved by baptism. Only by asking Jesus into their heart can a person be saved.