Question:
What is the Biblical basis for infant baptism?
Lindz
2007-08-14 19:59:45 UTC
First, I would like serious, and NOT insulting answers please. Second, I am a conservative Christian. I was brought up with adult baptism (and personally still agree with it, after studying all Biblical references.... baptism always happened after conversion). However, I have married into Lutheranism, which I don't mind in itself, except for when we have children and they are to be baptized as infants. Also, since baptism is not the way to Heaven, should I even be concerned with it, or should I just let it go???
34 answers:
Nickster
2007-08-14 20:06:09 UTC
Dear Lindz,



i don't think there is a basis for infant baptism (that actually seems to be a more Catholic practice). Baptism is identifying with the death of Christ and expressing publicly a desire to live like Christ- and so i think infants are not quite at a place where they can clearly understand that.



i do believe in baby-dedications (just like Hannah dedicated her baby Samuel to the Lord) and i think that is a very special and meaningful thing. At my old church we did baby dedications where the parents dedicated that baby to be used for the Lord- and those of us who were there to witness the event dedicated ourselves to help and encourage this baby grow in the Lord (as older brothers, uncles, etc.)



That would be my suggestion to you and your husband. i think Baptism will be a lot more meaningful for your children when they can appreciate and understand it as an act of obedience to the Lord.



Hope that helps. Kindly,



Nickster
2007-08-14 20:24:52 UTC
I was raised Lutheran and on the 4th of July weekend, right after getting home from the Vietnam War I had a long talk with my Lutheran Pastor about this very topic.



First he admitted, very reluctantly that the Greek word translated "Baptism" really does mean "to immerse".



But he had to look it up in this huge Greek Lexicon the size of an unabridged dictionary the kind you only see at a library and was rather disappointed and what he found.



Second he admitted that according his study of the Bible no baby had ever been baptized.



When I asked why, his only answer was, "Tradition, this is the way we've always done it."



When I pushed him on the word "always", he fussed and finally in a very perjoritive way accused me of "adopting Billy Graham's religion" and he told me, "I don't agree with Billy Graham's religion!"



That was the day I decided I was no longer a Lutheran.



My pastor was a graduate of Luther Seminary in St. Paul.



The early church was baptizing babies by sprinkling at least by the time of St. Augustine which was about the late 4th and early 5th century, AD.



To me baptizing a baby is child abuse and I'll tell you why. Its becaue this child will grow up thinking that "I've been 'baptized' so I am a Christian so I don't need to make any decisions about Jesus like some people do." Hell will be full of people who never decided about Jesus because they had been "baptized" as babies.



I've included a link which has a history of when the tradition started.



If you type the three words on the next line into Google you get lots of hits:



beginning infant baptism



Pastor Art
PaulCyp
2007-08-14 20:25:24 UTC
Jesus said that no-one can enter the kingdom without being reborn through water and the spirit, an obvious reference to the holy sacrament of Baptism. He looked upon a group of babies and small children and said, "to such as these belongs the kingdom of God". So obviously if these children were in possession of the kingdom, and no-one can possess the kingdom without being baptized, these children were baptized. Which you would expect since that was the common practice of the early Christian (=Catholic) Church. Scrupture repeatedly describes the baptism of whole families. Never does it say "all the adults in the family", or "the whole family except the chuildren". This is also plainly evident in the writings of the earliest Fathers of the Church. Why Protestants avoid these informative and authoritative historical documents when looking for the answers to historical questions is a real mystery. Do they really want to know the answers?



Hippolytus, 214 AD: "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"



Origen, 248 AD: "The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit"
2007-08-14 20:53:07 UTC
Simple answer. There is none.



Sorry to say this but the Lutherans and Catholics have this doctrine wrong. It would be wise to search the Scriptures to see if this doctrine is true. Since it's not biblical, it should greatly concern you!



These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so Acts 17:11



Biblical baptism is full submersion under water and this is for believers. In the Bible, once someone repented and believed they were dunked in water!



Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”

And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away, so that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing. Acts 8:37-39



Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Matt. 28:19



God can't lie. Titus 1:2
JoeBama
2007-08-14 20:51:21 UTC
It is related to the mistaken idea that babies are born with the guilt of inherited sin. If a baby is guilty of sin, the thought is that they should be baptized to wash away that sin.



The Bible however teaches that "sin is the transgression of the law." (1 John 3:4) If a baby is guilty of sin, what law have they transgressed? A baby is not capable of transgressing, or even understanding, any law.



But, what about inherited sin (guilt)?



This idea goes against many verses, including Ezekiel 18:20.



"The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself."



This verse clearly teaches that children do not inherit the guilt of sin.



Those who teach infant baptism many times point to the households that were baptized in the New Testament. They assume these households had infants and those young children were included in the baptism.



This, however is just an assumption. It is risky to base your doctrine on a guess that cannot be proven from the Scriptures!



In fact, the context of many of these scriptures DISPROVE infant baptism. Notice for example the household of the keeper of the prison in Acts 16.



He was baptized with his household (verse 33). But notice also, all his household was taught ( verse 32), and they all believed (verse 34). An infant cannot be taught, and an infant cannot believe. Therefore, "household" here does not include any infants.



In fact, to be baptized one must first believe and repent, therefore, baptism is not for infants. (Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38)



Notice the eunuch in Acts 8. He asked, "What hinders me from being baptized?” (verse 36) "Then Philip said, 'If you believe with all your heart, you may.'" (verse 37)



A baby cannot believe, therefore a baby would not meet this requirement for one to be baptized.



I hope this information helps!
ccrider
2007-08-14 20:34:35 UTC
Infant, or paedo, baptism is a matter of weight of evidence of replacing circumcision, rather than pulling specific verses out of the Bible that can contradict each other if you believe in credo, or believer's, baptism.



I'm not exactly sure what Lutheran beliefs are pertaining to Baptism and how closely related they are to Reformed doctrine, but they would have to be pretty close. Lutherans wouldn't see it as removing original sin (Catholic belief) but they would infer entire households as including small children (simply the culture of the times, wife and servants and babies all held the same social status). Other observations: no forbiddance of those under the age of reason from receiving the sacrament; the idea of John the Baptist being physically unable to baptize the throngs of people that came to the river to see him; the way the Hebrews would naturally have understood the rite to apply to all Israelites; strong parallels to circumcision; being tied so closely to salvation that it was in some verses indistinguishable; and just plaing "making sense" when baptism is discussed. Read it in that light when you come across that word, and it fits no matter what context it's in.



White papers and books abound on the subject and you should be able to find apologetics easily enough via the web. Infant baptism would not be practiced today if there were not sound biblical exegesis to support such a belief.



But to answer your last question, I believe you should be very concerned with baptism, because it IS the way to Heaven in the same way that circumcision was the mark of a Jew, and being one of God's chosen people, His property as it were. I constantly refer to baptism when reminding my youngster of how I raised her as being ingrafted, stuck to Christ, if I can help it. She is different, my household is different. We belong to and serve the Lord. Baptism is the overarching principle by which we live our lives, it's not just a quick ceremony to profess one's faith.
kcchaplain
2007-08-14 20:20:17 UTC
Well, Jesus told the apostles to make disciples of all nations and to baptize them (Matthew 28: 18-20). He didn't say "except for the babies". Thus, even if the Bible doesn't specifically call for infant baptism, neither does it reject it. Those of us who believe in infant baptism could just as easily ask what the Biblical basis for NOT baptizing babies is.



Baptism washes away Original Sin AND initiates one into the Church. Both are excellent reasons for baptizing babies, and anyone else, for that matter.



Who said that Baptism isn't the way to Heaven? Jesus said, "no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit" (John 3:5). It sounds like baptism IS necessary for salvation.
2007-08-14 20:13:49 UTC
Bless your heart and your marriage.

Dear one, there is no Biblical basis for infant baptism.

It's parallel in other denominations like the Baptist etc. is infant dedication. It is all for the parents.



In the one case, the poor child just gets wet and doesn't know why, and in the other they usually get a little New Testament that they can not read and is usually put away as a keepsake for the parents anyway.



Biblical baptism (the water kind), is only for people who understand it's significance and willingly take part in it.



Let us never forget that REAL baptism and the only baptism that matters to God is found in 1.Cor.12:13.

If a person does not know, understand, or believe that verse, they can get baptized all they want, they're just wet.



Great question, and again God bless your marriage!
C.Thomas.H.
2007-08-14 20:09:21 UTC
I think that RC Sproul could give you a more comprehensive answer to this concern. Look him up at www.ligonier.org. He (and I do too) believe in infant baptism. Not for salvation, but as a means of welcoming the infant into the earthly christian community. When the child is older, they have to make a choice to serve Christ for themselves.



Remember, Jesus was circumcised on the 8th day. Baptism took the place of circumcision in the new testament. Jesus had no clue that His parents had done this. But His parents did it out of obedience to the law of Moses. It had nothing to do with salvation, but identification with a community of believers and obedience to the Law of Moses.



If this is an act to attempt to "save" the soul of the baby, I can't support that neither does the scriptures support the practice of baptismal regeneration (salvation by baptism alone).
BitterSweetDrama
2007-08-14 20:06:25 UTC
~It is not Biblically based. In the Middle Ages people believed that Baptism was the only way to salvation with God. Since the infant mortality rate was so incredibly high at that time, parents would have their children baptized as soon as possible to insure that they would make it to Heaven. As the years went by and the infant mortality rate went down, it just stuck as a tradition.
2007-08-14 20:56:38 UTC
There is no Biblical basis for infant baptism.



The churches of christedom made up this infant baptism to ensure that there would be continuous followers for thier church.



If you will notice Jesus comand at Matt 28:19, 20 he said" go therefore and make

disciples teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you."



Did you notice the word "teach" , so a person would have to be at an age of understanding in order to learn what is being taught.



So how and what was Jesus teaching?Jesus was teaching and preaching about "The Good News Of GODS Kingdom. So what was the good news about? It was about Gods Kingdom Government ruling the earth and doing a way with all earthly governments. Dan 2:44



Then the earth would be transformed back to the paradise it was originally intended for.



After the great war of Harmegeddon, that is the war between ungodly men and Jesus the survivors of that war would live on this earth forever. With no death, crying, pain, sorrow or tears, the former things that we were used to will have past a way.

Rev 21:3,4.

So how are we to tell people about the good news? Acts 20:20 set it out for us. We are to go from house to house, city to city, town to town.



So who are the only people today that are telling every one about the good news?and following Jesus comand at Matt 28? it's non other than Jehovah GODS Christian Witnesses. Now spreading the good news in over 237 lands, islands, countries, with over 100,000 thousand congregations with

an average of 5 being built every 3 days.

If you would like more information on this subject I would be glade to send you some free.



Sincerely yours,

Fred and Katie Hunter

Katiesk3@yahoo.com
Poohcat1
2007-08-14 20:12:20 UTC
Lutheranism (my beginning faith also) stems from the original catholic beliefs. The Bible states that all men are born into sin...i.e this is interpreted to mean that even an infant is sinful because they are born of man. So, the next logical step for those who interpret that passage to mean that infants are sinful because of their heritage would be to do something that cleanses the baby from sin...i.e. infant baptism. In today's modern churches however, infant baptism is more to bring the child to God and have parents and sponsors who are promising to keep the child walking with God etc.
2007-08-14 20:25:50 UTC
I have been raised as a Lutheran, and we're taught that baptism is the promise of the mother and father, as well as the godparents, to raise the child in God. Baptism for us is also an invitation for the Holy Spirit to enter our hearts and souls.



Confirmation is the Lutheran equivalent to adult baptism, as this is when we confirm our faith and our understanding of the Lutheran beliefs.



It's up to you whether you have your child baptised while they're still young. I was baptised as a baby, but my siblings were baptised a little later in their lives. Talk to your partner about what it means to them, and maybe you'll be able to figure out something that you're both comfortable with. ^_^
2007-08-14 20:04:07 UTC
Infant Baptism is not in the Bible. How could an infant understand what is happening?

That being said, I think it's more of an outward sign that the parents are going to raise their child in a Godly manner. Like a baby dedication.

Although, once the child is old enough, he/she should be 'dunked' again.



`
alisa
2016-05-18 04:53:18 UTC
Because it derived from pagan practices. The Bible doesn't support the baptism of babies. the bible states that a man be baptized after he has an understanding.Unfortunately the Catholic Church is responsible for a lot of misunderstood scriptures.
pugjw9896
2007-08-14 20:47:31 UTC
It is important to know the REASON for baptism.

It is an agreement between a mature adult and God, whereby you agree to obey him...by way of the teachings of his son.

(Mark 9:7) And a cloud formed, overshadowing them, and a voice came out of the cloud: “This is my Son, the beloved; listen to him.”



An infant does not have the maturity to make this decision.

And the early Jews did not have infant baptism.

some religions have introduced it in the mistaken belief that this simple act somehow protects the infant. This is not supported by scripture.

Joseph and Mary did not baptise Jesus.

Jesus waited till he commenced his ministry at age 30.
2007-08-14 20:22:59 UTC
You could do both. It wouldn't hurt at all. My husband was christened as a baby at a Methodist church. When we converted to the Mormon church just last year, he was baptized again by full immersion in a baptismal pool. ( The Book of Mormon states that Jesus came to a 14 year old boy Joseph Smith and told him how we are to be baptized and by whom using what words) Same as John The Baptist. Later when your baby is an adult, you could have it done in a Baptist church. According to the other testamant of Jesus Christ in America ( The Book Of Mormon) It is nessasary to go to heaven to be baptized after the age of 8 ( when a child knows right from wrong) It is silly to baptize a baby because they just came from heaven and are already pure. But, that is our belief! I am just trying to make you feel better. Babies are just little angels!
Levone
2007-08-14 20:10:06 UTC
In short, there isn't any. It's the way baptism is defined...it was always performed after the person believed. Some believe that 'christening' is a way of washing away the taint of original sin...but that teaching isn't in the Bible.
2007-08-14 20:07:30 UTC
Baptism as a child is tradition to rinse original sin of Adam and Eve. Later at the age of understanding they should go yhrough it again
Alien Brain
2007-08-14 20:05:05 UTC
For infant baptism. None.



For adult baptism, it is a symbolic means of making a confession of faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord.
2007-08-14 20:03:48 UTC
Many churches believe in a mini-baptism kind of thing(aka Christening) it's to take away the original sin from the babies...



No bible reference...not many for church doctrines...
2007-08-14 20:19:15 UTC
When a baby is baptized you end up with a wet baby & nothing more.

To baptise means to bury. When someone repents & is starting a new walk with Jesus Christ. They then are baptised as a symbol of burying their old self & resurrected out of the water grave as a symbol of a resurrection to a new life. They then are to walk with Jesus Christ & live according to His word the bible. A baby isn't old enough to decide to do this, & hasn't even lived a life long enough to need to repent. Even Jesus OUR example was about 30 years of age before He was baptised.

NO ONE can be saved before their old enough to know that they even need to be saved! So it's a false teaching with no bible to back it up. If you find any proof then please email me so I can examine it, & if you'll right then I'll say I was wrong. It's not what I think but It's what God says that counts! Believe your bible!
Maurice H
2007-08-14 20:03:02 UTC
Water baptism is a show of commitment to God.
Monte T
2007-08-14 20:05:15 UTC
It is based on the Catholic idea of Original sin. That is the sin of Adam and Eve. The Catholics believe that we are all guilty of this sin. That is why some even protestant denominations still christen babies.
TEK
2007-08-14 20:03:28 UTC
Tradition. Not Biblical revelation.
chieko
2007-08-14 20:04:38 UTC
plan of salvation:

1. hear God's word and understand

2. repent of your sins

3. be baptized for the forgiveness of sin



a baby cannot do any of these things. most churches that do the infant baptism thing usally call them dedications nowadays. otherwise, expect to baptise your children again when they can actually fulfill the plan of salvation...
great gig in the sky
2007-08-14 20:03:21 UTC
Acts 2:38-39. The be baptised every one of you...and to your children part is the clincher.
devora k
2007-08-14 20:02:49 UTC
Not really sure but it makes sense from John The Baptist
2007-08-14 20:02:51 UTC
No Biblical basis at all.
Wise@ss
2007-08-14 20:05:48 UTC
Have to wash away Original Sin. If a baby dies with Original Sin, it goes to the big fire.



(And Christians complain when you say their religion doesn't make sense.)

.
2007-08-14 20:09:47 UTC
Let it go.

Don't worry about it.

Jesus doesn't mind whether he/she is baptized or not.

He loves everyone.
TCC Revolution
2007-08-14 20:04:50 UTC
None. When your child is ready,they will decide.

GOD BLESS
zee zee
2007-08-14 20:06:02 UTC
there is none ............ its man made.... by worried parents.
Jacob Dahlen
2007-08-14 20:12:24 UTC
Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked those who brought them. Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."





(Matthew 19:13-14)











Infant baptism has been the normal practice of Christians throughout the entirety of the Christian era, from the early church up to the present time. It is still the practice today among Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and most Protestant denominations. It was never a controversial or debated issue until about 1525, when those in the "Anabaptist" movement rejected infant baptism and began re-baptizing each other, viewing their infant baptisms as invalid.







(It is interesting to note that there is a political twist to the story: infant baptism was used by the secular government for tax registration, so this may have been a tax protest in disguise! If Christians had not allowed Caesar to meddle in the affairs of the church, perhaps we would not have the controversy over infant baptism today.)







One of the arguments used against infant baptism is that it is not referred to in Scripture -- that is true. But there is also no mention in Scripture of the practice of Christian parents waiting to baptize their children until they are older.

Although infant baptism is not mentioned explicitly in Scripture, there are hints of it in several passages that record the baptism of a whole "household," which may have included children and infants:



"... she [Lydia] and the members of her household were baptized..."

(Acts 16:15)



"... immediately he [the jailer] and all his family were baptized."

(Acts 16:33)



"... I [the apostle Paul] also baptized the household of Stephanas..."

(I Corinthians 1:16)



Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children..." (Acts 2:38-39)







The earliest explicit reference to child or infant baptism is in the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, about 215 A.D.:







"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." (Hippolytus, Apostolic Tradition 21:15, c. 215 A.D.)







Martin Luther and John Calvin, the two primary founders of the Protestant Reformation, both believed in infant baptism:







Of the baptism of children we hold that children ought to be baptized. For they belong to the promised redemption made through Christ, and the Church should administer it to them. (Martin Luther, The Smalcald Articles, Article V: Of Baptism, 1537)

"If, by baptism, Christ intends to attest the ablution by which he cleanses his Church, it would seem not equitable to deny this attestation to infants, who are justly deemed part of the Church, seeing they are called heirs of the heavenly kingdom." (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1559)







Nevertheles, there are a minority of Protestants who do not practice infant baptism but who wait until children have reached an "age of accountability" (also not referred to in Scripture) to be baptized.

In his article What About Infant Baptism? Mark Copeland presents some common Protestant arguments against the historic Christian practice. The author makes two major points: (1) Infant baptism is not "real" baptism, because it is not immersion. This is erroneous, because all persons baptized in the Orthodox Church, whether as infants or as adults, are baptized by full immersion. When our son Garrett is baptized, he will be immersed in water not just once, but three times, in the name of the Holy Trinity. (2) Babies "are not lost and in need of salvation." Copeland interprets the doctrine of "original sin" to mean that babies are born with the guilt of Adam's sin, and he rejects the doctrine on that basis. This, however, is a misunderstanding of original sin. What we inherit from Adam is not personal guilt but a fallen nature that is subject to death. "God created man for incorruption" (Wisdom of Solomon 2:23), but "sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men" (Romans 5:12). Thus, the author's case against infant baptism is based on two errors -- a factual error and a theological error.

Orthodox Christians understand baptism to be a sacrament or a mystery -- a visible means by which the grace of God is communicated to us.

We understand the sacraments of the New Covenant, established by Christ in the church, to be the fulfillment of the types and images that were foreshadowed in the Old Covenant, between God and the people of Israel. (See Hebrews 9-10) In the Old Testament, circumcision was the means by which a Jew entered into the covenant of Abraham. In the New Testament, it is baptism which marks our entrance into the kingdom of God, the beginning of our Christian life. Just as Jewish boys were circumcised as infants, so also the children of Christian parents are baptized as infants. St. Paul makes this explicit link between circumcision and baptism:







In [Christ] 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. (Colossians 2:11-12)







When does a person's Christian life begin? For an adult, it begins at the time that one freely chooses to embrace the apostolic faith in Christ. But for a child born into a Christian home, the Christian life begins at birth, as his parents teach him to love God, as they read the Scriptures to him and teach him to pray with them, and as they bring him to church regularly to worship with other believers.

While baptism marks the beginning of our Christian life, each of us who are baptized must continue daily to persevere in our faith until the end of our earthly life. As St. Paul says:







"Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect... I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do... I press on toward the goal to win the prize..." (Philippians 3:12-14)







One final point that bears mention: the Orthodox Church practices not only infant baptism but also infant communion. In the Catholic Church, children are baptized as infants but do not receive the Eucharist until they are old enough (typically around 7-8 years old) to make their first confession of sins and then receive their "First Communion." Then, at an older age (usually 12-15 years), they receive the sacrament of confirmation (called chrismation in the Orthodox Church). By contrast, in the Orthodox Church, the three sacraments of initiation -- baptism, chrismation and the Eucharist -- are all administered to babies, and children continue to receive communion regularly throughout infancy and childhood.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...