Can your baby swim? Let's find out!

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#21
The short answer is "Because that is not what the Bible teaches". Water baptism by immersion is only for those who have responded to the Gospel through repentance and believing on the Lord Jesus Christ (Mt 28:18-20; Mk 16:15,16). Which means that they must be capable of seeing themselves as sinners and Christ as their Savior and Lord. And sinners must repent and be converted.

As to circumcision, it was meant to symbolize repentance, conversion and faith, so one again it cannot be applied to babies.

And he [Abraham] received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also (Rom 4:11).

But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. (Rom 2:29).
Leviticus 12:3 On the eighth day the the boy is to be circumcised.
Gen. 17:12 For the gerations to come every make among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money foreigner-those who are not your offspring.
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#22
Um, I think I caught that. :D

You all sprinkle, yes, fully aware, we have a son in the OPC. We call sprinkling infants waterboarding, but that's just my sense of humor. ;)
Yeah, well your infants probably have dry skin because they weren't baptized! Lol.
 
J

joefizz

Guest
#24
They can be re-baptized if they feel the need or they can simply accept thier baptism as an infant as valid.
They shouldn't have a false senice of salvation if they are thought that they must have faith in what the baptizim symbolizes. Babies could not make the choice to be circumcised either.

I don't add to Scripture, I'm taking note of what is not exulded in the new covenant.
Well the point is that babies aren't baptized truly with sprinkling or the like because a baby is not aware of the meaning of said baptism,so it does nothing,I believe it to be two things,parents either worried about their infants going to hell because of blasphemers spouting such nonsense or simply seeking glory over the child being baptized just the same as some parents did in the bible concerning circumcision.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,167
12,764
113
#25
Leviticus 12:3 On the eighth day the the boy is to be circumcised. Gen. 17:12 For the generations to come every make among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money foreigner-those who are not your offspring.
Well, you can't have it both ways. If you wish to revert back to the Old Covenant, circumcise away, but also follow the entire Mosaic Law. On the other hand, if you wish to follow the teachings of the New Covenant, then teach your children obedience to the Gospel, encourage them to repent and be saved, then tell them that it is Christ's commandment that they be baptized as believers (which is by immersion). No half measures with sprinkling, dedication, and spiritual confusion.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,167
12,764
113
#26
Something which many Christians may not be aware of is that since the Reformers came out of Roman Catholicism they did not repudiate all the Catholic practices. They taught salvation by grace through faith but rejected believer's baptism. Therefore they persecuted (and even killed) the Anabaptists and the Baptists who refused to have their babies baptized. That is a sad chapter in the history of the Reformation, since believer's baptism is the only valid biblical baptism.
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,395
113
#27
Something which many Christians may not be aware of is that since the Reformers came out of Roman Catholicism they did not repudiate all the Catholic practices. They taught salvation by grace through faith but rejected believer's baptism. Therefore they persecuted (and even killed) the Anabaptists and the Baptists who refused to have their babies baptized. That is a sad chapter in the history of the Reformation, since believer's baptism is the only valid biblical baptism.
No to mention sprinkling is not immersion.....the word for sprinkle "rantizo" is not used once in reference to baptism "baptize" Baptism is representative of being BURIED with Christ in his death and being raised a new creation in Christ Jesus....IMO people who are sprinkled were never baptized.....Jesus came up OUT of the water and the word itself is tied to a word that described a ship that sunk under the water......
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#28
The short answer is "Because that is not what the Bible teaches". Water baptism by immersion is only for those who have responded to the Gospel through repentance and believing on the Lord Jesus Christ (Mt 28:18-20; Mk 16:15,16). Which means that they must be capable of seeing themselves as sinners and Christ as their Savior and Lord. And sinners must repent and be converted.

As to circumcision, it was meant to symbolize repentance, conversion and faith, so one again it cannot be applied to babies.

And he [Abraham] received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also (Rom 4:11).

But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. (Rom 2:29).
Well, you can't have it both ways. If you wish to revert back to the Old Covenant, circumcise away, but also follow the entire Mosaic Law. On the other hand, if you wish to follow the teachings of the New Covenant, then teach your children obedience to the Gospel, encourage them to repent and be saved, then tell them that it is Christ's commandment that they be baptized as believers (which is by immersion). No half measures with sprinkling, dedication, and spiritual confusion.
Not trying to have it both ways, I quoted Scripture against your argument that crircumcision didn't apply to infants. We do in fact teach our children obideance to the Gospel, and to rent and be saved, it's up to them to except and belive what their baptism represents.

I'm going to set aside the immersion vs sprinkling debate just to stay on course here.
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#29
Something which many Christians may not be aware of is that since the Reformers came out of Roman Catholicism they did not repudiate all the Catholic practices. They taught salvation by grace through faith but rejected believer's baptism. Therefore they persecuted (and even killed) the Anabaptists and the Baptists who refused to have their babies baptized. That is a sad chapter in the history of the Reformation, since believer's baptism is the only valid biblical baptism.
Infant baptism is quite diffent in the Presbyterian church than what the Roman Catholics do. We don't believe in baptismal regeneration.

Theocracy is as bloody as any form of government. If the teachings of Martin Luther are rejected because of the persuction of Anabaptist then a lot of us are in trouble.
 

Zmouth

Senior Member
Nov 21, 2012
3,391
134
63
#30
Of course it is pointless to baptize the dead, it's too late to do anything.
Too late? maybe not....

And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Col 2:13

There is a passage which says blessed and holy is him that has part in the first resurrection which the following passage often goes over the head of many...

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. 1 Cor 12:3

Then Peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38
Since repent means to have a change of mind,

For he that is dead is freed from sin. Romans 6:7

some might consider the parable regarding the Son of man sending forth his angels to gather out of his kingdom all things which offend and commit iniquity;

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Romans 6:3

Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Col 2:12
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#31
Too late? maybe not....

And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Col 2:13

There is a passage which says blessed and holy is him that has part in the first resurrection which the following passage often goes over the head of many...

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. 1 Cor 12:3



Since repent means to have a change of mind,

For he that is dead is freed from sin. Romans 6:7

some might consider the parable regarding the Son of man sending forth his angels to gather out of his kingdom all things which offend and commit iniquity;

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Romans 6:3

Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Col 2:12
Spiritually dead and phisicaly dead are not the same thing, if you have not been baptized and your heart stops beating, you have passed on to be jugded then it is too late.
 

OneFaith

Senior Member
Sep 5, 2016
2,270
369
83
#32
In Mat 28:19-20 Jesus tells us first make believers then baptize them

Numerous Scriptures invite unbelievers to Believe and be baptized.

Many believe that baptism is part of the Salvation process. I believe that it is NOT.

I believe that baptism is a first step of obedience after Salvation. It is or ought to be a public testimony of Jesus' Lordship.
If you are saved before baptism- that would mean that baptism does not save, and if baptism does not save God is made out to be a liar- since all scripture is God-breathed, from His very mouth, including 1Peter 3:21. So what you're saying, what you're telling me is to believe you over God?
 
N

NoNameMcgee

Guest
#33
If you are saved before baptism- that would mean that baptism does not save, and if baptism does not save God is made out to be a liar- since all scripture is God-breathed, from His very mouth, including 1Peter 3:21. So what you're saying, what you're telling me is to believe you over God?
do you think every man/woman who enters heaven has had a water baptism?
 

OneFaith

Senior Member
Sep 5, 2016
2,270
369
83
#34
They can be re-baptized if they feel the need or they can simply accept thier baptism as an infant as valid.
They shouldn't have a false senice of salvation if they are thought that they must have faith in what the baptizim symbolizes. Babies could not make the choice to be circumcised either.

I don't add to Scripture, I'm taking note of what is not exulded in the new covenant.
No infant baptism is valid. Yes, babies were physically circumcised under the physical covenant. But now under the spiritual covenant, God performs spiritual circumcision of the heart during baptism. A "clear conscience before God" There is nothing babies have to get off their conscience.

God does not make mistakes, He did not forget to put infant baptism in the New Testament, just like He didn't forget to put other things from the physical covenant- like take certain sinners out of the city and stone them to death. Which was nessesary because it was the physical representation of how we spiritually die to sin.

No matter what your intentions are, you cannot add to the New Testament- even if it was something practiced in the Old Testament. God says to rightly divide the Word- what's in the Old Testament stays in the Old Testament, and what's in the New Testament stays in the New Testament.

I'm sure you have good intentions, but remember the man who caught the ark of the covenant because it was falling, then dropped dead. His good intentions did not matter- God said only a Levite was allowed to touch it. In the same way, Jesus said not to add or take away from the Word- no matter what your intentions are.

For people who do not know or understand the Word, the Bible says that their conscience serves as a law onto them self. Babies are already saved, because their conscience hasn't gotten dirty yet, and because they are unable to make a conscious choice yet.
 
J

Joshua_6

Guest
#35
No infant baptism is valid. Yes, babies were physically circumcised under the physical covenant. But now under the spiritual covenant, God performs spiritual circumcision of the heart during baptism. A "clear conscience before God" There is nothing babies have to get off their conscience.
I hadn't thought of it this way before. I understood that just as physical circumcision removes what impedes the function of the physical man, circumcision of the heart removes what stops the proper functioning of Christians' hearts. But I'd always thought it was the sinful nature removed, rather than an unclean conscience. But removal of the dirty conscience makes more sense, as the sinful nature still wages war within our bodies, which should be hard for it to do if it had already been snipped off.

For people who do not know or understand the Word, the Bible says that their conscience serves as a law onto them self. Babies are already saved, because their conscience hasn't gotten dirty yet, and because they are unable to make a conscious choice yet.
Are there any scriptures supporting what you said about babies?
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,167
12,764
113
#36
Infant baptism is quite diffent in the Presbyterian church than what the Roman Catholics do. We don't believe in baptismal regeneration.
Since Reformed churches (including the Presbyterians) hold to Covenant Theology, they simply make infant baptism a sign of a so-called covenant to parallel the Old Covenant, and therefore baptize infants (rather than circumcise them). But the NT does not give them any basis for this whatsoever.
Theocracy is as bloody as any form of government. If the teachings of Martin Luther are rejected because of the persecution of Anabaptist then a lot of us are in trouble.
No. "A lot of us are in trouble" because Christ did not command His disciples to establish a theocracy, but to plant churches. That again was something the Reformers cooked up on their own. Preaching the Gospel and making disciples does not constitute a theocracy. And the Reformers had absolutely no authorization to persecute and destroy other Christians. That was pure evil.