-
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.
- Status
B
When the little children came to Jesus, they trusted Him as someone they can approach. The disciples tried to keep them away, but Jesus said that unless they become as a child in receiving thye Kingdom of God, they shall in no wise enter therein.
Mark 10:13And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. 14But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 15Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
Trust is the basis for all relationships.
Plus:
John 6:44No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
1 Corinthians 3: 5Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? 6I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. 7So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
John 3:16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
God is at work so nothing is impossible for Him.
All that is really required from us is this:
John 6: 28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Romans 1: 16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
And anyone that believes are in.
Romans 10: 8But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. 12For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! 16But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Doesn't matter what background or intelligence. Those that seek God will hear the Word, believe, and they are in as bought with a price and sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise by Jesus Christ.
Mark 10:13And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. 14But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 15Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
Trust is the basis for all relationships.
Plus:
John 6:44No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
1 Corinthians 3: 5Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? 6I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. 7So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
John 3:16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
God is at work so nothing is impossible for Him.
All that is really required from us is this:
John 6: 28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Romans 1: 16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
And anyone that believes are in.
Romans 10: 8But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. 12For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! 16But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Doesn't matter what background or intelligence. Those that seek God will hear the Word, believe, and they are in as bought with a price and sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise by Jesus Christ.
I Believe in the age of accountablity, which varies among different people. Joh 3:17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.Joh 3:18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
adam and eve, didn't know what sin was until their eyes were opened by knowledge, the first then they did was, feared God
Wisdom is the fear of the Lord, knowledge is knowing whats right and wrong, and understanding is understanding which one we should do.
adam and eve, didn't know what sin was until their eyes were opened by knowledge, the first then they did was, feared God
Wisdom is the fear of the Lord, knowledge is knowing whats right and wrong, and understanding is understanding which one we should do.
M
~Coming to the Lord 'as a child' means to come in INNOCENCE, without guile.
~You're right, it is BELIEF which fosters obedience, that is all that is needed. Can a baby believe? No.
~You're right again: It is not a matter of background, culture or intelligence...because even babies are intelligent, which is to say they CAN LEARN.
But a baby cannot comprehend 'counting the cost' and submitting to God's word until they are quite a bit older.
Maggie
~You're right, it is BELIEF which fosters obedience, that is all that is needed. Can a baby believe? No.
~You're right again: It is not a matter of background, culture or intelligence...because even babies are intelligent, which is to say they CAN LEARN.
But a baby cannot comprehend 'counting the cost' and submitting to God's word until they are quite a bit older.
Maggie
You ask "what about infant baptism?" First, it is universal and practiced by the vast majority of the world's Christians. Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Methodists, and many more practice infant baptism. It was not until the Anabaptists during the Reformation that infant baptism was completely rejected. Most of the prominent Reformers strongly condemned the Anabaptist view on infant baptism. Second, it was practiced by the early Church and seems to have been a nearly universal practice even then. Adult baptism was the norm, but Christian families often baptized their children. Third, it is implied in the Bible, which frequently speaks of household baptisms (Acts 16:14,15; 16:30-34; 18:18, 1 Corinthians 1:16). It is reasonable to expect that children of some sort were in the household. Fourth, Jesus said "let the little children come to me" so why should the church deny children the full benefits of the Church and membership in Christ's body because they are too young? Thus, infant baptism is a strongly supported Christian practice reflecting the will of God
Finally, the bible does NOT prohibit it. If it were such a theological outrage, I would think somewhere, somehow, someone, would have said, Something.
In Christ.
If you believe in age of accountability they believe you are saved anyway, regardless whether comprehend or not.But how is that different to believing a parent can believe for a childs salvation in infant baptism? It isn't any different. Both doctrines believe a child is saved. Both have support with scripture.
Most think salvation is about an intellectual understanding of certain things. That is true but age of accountabiliy bends that rule by saying children before a certain age are saved, and heart faith also bends that rule. Understanding is not just about understanding a certain doctrine to a certain accuracy or quoting scripture. Understanding is about understanding in the heart a) God's existance, b) God's love. These things can be comprehended and understood by children before the age of accountability. Faith can exist in the heart before ever praying a sinners prayer or responding to an altar call. And it is hard to explain to a child how they are a sinner and need Jesus to save them from their sins, when they haven't sinned much. I think children fall under a special category of people who can't fully intellectually understand, but may understand in their heart. The same goes for mentally disabled adults etc.
my own experience,approx age 3-5 as far as I can remember, I was aware of God's existance and presense and prayed to Him well before I prayed a sinners prayer and would be "saved" (according to the requirements that most fundamentlists lay upon people). Whether believe in the accountability or not I can't pin point a time of disbelief that I would ever say I was "unsaved". I have always been a believer so the idea of praying a sinners prayer was more a formality and re-affirmation of the faith I already had, rather than a dramatic unsaved to saved conversion experience.
Most think salvation is about an intellectual understanding of certain things. That is true but age of accountabiliy bends that rule by saying children before a certain age are saved, and heart faith also bends that rule. Understanding is not just about understanding a certain doctrine to a certain accuracy or quoting scripture. Understanding is about understanding in the heart a) God's existance, b) God's love. These things can be comprehended and understood by children before the age of accountability. Faith can exist in the heart before ever praying a sinners prayer or responding to an altar call. And it is hard to explain to a child how they are a sinner and need Jesus to save them from their sins, when they haven't sinned much. I think children fall under a special category of people who can't fully intellectually understand, but may understand in their heart. The same goes for mentally disabled adults etc.
my own experience,approx age 3-5 as far as I can remember, I was aware of God's existance and presense and prayed to Him well before I prayed a sinners prayer and would be "saved" (according to the requirements that most fundamentlists lay upon people). Whether believe in the accountability or not I can't pin point a time of disbelief that I would ever say I was "unsaved". I have always been a believer so the idea of praying a sinners prayer was more a formality and re-affirmation of the faith I already had, rather than a dramatic unsaved to saved conversion experience.
I believe the same as Eric, due to my upbringing and own experience, about infant baptism and household baptism, which was practiced by the apostles. Also the great parallels between water baptism and circumcision as being signs of a person being part of God's people.
I don't understand the age of accountability because it's so hard to define when a person actually reaches that age, and I ask pastors what age is that and they can never say or know, so it is wishful thinking IMO. So logically I would not want to leave a 1 or 2 year age gap between the accountability cut off point and the time that a preacher gets around to baptising a child. For exammple, the pastor might think the AOA is age 10, but the child has reached understanding at age 7, then there's a 3 year gap of the child being an accountable sinner deserving hell (according to AOA doctrine ) which I don't think is good. Let's face it the gospel basics are not hard to understand, they were meant for simple minded people, and I think if a child is learning maths and ABC's and stories about robin hood and king arthur and harry potter etc at age 6 which they do here in australia, then being taught and learning the Gospel is not so hard for them. Believe it or not we even had sex education at age 6 so the Gospel should definitely be introduced about that time.
If the child dies in those 1 or 2 year gap that is possibly they go to hell, according to the accountability doctrine of understanding. However the age of accountability doctrine has support from the apocrpyha, the apocalypse of Peter about care taking angels taking care of children who die young and they being raised up to adult hood in heaven by the care taking angels. The context of this is children who die in abortion.
I don't understand the age of accountability because it's so hard to define when a person actually reaches that age, and I ask pastors what age is that and they can never say or know, so it is wishful thinking IMO. So logically I would not want to leave a 1 or 2 year age gap between the accountability cut off point and the time that a preacher gets around to baptising a child. For exammple, the pastor might think the AOA is age 10, but the child has reached understanding at age 7, then there's a 3 year gap of the child being an accountable sinner deserving hell (according to AOA doctrine ) which I don't think is good. Let's face it the gospel basics are not hard to understand, they were meant for simple minded people, and I think if a child is learning maths and ABC's and stories about robin hood and king arthur and harry potter etc at age 6 which they do here in australia, then being taught and learning the Gospel is not so hard for them. Believe it or not we even had sex education at age 6 so the Gospel should definitely be introduced about that time.
If the child dies in those 1 or 2 year gap that is possibly they go to hell, according to the accountability doctrine of understanding. However the age of accountability doctrine has support from the apocrpyha, the apocalypse of Peter about care taking angels taking care of children who die young and they being raised up to adult hood in heaven by the care taking angels. The context of this is children who die in abortion.
M
MahogoonySnail: Isn't it wonderful that Holy Spirit is not any different for the kids than He is for us adults? But He is also a gentleman and will not come upon anyone without their heart's permission.
If a child dies before they are old enough to comprehend, Scripture tell us that he/she is sanctified by the believing parent(s) 1 Cor 7:14
Watchman: Four is a bit young, but I know it does happen. Good for him!
But how is that different to believing a parent can believe for a childs salvation in infant baptism? It isn't any different. If parents believe a lie, regardless of how sincere they are, they are still deceived and wrong. In the OT and NT, infants were not baptised 8 days after birth. They were DEDICATED. Big difference.
Childhood prayers are fine. But in order to be saved, there must be a RELATIONSHIP with Christ. And scripture tells us that God is not obligated to answer the prayers of those that are not obedient to His word. Isa 1:15 " So when you spread out your hands in prayer, I will hide My eyes from you;Yes, even though you multiply prayers, I will not listen Your hands are covered with blood.
& 1 Chro 5:20b " and He answered their prayers because they trusted in Him.
Watchman: No, nor can they be condemned. Very true!
Eric wrote"You ask "what about infant baptism?" First, it is universal and practiced by the vast majority of the world's Christians. Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Methodists, and many more practice infant baptism. And many of those people also practice glutony! But that doesn't make it a good thing, does it? No. Just because today's traditional churches teach or do something does not make it Biblical. you might want to read the article at: http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/886-what-is-the-history-of-infant-sprinkling It was not until the Anabaptists during the Reformation that infant baptism was completely rejected. Most of the prominent Reformers strongly condemned the Anabaptist view on infant baptism. Second, it was practiced by the early Church and seems to have been a nearly universal practice even then.No it was not practiced by the early church...at least not prior to Constantine. Adult baptism was the norm, but Christian families often baptized their children. Third, it is implied in the Bible, which frequently speaks of household baptisms (Acts 16:14,15; 16:30-34; 18:18, 1 Corinthians 1:16).Just because scirpture says "household' does not mean anyone can infer that infants were present. It is presumptuious to do so. It is reasonable to expect that children of some sort were in the household.Why? So you can support your beliefs? Fourth, Jesus said "let the little children come to me" so why should the church deny children the full benefits of the Church and membership in Christ's body because they are too young? The CHURCH....the body of believers cannot deny a child a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus, which is what salvation is all about. A body of people that adhere to God's written word have no problem allowing a child...CHILD, NOT INFANT go through the ACT of baptism when they are asure that the child understand what it is and WHY it is a good thing to do...things an infant cannot understand. Iin order to have a relationship with anyone, one must get to know the other Person!Thus, infant baptism is a strongly supported Christian practice reflecting the will of God It is only supported by those that do not know that the word of God never even mentions infant baptism.
Finally, the bible does NOT prohibit it. It does not specifically prohibit a lot of things. But by the simple rule of omission, neither is it condoned, promoted or even suggest. Simple logic tells us that because it was never mentioned, it was not done, because if it had been done, knowing that we would need direction on the matter and God not being a God of confusion, He would have told us about its occurance. And He didn't .If it were such a theological outrage, I would think somewhere, somehow, someone, would have said, Something. I have.
I have a degree in Practical Ministry from Wagner Leadership Institute and am working on my Masters. I'm head of Women's (can you learn from a woman who simply doesn't want you to be 'out in the cold with no oil in your lamp') ministry at my Pentecostal church. So it's not like I'm ignorant about Scriputre (which is not to say that I know it all because I don't, no one does), or that I don't have a pastoral covering ( I do). I'm sure if you scan the net, you will find that infant baptism, the idea of being saved as an infant or before one is born IS a theological outrage. Many people have been deceived by decieved parents, grandparents, etc. But tradition does not outrank Scripture.
Maggie
If a child dies before they are old enough to comprehend, Scripture tell us that he/she is sanctified by the believing parent(s) 1 Cor 7:14
Watchman: Four is a bit young, but I know it does happen. Good for him!
But how is that different to believing a parent can believe for a childs salvation in infant baptism? It isn't any different. If parents believe a lie, regardless of how sincere they are, they are still deceived and wrong. In the OT and NT, infants were not baptised 8 days after birth. They were DEDICATED. Big difference.
Childhood prayers are fine. But in order to be saved, there must be a RELATIONSHIP with Christ. And scripture tells us that God is not obligated to answer the prayers of those that are not obedient to His word. Isa 1:15 " So when you spread out your hands in prayer, I will hide My eyes from you;Yes, even though you multiply prayers, I will not listen Your hands are covered with blood.
& 1 Chro 5:20b " and He answered their prayers because they trusted in Him.
Watchman: No, nor can they be condemned. Very true!
Eric wrote"You ask "what about infant baptism?" First, it is universal and practiced by the vast majority of the world's Christians. Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Methodists, and many more practice infant baptism. And many of those people also practice glutony! But that doesn't make it a good thing, does it? No. Just because today's traditional churches teach or do something does not make it Biblical. you might want to read the article at: http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/886-what-is-the-history-of-infant-sprinkling It was not until the Anabaptists during the Reformation that infant baptism was completely rejected. Most of the prominent Reformers strongly condemned the Anabaptist view on infant baptism. Second, it was practiced by the early Church and seems to have been a nearly universal practice even then.No it was not practiced by the early church...at least not prior to Constantine. Adult baptism was the norm, but Christian families often baptized their children. Third, it is implied in the Bible, which frequently speaks of household baptisms (Acts 16:14,15; 16:30-34; 18:18, 1 Corinthians 1:16).Just because scirpture says "household' does not mean anyone can infer that infants were present. It is presumptuious to do so. It is reasonable to expect that children of some sort were in the household.Why? So you can support your beliefs? Fourth, Jesus said "let the little children come to me" so why should the church deny children the full benefits of the Church and membership in Christ's body because they are too young? The CHURCH....the body of believers cannot deny a child a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus, which is what salvation is all about. A body of people that adhere to God's written word have no problem allowing a child...CHILD, NOT INFANT go through the ACT of baptism when they are asure that the child understand what it is and WHY it is a good thing to do...things an infant cannot understand. Iin order to have a relationship with anyone, one must get to know the other Person!Thus, infant baptism is a strongly supported Christian practice reflecting the will of God It is only supported by those that do not know that the word of God never even mentions infant baptism.
Finally, the bible does NOT prohibit it. It does not specifically prohibit a lot of things. But by the simple rule of omission, neither is it condoned, promoted or even suggest. Simple logic tells us that because it was never mentioned, it was not done, because if it had been done, knowing that we would need direction on the matter and God not being a God of confusion, He would have told us about its occurance. And He didn't .If it were such a theological outrage, I would think somewhere, somehow, someone, would have said, Something. I have.
I have a degree in Practical Ministry from Wagner Leadership Institute and am working on my Masters. I'm head of Women's (can you learn from a woman who simply doesn't want you to be 'out in the cold with no oil in your lamp') ministry at my Pentecostal church. So it's not like I'm ignorant about Scriputre (which is not to say that I know it all because I don't, no one does), or that I don't have a pastoral covering ( I do). I'm sure if you scan the net, you will find that infant baptism, the idea of being saved as an infant or before one is born IS a theological outrage. Many people have been deceived by decieved parents, grandparents, etc. But tradition does not outrank Scripture.
Maggie
A
Yes he was saved at 4, but not baptized until he was 7 after I had gotten saved, and he was baptized in the Holy Spirit shortly after He has the gift of interpretation as well as prophecy, he is 12 now by the way and still serving God full force As you can see I am a proud papa
As you can see I am a proud papa
My grandaughter was slain in the Spirit twice and she is only two years old.
She laided on the ground out cold for about 2mins or so, and then jumped up and started danceing and the other she started waving her hands in the air like you do at church when your praiseing God!
One time was at my house and the other time at my church in front of everyone!
I don't know if you know how hard it is to get at two year hold to hold still!
that's why infant baptism works. It is the faith of the parents for the child that God sees. In our society we are too individualistic. But God looks at households and the children of saved (and married) parents are special by virtue of the marriage covenant. Not to mention the possibility of the Spirit's presence being imparted to the child via the mother or father, and any prayers for the child to receive the Spirit at an early age. You stated that the Spirit is a gentlemen and won't come upon anyone without their permission. Well I disagree, that's sort of putting rules upon God. There are examples in the old testament of the Spirit coming upon a person simply by virtue of their proximity to Holy Spirit filled people. And afterall, isn't that how an unbeliever is converted? The Spirit draws that person to themself, perhaps without the person's knowledge or consent.
How is believing for a child's salvation, before the child can believe for themself, any different to a person believing for another person's healing and seeing them healed, even though the person themself might not have enough faith? You could say infant baptism is putting faith in faith. It's faith from beginning to end.
QUOTE: Finally, the bible does NOT prohibit it. It does not specifically prohibit a lot of things. But by the simple rule of omission, neither is it condoned, promoted or even suggest. Simple logic tells us that because it was never mentioned, it was not done, because if it had been done, knowing that we would need direction on the matter and God not being a God of confusion, He would have told us about its occurance. And He didn't .If it were such a theological outrage, I would think somewhere, somehow, someone, would have said, Something. I have.END OF QUOTE
I seriously suggest you reevaluate the logic you have employed here. We have a bible that does NOT criticize infant baptism. We have a Christian TRADITION going back to the first century in which infant baptism is practiced. Given a written silence on the subject, and an active AFFIRMATION of the subject by the early Christians and the CHURCH, for someone to argue that the practice is THEOLOGICALLY HERETICAL, a tremendous burden of proof falls on the person to make a comelling argument.
Fianlly, SACRED TRADITION has equal authority with Scripture. It often serves to shed light, to clarify scripture. In this case, scripture is silent and TRADITION is not silent. So, the weight of evidence is totally in favor of the practice.
I respectfully submit you have failed to carry that burden of proof by an "argument" that is far less than compelling.
BE in Christ
I seriously suggest you reevaluate the logic you have employed here. We have a bible that does NOT criticize infant baptism. We have a Christian TRADITION going back to the first century in which infant baptism is practiced. Given a written silence on the subject, and an active AFFIRMATION of the subject by the early Christians and the CHURCH, for someone to argue that the practice is THEOLOGICALLY HERETICAL, a tremendous burden of proof falls on the person to make a comelling argument.
Fianlly, SACRED TRADITION has equal authority with Scripture. It often serves to shed light, to clarify scripture. In this case, scripture is silent and TRADITION is not silent. So, the weight of evidence is totally in favor of the practice.
I respectfully submit you have failed to carry that burden of proof by an "argument" that is far less than compelling.
BE in Christ
L
Infant baptism takes the focus off of Jesus and places it on baptism. There are people out there that believe that one only need be baptized to go to heaven. My parents attended a Lutheran church while I was growing up; they had all of us children baptized when we were little because it was what the church told them needed to be done to be saved. They've rested their hopes of salvation on that baptism rather than on knowing Jesus because of what the church told them.
So to me, there IS harm in infant baptism. If you are a believer and want to dedicate your child to God to show that faith, that is one thing. But otherwise, it's a practice that just misleads unbelievers into a false sense of security based on a sprinkling or immersion of water.
So to me, there IS harm in infant baptism. If you are a believer and want to dedicate your child to God to show that faith, that is one thing. But otherwise, it's a practice that just misleads unbelievers into a false sense of security based on a sprinkling or immersion of water.
- Status