The Apostles taught Infant Baptism!

  • Thread starter Thread starter yogosans14
  • Start date Start date
  • 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.
Again, I need evidence in Scripture to prove infant baptism or this conversation is not going to go anywhere fast, my friend.

yes. what certain men taught a few hundred years after Christ ascended is no kind of proof. it is clear from the epistles that there was false teaching in abundance even while the apostles lived and taught, and they by no means taught that false teaching would disappear, but multiply.
what i trust and believe is what is written in the book by the first-hand witnesses, and what can be directly inferred from it by the Spirit.
 
Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Origen, John Chrysostom, Augustine.

My own rule of thumb: The more influential, well known and respected a person is. The less likely that truth is coming out of their mouths.

There are exceptions of course, as with anything
 
FIRST QUOTE: "The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).


These are not the Apostles of the New Testament. And this quote/comment has not one thing to do with Romans 5:9)

Romans 5:9 .) Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.


Given this, why should we believe any of the rest of your commentaries........they are right out of the RCC school of ideology are they not?


yes. what certain men taught a few hundred years after Christ ascended is no kind of proof. it is clear from the epistles that there was false teaching in abundance even while the apostles lived and taught, and they by no means taught that false teaching would disappear, but multiply.
what i trust and believe is what is written in the book by the first-hand witnesses, and what can be directly inferred from it by the Spirit.

Is it so hard to believe that maybe the Holy Spirit guides the early church into all truth and is able to keep it from error?
 
Is it so hard to believe that maybe the Holy Spirit guides the early church into all truth and is able to keep it from error?

The Holy Spirit always guides the Church. But the Church is never the majority
 
FIRST QUOTE: "The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).


These are not the Apostles of the New Testament. And this quote/comment has not one thing to do with Romans 5:9)

Romans 5:9 .) Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.


Given this, why should we believe any of the rest of your commentaries........they are right out of the RCC school of ideology are they not?

The Holy Spirit always guides the Church. But the Church is never the majority
Which Church are you referring to?Baptist?Methodist?
 
Again, I need evidence in Scripture to prove infant baptism or this conversation is not going to go anywhere fast, my friend.
Well Acts 16:14–15,18:8; 1Cor 1:16 are good evidences that small children (of believers) indeed received baptism. And it does matter what one believes about baptism, what it actually is and what it does or contains, when one takes position on this. If one see baptism as merely a "symbol" of one's commitment or something that is done as a work of man, having first met certain criteria and thus qualifying for it by means of mere intellectual consent, then it's hard to see the covenantal principle in baptism (and of course harder even harder to see that children of believers were all qualified to receive such). I see those favoring "believers baptism" making great deal about the word "infant" and being very uncertain/unclear on when the earliest age of child qualifying for baptism actually is, coming up with man-made notions like "the age of accountability" etc. Anyway, I am ready to answer all objections to "infant baptism", with scripture references accordingly.
 
Well Acts 16:14–15,18:8; 1Cor 1:16 are good evidences that small children (of believers) indeed received baptism. And it does matter what one believes about baptism, what it actually is and what it does or contains, when one takes position on this. If one see baptism as merely a "symbol" of one's commitment or something that is done as a work of man, having first met certain criteria and thus qualifying for it by means of mere intellectual consent, then it's hard to see the covenantal principle in baptism (and of course harder even harder to see that children of believers were all qualified to receive such). I see those favoring "believers baptism" making great deal about the word "infant" and being very uncertain/unclear on when the earliest age of child qualifying for baptism actually is, coming up with man-made notions like "the age of accountability" etc. Anyway, I am ready to answer all objections to "infant baptism", with scripture references accordingly.

It's for us, our children, and all who are far off (not born yet)- when they become of adult age. The church is the bride of Christ, and just as in marriage, it's a lifetime commitment. Babies and children are not capable of making a lifetime commitment. They have no sin to repent of or confess. It is not removal of dirt from the flesh, but a pledge of a clear conscience toward God (1 Peter 3:21). Conscience=understanding. Children and babies do not understand, therefore it is impossible for them to make this conscience choice.
 
It's for us, our children, and all who are far off (not born yet)- when they become of adult age. The church is the bride of Christ, and just as in marriage, it's a lifetime commitment. Babies and children are not capable of making a lifetime commitment. They have no sin to repent of or confess. It is not removal of dirt from the flesh, but a pledge of a clear conscience toward God (1 Peter 3:21). Conscience=understanding. Children and babies do not understand, therefore it is impossible for them to make this conscience choice.
We are in very much disagreement here. When I was convinced "believers baptism" (hereafter referred to as BB) was the correct view I would not go to that way of saying that children had no sin. Otherwise I reasoned quite similar like you do now.

First off, conscience/understanding may not always be articulated in a way that can be understood by us, but yet by God. Therefore that argument is invalid. John the baptist, while even in his mother's womb, leaped of joy when he heard the greeting of Mary (Luk.1:41). For sure he could not articulate his understanding at that time to fellow men, but also for sure he understood what was going on, God working in him, he having faith. Today I hold the view that it is very wrong to assume that infants can not believe (and it stems from the erroneous idea about faith being something of basically intellectual consent and capacity). Is it our job to judge who "truly believes" or not before admitting someone to baptism? A baptist minister must always do this. BB advocates might say "we cannot know if babies believe or not, therefore we cannot baptize them". But how can they know that an adult person "truly believes"? It may be fake or it may be a heretic creeping in unaware among the flock. Baptism will not work apart from believing, and believing or not believing is not a matter of intellectual consent or capacity.

Seeing what baptism is and what it confers, it is not just to bar babies, from christian homes, or at least with one christian parent, from receiving same.

Acts.2

[38] Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
[39] For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
 
Last edited:
Acts 2:38
"Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

So the way I understand this is that the person should at least be capable of repenting before baptizing.
I'm sure God will cut some slack for the infants either way, but hey,
it only takes a minute to dunk a baby so if you doubt,
than you might as well do it just for your own peace of mind
 
It may not be explicitly spelled out in scripture but the Apostles did teach it according to history.

What then does the Bible explicitly show and say about baptism? Oh, it shows it consistently as immersion, a sign of repentance, and most notably a cognitive decision by the person being baptized.

And when does it show an infant being baptized or what does it say about infant baptism? Nowhere and Nothing.
 
"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).


Here we see historical evidence for infant baptism. If the Apostles thought it was ok I think it's ok aswell!:)

Irenaeus

"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment34 [A.D. 190]).

Hippolytus

"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" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).

Origen

"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

John Chrysostom

"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).



Augustine

"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).
What are the implications of this practice when compared other current forms of baptism.
 
I believe that what is called "infant baptism" was practiced very early among christians, including in the NT times. However, I do not agree with the roman catholic teaching on baptism.
Hi tribesman, I was wondering why do you pick that tribes girl as an avatar.
 
"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).


Here we see historical evidence for infant baptism. If the Apostles thought it was ok I think it's ok aswell!:)

Irenaeus

"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment34 [A.D. 190]).

Hippolytus

"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" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).

Origen

"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

John Chrysostom

"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).



Augustine

"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).


Peter said

''REPENT and be baptised Acts 2:38

Can an infant repent of their sins?
 
No need to accuse Catholics of being antichrist.

Unlike some of you here, i HAVE been to Catholic churches, and also to baptist churches, Methodist churches, Pentecostal churches, vineyard and a orthodox church. Guess what? There was no difference in their teachings.
(Well, I didn't understand what was said in the orthodox one, but y'know).

That being said: I see no scripture- based evidence that infant baptism is asked of us,
nor do I think that adult baptism saves. I think it is an act done to show symbolically that one truly wants to follow Jesus,
 
"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).


Here we see historical evidence for infant baptism. If the Apostles thought it was ok I think it's ok aswell!:)

Irenaeus

"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment34 [A.D. 190]).

Hippolytus

"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" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).

Origen

"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

John Chrysostom

"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).



Augustine

"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).


This is perfect... if you're Catholic and rely on the words of men over the word of God. Care to rationalize this with scripture even in the slightest bit?
 
Is it so hard to believe that maybe the Holy Spirit guides the early church into all truth and is able to keep it from error?

By "early church" I hope you aren't referring to the "church" that literally rewrote the word of God to fit their own crazy beliefs and murdered thousands, maybe millions of Christians; many for having or reading the Word of God. Yes, that's right. The catholic church prohibited people from reading or possessing the truth so they can twist the word for their own greedy, selfish evil ways. The same church that deliberately acts out against God and contradicts His teachings. Get out while you can my friend. You are young.
 
Except Peter baptized the "entire household" of Cornelius.
Acts chapter 10

[44] While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
[45] And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
[46] For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
[47] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
[48
] And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

I suppose that you believe that the alleged infants of your eisegesis WERE SPEAKING IN TONGUES AND MAGNIFYING GOD before being baptized by Peter, right?

Give it a rest.