I know of three people who are athiests, yet had their kids baptised. Is it like a peer pressure thing? They do it because of their family?
I will read passages from different religious texts to my son, as I believe they all have (at least some) valid concepts/lessons within them.) But I don't want him to think his parents believe in a certain faith when we don't. He knows *something* spun things off, but we aren't sure what. So here are some ideas people have come up with to explain things...

Most kids are what their parents are (at least up to a certain age) and then, even if they completely change their beliefs, they have that 'core' in their head, the way they have their times tables. I don't want him to have to constantly correct himself (like if we taught him that 2x2=5.)

I understand why believers would baptise, and I don't have a problem with that(would't matter if I DID )
But those who don't believe, why baptise your kid?
Just wondering if anyone who did this can explain why they did...?

Sorry, should be 'baptise' (posted via BB)

I was gonna say WTF is paptise?

Well it has something to do with if both are atheists. Melanie isn’t and I am. Yet we had Amanda baptized. I could have cared less if she was. But Melanie and her parents wanted it.


Oh and you could have changed the title when you posted that second time as long as no one had posted before you edited your first post. But not after the second post.

Steve

------------------
Technology is great when it works,
and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't.
Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.

My son was raised in the Anglican Church. We had him baptised as a matter of religious dogma. As time went on my "faith" in religion was subsided by events, reason and life and I became an atheist. Ryan lived with his mother growing up (after I came out and we split) and she is still a woman of "faith." Ryan is now 20 and like any 20 year old does not think much about religion but more about parties!!!

When put to task his response is more athesist than religious. He seems to think, like I do, that religion is not necessary for a good life.

So why was he baptised? Just a matter of course. Looking back with experience and hindsight I think it does not matter one bit. His mother would likely disagree as she is still hung up in religion.

Maybe they (the atheists) want a little bit of insurance in case their children suddenly die, but they are being hypocrites for doing this . Baptism is but one of the seven sacraments Christians observe.
Here is an article on this:
Why are babies baptized? Aren't they too young to accept Jesus?
http://www.americancatholic.../answers.asp?QC0389b

quote Obviously, infants cannot understand the change of allegiance, the putting off of the old and putting on of the new, the dying and rising, the new life, or the sharing in the life of Christ. However, the parents of those infants can understand and live those values and pass them on to their children. They can also experience the support of the community in living those ideals, and that is extremely important. Infant Baptism only makes sense if parents are true Christian disciples. If they are not, then it makes little sense to initiate their children into a Church which calls for a commitment to living the mission of Christ. The Rite of Baptism for Children emphasizes the importance of faithfulness on the part of parents when it says to parents: In asking to have your children baptized, "you are accepting the responsibility of training them in the practice of the faith." That word practice is crucial; it calls for Christian modeling on the part of parents. Children learn to be Christian by osmosis, by experiencing Christianity at home. The "domestic church" prepares children for the local and world Church. It is in the home, in the domestic church, that children first learn basic trust which is the foundation of faith. Without the experience of faith, hope and commitment in the home, children will not be able to know and understand the larger Church.

Here is the full article on this.
http://www.americancatholic...etters/CU/ac0389.asp

"Seven sacraments that Christians observe..."

You mean "Catholics". Interestingly enough, Baptist Churches don't baptize babies. You have to be old.enough to make the decision to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior. If you died before that you were just screwed. Plus Baptists believe that Catholics follow a false god by praying to the Virgin Mary and saints. So all of you Papists are going to burn in the lake of fire.

yes - I'd have to say peer pressure/family being at the root of such sillyness

I am reminded of that scene in "The Mummy" where Benny is backing away from the mummy while fummbling through all his different religous necklases reciting each individual prayer-per-religion, hoping he hit on whichever religion is the right religion before he died.

It was the ex's and courts choice....I fought like hell against it, my feelings being that they had a whole lifetime to decide for themselves...I lost the fight.

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: I know of three people who are athiests, yet had their kids baptised. Is it like a peer pressure thing? They do it because of their family? I will read passages from different religious texts to my son, as I believe they all have (at least some) valid concepts/lessons within them.) But I don't want him to think his parents believe in a certain faith when we don't. He knows *something* spun things off, but we aren't sure what. So here are some ideas people have come up with to explain things... Most kids are what their parents are (at least up to a certain age) and then, even if they completely change their beliefs, they have that 'core' in their head, the way they have their times tables. I don't want him to have to constantly correct himself (like if we taught him that 2x2=5.) I understand why believers would baptise, and I don't have a problem with that(would't matter if I DID ) But those who don't believe, why baptise your kid? Just wondering if anyone who did this can explain why they did...?

If baptism was the ultimate "get out of jail" card nobody would need to repent, right? Surely a child cannot repent for they aren't cognizant
of what's right from wrong.

------------------



"Friends don't let their friends drive stock."

quote Originally posted by madcurl: If baptism was the ultimate "get out of jail" card nobody would need to repent, right? Surely a child cannot repent for they aren't cognizant of what's right from wrong.

I assume we're talking about Christian baptism, I don't know if there are others that do.

Children are "wrong" (sinful) from the moment of conception, according to the Bible and thus are not saved. Baptism provides for saving grace until they are cognizent and able to reject that saving grace. At that point, the baptism isn't the "get out of jail free card." There's more to it, but there's your cliff's notes.

As for why do atheists do it. Probably mostly for "show", or "that's how its been done" in their families. I'm guessing a good percentage of them are the same folks who live the atheist lifestyle but show up to church once a year on Easter morning.

[This message has been edited by Rainman (edited 10-18-2010).]

Very pertinant question for my family.

I grew up Catholic. Amy's family is Catholic. While I am a firm believer that I came from a monkey, her family is very religious. It has caused some rifts, but none that could not be repaird with kindness. Benjamin Anthony is due to be extracted from his Mother's belly on October 25th. (One week away! ) I am sure that he will be baptised. (Or is it paptised?) I have absolutely no issue with her wishes. It is a mute point on my behalf, and I am more than happy to appease her on this one.

------------------

quote Originally posted by Rainman: Children are "wrong" (sinful) from the moment of conception, according to the Bible and thus are not saved. Baptism provides for saving grace until they are cognizent and able to reject that saving grace. At that point, the baptism isn't the "get out of jail free card." There's more to it, but there's your cliff's notes.

If baptism provides a "saving grace" then why the need for repenting? Most importantly is the practice of baptizing children who aren't cognizant of right from wrong a teaching found in the Bible?

[This message has been edited by madcurl (edited 10-18-2010).]

I was taught that baptism is needed to have the original sin forgiven. You still have to be truly repentant of your sins for them to be forgiven. You also need to believe that Jesus Christ died so that our sins may be forgiven.
As for the difference between Catholics and Christians.
http://www.davidmacd.com/ca...holics_christian.htm

quote Are Catholics Christian? I have an Evangelical friend who asked me: "what is the difference between Catholics and Christians?" I had to scratch my head for a few moments because it never occurred to me that some people didn't think Catholics are Christian. I explained to him that that is kind of like saying "what is the difference between Americans and U.S. citizens?" The name Christian predates the Evangelical community by over a millennium, as do the words Bible, and Trinity. Evangelicals who assert that Catholics are not Christian will have a hard time standing on that, because they accept the authority of the Catholic Church every time they pick up the Bible. The history of the Bible is here. Any time spent studying the Church Fathers will make it abundantly clear that early Christian beliefs were Catholic. Their complete unity over the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is only one example. I think it is good that Evangelicals and Catholics have lively and animated discussions on the interpretation of Scripture. That's the spice of life. Evangelicals do that with each other all the time. That's why there are so many different denominations. However, I have a big problem with any organization that says "Catholics are not Christians," because they are ignoring the history of Christianity. Some who advance this theory, spend a lot of effort pulling Vatican statements out of context. By saying we are not Christian they are hoping to avoid Jesus' call a Christian unity that includes us (Jn 13:34).

[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 10-18-2010).]

quote Originally posted by avengador1: I was taught that baptism is needed to have the original sin forgiven. You still have to be truly repentant of your sins for them to be forgiven. You also need to believe that Jesus Christ died so that our sins may be forgiven.

There are differences mainly in tradition between Catholic and Protestant.:

Prot·es·tant (prt-stnt)
n.
1. A member of a Western Christian church whose faith and practice are founded on the principles of the Reformation, especially in the acceptance of the Bible as the sole source of revelation, in justification by faith alone, and in the universal priesthood of all the believers.
--

"Universal priesthood" of each believer means we pray to Jesus and God, we do not beileve we need to go to a confessional or church to confess, which uses the priest as a mediator between us and God. Nor do we pray to Mary.
As for baptism:
Most protestants believe that baptism is a symbol of rebirth to yourself and to others and not required. One example of someone not baptised would be the theif crucified by Jesus side, the thief merely believed and said "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.", and Jesus said “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

It my experience it is usually the parents or grandparents Catholic influence that results in their grandchild or great grandchild being baptised as an infant.

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 10-18-2010).]

quote Originally posted by madcurl: If baptism provides a "saving grace" then why the need for repenting? Most importantly is the practice of baptizing children who aren't cognizant of right from wrong a teaching found in the Bible?

Sorry if I'm not making too much sense, I'm on here while conducting conference calls, etc, so I usually have more than one train of thought in my head.

Baptism is the saving grace for the forgiveness of sins before one can repent for their sins. An infant is sinful, but they can't repent at the moment.I would assume those with mental handicaps that are unable to understand, batism would come into play there too. I am not one who knows a lot, so I can be wrong on some stuff, or maybe not explainining it correctly.

Baptism itself is not a requirement for forgiveness for those who are of mind to be able to understand and repent. We have evidence that baptism isn't required of the thief on the cross next to Jesus. We aren't told he was ever baptised and are under the impression he lived his entire life as an unbeliever, but with his repentance on the cross, Jesus asssured that thief he will be in heaven that day. That is confirmation for Christians that we are: saved by grace alone, by faith alone and not by works.

The church I attend baptises infants (my 4 mo old son is baptised) but usually not adults. If an unbaptised adult wishes to be baptised, that is an option, but its not a common practice, as far as I know. Other denonimations likely differ. I'm a WELS Lutheran, you can't get much more conservative than that, so there are a whole range of differeing practices in different denominations.

[This message has been edited by Rainman (edited 10-18-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Rainman: Sorry if I'm not making too much sense, I'm on here while conducting conference calls, etc, so I usually have more than one train of thought in my head. Baptism is the saving grace for the forgiveness of sins before one can repent for their sins. An infant is sinful, but they can't repent at the moment.I would assume those with mental handicaps that are unable to understand, batism would come into play there too. I am not one who knows a lot, so I can be wrong on some stuff, or maybe not explainining it correctly. Baptism itself is not a requirement for forgiveness for those who are of mind to be able to understand and repent. We have evidence that baptism isn't required of the thief on the cross next to Jesus. We aren't told he was ever baptised and are under the impression he lived his entire life as an unbeliever, but with his repentance on the cross, Jesus asssured that thief he will be in heaven that day. That is confirmation for Christians that, aside from those unable to understand (where baptism comes into play) that we are: saved by grace alone, by faith alone and not by works.

Is there any experiences in the Bible were children are baptized as infants?

quote Originally posted by madcurl: Is there any experiences in the Bible were children are baptized as infants?

I had to go out and find a better explanation than I can provide, although I feel the thread may be drifting from the original topic. I am not a Bible expert, I have to bow out on knowing of a specific example. I suspect there may not be any recorded, but I am also unaware of any statements excluding infants for baptism.

From here: http://www.wels.net/what-we...ions-answers/baptism

Why do Lutherans believe it is necessary to baptize infants?

We baptize babies because they are included in the Great Commission, which is a general command, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19, also see Mark 16:15-16).

Scripture does not exclude infants from baptism, rather it indicates that they need to be baptized because they are conceived and born in sin, and they need to be born again to enter the kingdom of God (Psalm 51:5, John 3:5-6). Through Baptism the Holy Spirit works to create or strengthen faith and brings the gifts of forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation (Titus 3:4-7, 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 2:38-39). We should never deprive children of baptism, "the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit."

On the day of Pentecost when Peter told the gathered crowd, "Repent and be baptized." He also said, "The promise is for you and your children" (Acts 2:38-39). Children were included in the command and promise Peter spoke. St. Paul draws a parallel between Old Testament circumcision and Baptism (Colossians 2:11-12). Babies in the Old Testament were to be circumcised on the eighth day after birth.

[This message has been edited by Rainman (edited 10-18-2010).]

Baptism goes way back before Christianity, you can say that even the Hindus with their wash in the Ganges River is an example of Baptism and the Egyptians been doing it long before Moses. Why Christians hijacked it as a part of their religious doctrine as some form of a cold rape shower? I don't know, even Jesus was Baptized, so why did he need to?

Why are my kids Baptized? To please family members, to an Atheist it doesn't matter to us, much like celebrating holidays and birthdays, a good christian baptism to make other family members is worth playing the game and nothing to be defiant about, that is all it really is to most people even if they say they believe.

As for other rituals that go along with this? Why do people still mutilate their sons penises is beyond me. Dipping a baby's head in tap water is one thing, cutting and scaring the family jewels without the little dude's consent is really bad and it is still considered mainstream.

That is one line I wasn't going to cross and that is circumcising.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: even Jesus was Baptized, so why did he need to?

Question: "Why was Jesus baptized? Why was Jesus' baptism important?"

Answer: When Jesus came to John to be baptized, John asked the same question. Why should he, a sinful man, baptize the Messiah? He tried to prevent Jesus from being baptized saying “I need to be baptized by You and You are coming to me?” (Matthew 3:14). The baptisms that John performed symbolized repentance, and he saw this as inappropriate for the One he knew to be the spotless Lamb of God. Jesus replied that it should be done because “it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15). Christ was here identifying Himself with sinners. He will ultimately bear their sins; His perfect righteousness will be imputed to them (2 Corinthians 5:21). Therefore, this act of baptism was a necessary part of the righteousness He secured for sinners. His was a perfect righteousness in that He fulfilled all the requirements of the Law which we, for whose sin He would exchange His righteousness, are not capable of fulfilling. He is our perfect substitute.

This baptism was a very public one and was recorded for all generations to know about and understand, and it is important for several reasons. First, it pictures His death and resurrection. Second, it symbolizes the believer’s identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection. Third, it marks His first public identification with those whose sins He would bear. Fourth, the event was a public affirmation of His Messiahship by the testimony that came directly from heaven (Matthew 3:17).

Water baptism is used as a way to identify. In Jesus’ day, when a Gentile would convert to Judaism, he would have to be publicly baptized to identify him as a convert. Obviously, Jesus was not converting to anything. Jesus’ baptism was an identification of Jesus with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Jesus was baptized to publicly announce Himself as God’s Son, and to pronounce the beginning of His ministry with the Holy Spirit’s power. Jesus did not “need” the Holy Spirit. However, to set an example for us, Jesus emptied Himself (Philippians 2:7) and relied upon the Holy Spirit’s power. Jesus' baptism and reliance upon the Holy Spirit is an example that we are to follow in our own lives.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-baptized.html


********

quote Originally posted by Rainman: Scripture does not exclude infants from baptism, rather it indicates that they need to be baptized because they are conceived and born in sin, and they need to be born again to enter the kingdom of God (Psalm 51:5, John 3:5-6). Through Baptism the Holy Spirit works to create or strengthen faith and brings the gifts of forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation (Titus 3:4-7, 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 2:38-39). We should never deprive children of baptism, "the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit." On the day of Pentecost when Peter told the gathered crowd, "Repent and be baptized." He also said, "The promise is for you and your children" (Acts 2:38-39). Children were included in the command and promise Peter spoke. St. Paul draws a parallel between Old Testament circumcision and Baptism (Colossians 2:11-12). Babies in the Old Testament were to be circumcised on the eighth day after birth.

Titus 3:4-7, 1 Peter 3:21, and Acts 2:38-39 makes no mention of infants being baptised but rather "children." Acts 3:41 states, " Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them." Acts 3:42 continues-"And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers"- (Gideon translation Bible).

How can infants "received his word" when they aren't cognizant of doctrine, prayers, and continue to be steadfastly in the apostles' word? 2 Timothy 3:15 states, " from childhood you have known the Holy scriptures, which you are able to make you wise for "salvation" through faith which is in Christ Jesus."-Gideon translation Bible.

How can a infant make cognizant decisions based upon Bible teachings?

quote Originally posted by Rainman: Why do Lutherans believe it is necessary to baptize infants? We baptize babies because they are included in the Great Commission, which is a general command, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19, also see Mark 16:15-16).

Matthew 28:20 states, "teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you." Mark 16:16 states, "he who believes and is baptized will be saved." Once again infants aren't cognizant of teachings and aren't able to go forth and preach. Children are mentioned but infants aren't. Unless you can find it in the Bible. If baptisim of infants isn't found in the Bible then the only conclusion is-the teaching is false.

quote Originally posted by Rainman: ".....I'm a WELS Lutheran, you can't get much more conservative than that....."

Ohhh, yes you can. I have some friends in Amsterdam that belong to the Netherlands Reformed Church.

They make Unitarians look like Evangelicals.

By the way....how'd you end up in Ohio? Just kidding...

Just in case?

quote Originally posted by 2.5: http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-baptized.html ********

You've posted from that source before and it has been proven to be the interpretation of one person's opinion. Using the book of Matthew is trying to squeeze only three of the passages from an author who wasn't even an eye witness to Jesus and was written a generation or two after his death and whose writings contradict those of the book of Mark and Luke.

I'm sorry but the answer why Jesus was baptized is because he was an ordinary Jew who became a rouge and famously postmortem Rabbi that people insanely worship as a son of some God.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: You've posted from that source before and it has been proven to be the interpretation of one person's opinion. Using the book of Matthew is trying to squeeze only three of the passages from an author who wasn't even an eye witness to Jesus and was written a generation or two after his death and whose writings contradict those of the book of Mark and Luke. I'm sorry but the answer why Jesus was baptized is because he was an ordinary Jew who became a rouge and famously postmortem Rabbi that people insanely worship as a son of some God.

Not sure where you get that idea Wichita.
But it seems you posted as if you were geniunly interested in knowing about something you actualy are not?
I think the got questions site is right on and accurate to the bible.




"Mission Statement of Got Questions Ministries:

"Got Questions Ministries seeks to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ by providing biblical, applicable, and timely answers to spiritually-related questions through an internet presence."

GotQuestions.org is a volunteer ministry of dedicated and trained servants who have a desire to assist others in their understanding of God, Scripture, salvation, and other spiritual topics. We are Christian, Protestant, conservative, evangelical, fundamental, and non-denominational. We view ourselves as a para-church ministry, coming alongside the church to help people find answers to their spiritually related questions.

We will do our best to prayerfully and thoroughly research your question and answer it in a biblically-based manner. It is not our purpose to make you agree with us, but rather to point you to what the Bible says concerning your question. You can be assured that your question will be answered by a trained and dedicated Christian who loves the Lord and desires to assist you in your walk with Him. Our writing staff includes pastors, youth pastors, missionaries, biblical counselors, Bible/Christian College students, Seminary students, and lay students of God's Word.

All of our answers are reviewed for biblical and theological accuracy by our staff, with final approval given by our President and Founder, S. Michael Houdmann. He possesses a Master's degree in Christian Theology from Calvary Theological Seminary and a Bachelor's degree in Biblical Studies from Calvary Bible College. May God richly bless you as you seek to study His Word and grow in your walk with Him"

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 10-18-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: I am reminded of that scene in "The Mummy" where Benny is backing away from the mummy while fummbling through all his different religous necklases reciting each individual prayer-per-religion, hoping he hit on whichever religion is the right religion before he died.

ZING!!!

hehehe

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: "Seven sacraments that Christians observe..." You mean "Catholics". Interestingly enough, Baptist Churches don't baptize babies. You have to be old.enough to make the decision to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior. If you died before that you were just screwed. Plus Baptists believe that Catholics follow a false god by praying to the Virgin Mary and saints. So all of you Papists are going to burn in the lake of fire.

Are you sure? Because I can tell you our Baby was Baptised by a Baptist Priest. He was less then 22 hours old when he was Baptised.

quote Originally posted by Khw: Are you sure? Because I can tell you our Baby was Baptised by a Baptist Priest. He was less then 22 hours old when he was Baptised.

Baptist... Priest?!
I didn't know they existed. Not being sarcastic. Just never heard the term.

My take on the whole baptism of kids thing...
Catholics believe that Baptism washes away the sin left to us by Adam and Eve. AKA, "original sin".
Everyone born "inherits" this sin, and cannot enter heaven before being baptised.
The parents or god-parents promise, on behalf of the child, that the child will be raised as a good Catholic.
When the child reaches about the age of 12, he receives the sacrament of Confirmation, where the child makes the commitment to the beliefs of the Church on his/her own. (To me, this always seemed like the spiritual equivalent of "baptism" in the Baptist church. The significant event being the person makes their own decision.)

Why do athiests have their kids baptised?
The decision to be athiest is, I believe, a conscious one. It also goes agains the commonly held beliefs of most people.
I believe that they allow their kids to become baptised, in case they are wrong. They don't want their beliefs to be held against their children.
Just my take on the situation. Pure conjecture. If you disagree, please do so politely.

quote Originally posted by Raydar: Baptist... Priest?! I didn't know they existed. Not being sarcastic. Just never heard the term.

http://www.baptisthistory.org/priesthood.htm

I probably should have said Pastor, but not having his Baptism record in front of me I do not remember if his title was Pastor. I actually had never met him before since he was, supplied?, by the Hospital. Our son passed at 22 hours.

[This message has been edited by Khw (edited 10-18-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Khw: http://www.baptisthistory.org/priesthood.htm I probably should have said Pastor, but not having his Baptism record in front of me I do not remember if his title was Pastor. I actually had never met him before since he was, supplied?, by the Hospital. Our son passed at 22 hours.

I rememer you mentioning this in another thread. Really sorry to hear about it. I know it was a while ago (years?) but it still really hurts I'm sure. At least you had the time with him that you did, and that you guys were with him through the ordeal.

------------------
Todd,
2008 Jeep Patriot Limited 4x2
2002 Ford Explorer Sport 2dr 4x2
2002 Ford Crown Victoria LX
1987 Pontiac Fiero SE / V6
1973 Volkswagen Type-2 Transporter

quote Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one 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.

New English Translation.

Translator's note "for" : "There is debate over the meaning of εἰς in the prepositional phrase εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν (eis afesin twn Jamartiwn Jumwn, “for/because of/with reference to the forgiveness of your sins”). Although a causal sense has been argued, it is difficult to maintain here. ExSyn 369-71 discusses at least four other ways of dealing with the passage: (1) The baptism referred to here is physical only, and εἰς has the meaning of “for” or “unto.” Such a view suggests that salvation is based on works – an idea that runs counter to the theology of Acts, namely: (a) repentance often precedes baptism (cf. Acts 3:19; 26:20), and (b) salvation is entirely a gift of God, not procured via water baptism (Acts 10:43 [cf. v. 47]; 13:38-39, 48; 15:11; 16:30-31; 20:21; 26:18); (2) The baptism referred to here is spiritual only. Although such a view fits well with the theology of Acts, it does not fit well with the obvious meaning of “baptism” in Acts – especially in this text (cf. 2:41); (3) The text should be repunctuated in light of the shift from second person plural to third person singular back to second person plural again. The idea then would be, “Repent for/with reference to your sins, and let each one of you be baptized…” Such a view is an acceptable way of handling εἰς, but its subtlety and awkwardness count against it; (4) Finally, it is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. That Peter connects both closely in his thinking is clear from other passages such as Acts 10:47 and 11:15-16. If this interpretation is correct, then Acts 2:38 is saying very little about the specific theological relationship between the symbol and the reality, only that historically they were viewed together. One must look in other places for a theological analysis. For further discussion see R. N. Longenecker, “Acts,” EBC 9:283-85; B. Witherington, Acts, 154-55; F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, 129-30; BDAG 290 s.v. εἰς 4.f.

Bold mine. It is a poor argument that water baptism saves anyone of anything at any time. The thief on the cross would, otherwise, have been lied to by Christ, which, essentially would have negated the Messiah's purpose on Earth, for He would have cast off the mantle of "Perfect Sacrifice."

Baptism is a public response to the Saving Grace provided by the Son on the Cross. When a person can understand, s/he must take responsibility for his/her own eternal destination. Ceremonial washing was common, as it was given as a command for certain offenses directly by God in the Torah (Pentateuch). Jesus came to fulfill the law, and this was part of that ministry.

Doni, RE: The NEtherlands Reformed Church; to paraphrase Douglas Adams, this must be some unknown use of the word "conservative" that I was previously unaware of. I don't consider Lutherans Conservative at all. And if NRC makes UUs look like Evangelicals, then that would be ultra-liberal.

Khw, my experience is that Baptists baptize by immersion. That's not easy with/for a baby. Nevertheless, I don't believe that it was the baptism that placed him in the Father's arms.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Khw, my experience is that Baptists baptize by immersion. That's not easy with/for a baby. Nevertheless, I don't believe that it was the baptism that placed him in the Father's arms.

I've said before that to me the Baptism was symbolic more then anything else, and I honestly feel it was treated as such since when a child has that many monitors hooked up to them immersion is impossible. Plus my son didn't make a choice to be Baptised.

This is my crux with religion. A child, such as my son, has no concept of God. If Baptism is required to be saved, they make no concious choice to be Baptized. If faith is required, they are incapable of faith. Repentance? How can a child who is 22 hours old repent? How can they accept Christ as their Savior?

Am I to beleive then that such a child is doomed to Hell?

In the LDS Faith, such a child is considered to pure of a spirit. The only thing they needed was to be born and claim their body. I must admit, this is something I would like to beleive, although there are other things LDS that I have trouble with. I have not attended a Catholic Church, but I saw this topic discussed on a Catholic TV show and it sounded to me like they considered my child Hellbound. In the many other non-Catholic Christian faiths the opinions are diversified even among their own respective members and clergy. The problem is to the best of my knowledge there is no scripture that answers this question specifically, unless you point to Original Sin which dooms the child to hell. However one wants to beleive that isn't so. One questions how can God forsake a child that never had a chance to learn of him?

I was raised in a Baptist church. I've attended a LDS church to learn what they beleive. I've been to a couple of Christian churches. I know I have faith. I know I beleive in God. I just don't know where I fit.

Genisis 18:25 KJV
That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

I hope so.

[This message has been edited by Khw (edited 10-18-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Khw: Am I to beleive then that such a child is doomed to Hell? In the LDS Faith, such a child is considered to pure of a spirit.

Humans have a sinful nature and are born with it, thus they cannot be pure of spirit in that sense but one could take that to mean they have not decided or chose to sin yet. However if a child is so young, or someone is mentally handicapped and they lack understanding or ability to believe, it is generally accepted that they are not yet accountable, and would go to heaven. Here is some info on it.


"The age of accountability is a concept that teaches those who die before reaching the age of accountability are automatically saved, by God’s grace and mercy.

First John 2:2 says Jesus is “the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” This verse is clear that Jesus' death was sufficient for all sins, not just the sins of those who specifically have come to Him in faith. The fact that Christ's death was sufficient for all sin would allow the possibility of God’s applying that payment to those who were never capable of believing.

The one passage that seems to identify with this topic more than any other is 2 Samuel 12:21-23. The context of these verses is that King David committed adultery with Bathsheba, with a resulting pregnancy. The prophet Nathan was sent by the Lord to inform David that because of his sin, the Lord would take the child in death. David responded to this by grieving, mourning, and praying for the child. But once the child was taken, David's mourning ended. David's servants were surprised to hear this. They said to King David, “What is this thing that you have done? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept; but when the child died, you arose and ate food.” David's response was, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who knows, the LORD may be gracious to me, that the child may live.’ But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.” David's response indicates that those who cannot believe are safe in the Lord. David said that he could go to the child, but that he could not bring the child back to him. Also, and just as important, David seemed to be comforted over this. In other words, David seemed to be saying that he would see the child (in heaven), though he could not bring him back."

http://www.gotquestions.org...-accountability.html

quote Originally posted by 2.5: http://www.gotquestions.org...-accountability.html

And the crux as I have said. The last paragraph of the srticle you linked.

quote Although it is possible that God applies Christ's payment for sin to those who cannot believe, the Bible does not specifically say that He does this. Therefore, this is a subject about which we should not be adamant or dogmatic. God’s applying Christ’s death to those who cannot believe would seem consistent with His love and mercy. It is our position that God applies Christ's payment for sin to young children and those who are mentally handicapped, since they were not mentally capable of understanding their sinful state and their need for the Savior, but again we cannot be dogmatic. Of this we are certain: God is loving, holy, merciful, just, and gracious. Whatever He does is always right and good.

Age of accountability is a phrase that does not appear in the Bible. It is a opinion, but nothing truely supports it. That's why you have people beleiving different. Some beleive the opinion some don't.

Did God take into his arms the first born sons of Pharohs people that had not obtained the maturity to know of him when he smite them?

[This message has been edited by Khw (edited 10-19-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Khw: Age of accountability is a phrase that does not appear in the Bible. It is a opinion, but nothing truely supports it. That's why you have people beleiving different. Some beleive the opinion some don't. Did God take into his arms the first born sons of Pharohs people that had not obtained the maturity to know of him when he smite them?

Some beleive the opinion some don't. As you have said.
What we can do is look at the nature of God, what Jesus said and did, and decide what we think based on that. Your question may be if a people as a whole were punished by God for something even such as Noah's flood, would the children who are not yet capable of deciding go to Heaven or Hell? That the parents or beliefs of the group determin the outcome for that child? Personally I don't see how we could come to that conclusion based on all the information given in the Bible.

The Flood, the plagues, these are old testament.
Things changed after Jesus died on the cross. Look at why Jesus was sent in the first place. Also in that link it said Jesus sacrifice was sufficient for all. I am probably not making a clear statement and I am sorry if that is the case. But it is taking all of this into account (new and old testaments) that we should look at things.


Differences in old and new testament:

The Old Testament gives the Law, which has two parts: the commandments and the blessing/curse that comes from obedience or disobedience to those commands. The New Testament clarifies that God gave those commandments to show men their need of salvation; they were never intended to be a means of salvation (Romans 3:19).

The Old Testament describes the sacrificial system God gave the Israelites to temporarily cover their sins. The New Testament clarifies that this system alluded to the sacrifice of Christ through whom alone salvation is found (Acts 4:12; Hebrews 10:4-10). The Old Testament saw paradise lost; the New Testament shows how paradise was regained for mankind through Christ. The Old Testament declares that man was separated from God through sin (Genesis chapter 3), and the New Testament declares that man can now be restored in his relationship to God (Romans chapters 3–6).
http://www.gotquestions.org...-new-testaments.html

quote Originally posted by Rainman: I assume we're talking about Christian baptism, I don't know if there are others that do. Children are "wrong" (sinful) from the moment of conception, according to the Bible and thus are not saved. Baptism provides for saving grace until they are cognizent and able to reject that saving grace. At that point, the baptism isn't the "get out of jail free card." There's more to it, but there's your cliff's notes.

Wrong. You are born pure. You havent been "exposed" to the sins of the world. In the Bible, there is a thing called "the age of accountability" of when you held accountabe for what you have done and know. You seriously think that if a child dies at 2 days old he/she will go to hell? At least thats how my Freewill Baptist religions teaches me. No, I m not a christian though.

quote Originally posted by ETC/GT: Wrong. You are born pure. You havent been "exposed" to the sins of the world. In the Bible, there is a thing called "the age of accountability" of when you held accountabe for what you have done and know. You seriously think that if a child dies at 2 days old he/she will go to hell? At least thats how my Freewill Baptist religions teaches me. No, I m not a christian though.

Read on sir, some of this has been addresssed.

I'm a Muslim living with an Adventist who, at the request of his Christian mother and Unitarian stepfather, had his daughter baptized a Baptist. She's now an Agnostic married to a Jew.

Who knows?

Go figure.

[This message has been edited by Doni Hagan (edited 10-19-2010).]