Is infant baptism and baptism by sprinkling biblical?May 1 2006 at 12:48 PM
No score for this post
There are religious systems that practice these types of baptisms and I just want to discuss with anyone who interested in this subject. I myself do not believe in this because I think that they were just man made modifications but are not biblical practises.
Its Biblical for baptism..."Bible never discuss how it was done"No score for this post
|May 1 2006, 4:21 PM |
read the forum....and you get your answers. this subject matter has been discussed. In sort, its bibical for baptism.
It is biblicalNo score for this post
|October 14 2006, 2:27 PM |
Regarding infant baptism and baptism biblical? Yes it is biblical. You know why there was no infant baptism in the early christianity? Because the early Christians were unbelievers, that is why they were accepted into Christianity through the water, deep. Today, is different unless you are non_christian becoming Christian. Thats is why infant baptism is valid and biblical because Jesus said to his disciples, go to all the WORLD and baptist them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. That's all you have to say. So, I ask you this question,"if some one wants to be baptist is a desert what do you do? I beleive that you can use any liquid oil for baptism and still it will be valid. So don't treat the bible as a newspaper. God bless
Re: It is biblicalNo score for this post
|October 15 2006, 10:20 PM |
Treat the Bible as a newspaper? Then, tell me the exact scripture that says that infant sprinkling is biblical, so meaning there is a record of an infant being baptised in the new testament! For Jesus showed us the example which we should follow and he was dedicated as a baby but baptised as an adult. For an infant doesn't fully understand what baptism means and I'm sorry to say that you don't don't either.
Where is the Biblical support?No score for this post
|October 16 2006, 11:23 AM |
What in hell do you know about the Bible!
Dwell on biblical evidences rather than men-made emotions and assumptions. Where in the bible does it outlaw infant baptism? That posting you responded to holds more water than your empty assumptions. At least he used the bible to back him up.
You are making a grand job shooting yourself in the foot, then putting that big foot in thine mouth. You are dwelling on man-made definitions rather than biblical premises. You must quote from the bible where it says sprinkling/pouring of water and infant baptism are unholy and that full immersion baptism of adults only are the only way. Jesus says to baptise all nations, not adults. He said to baptise all nations "in the name of the father, the son and the holy ghost", not full immersion of adults only. In his conversation with Nicodemus, Jesus said to be baptised with water and in spirit, not full immersion of adults only. Why is the bible so silent about the style of baptism? If the form of baptism is so important, why did not the bible accentuate this, rather than men accentuating forms of baptism? So who is practicing men-made teachings?
You want to mention the bible, then quote from the bible to back you up. No wonder there are 32,000 false christian religions on earth because so-called ministers claim what they say is biblical and you jump up in joy, clap your hands and shout Hell-eluya without challenging those agents of the devil.
Good on youNo score for this post
|October 17 2006, 4:38 PM |
Good on you, if infant baptism is unholy than where does it says it. we all created in God's image and likeness as says in the book of Genesis, than it doesn't matter whether a infant is baptised.
|La ilaha illAllah|
seek forgiveness - do u think u look like God?!No score for this post
|October 26 2006, 3:46 PM |
seek forgivness because you blasphemy against God when u say you are created in God's image.
Are you trying to say we look like God??!!!
This is your own vain desires.
Your book of Genesis also says God created light to diffrentiate between night and day before he even created the sun and the moon. Do u think he created the torch before the sun and the moon??? By the way, the moon is the reflection of the sun, not it's own light as your bible likes to claim.
Big fat contradictions on the first page of your book!
Keep reading your altered book and basing your life on conjecture.
God created Adam and EveNo score for this post
|October 31 2006, 5:00 AM |
Genesis 1:26 says: "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creature that move along the ground.'..."
The Hebrew word here for God is "Elohim" which literally means: "The Gods El. It is plural; Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is why He says; "Let us make man in our image..." I am 6 feet two inches tall and have a beard. This does not mean God looks like me. It means that just as God is a triune Being so He created Adam; spirit, soul and body, a triune being-three in one - a trinity in unity, just like God. Man has been created with an interlect, a moral and emotional nature which transcends instinct. We are able to communicate with each other - we are articulate with God too. Man's soul is his mind, will and emotion. He has the power to reason. Only mankind is created in the image of God with a spirit unlike animals and birds etc.
|La ilaha illAllah|
There is only ONE God NOT threeNo score for this post
|November 1 2006, 2:57 PM |
Don't you see your blasphemy against God?
If this is true, then why don't the jews - (who should know the hebrew language better then you) believe God is more then one.
Why do you and your christian friends claim that you can interpret a language you don't even speak??
Hebrew just like Arabic and Aramaic are sister semetic languages that the english language cannot compare to.
See how much the churches have indoctrinated you to the extent that you translate languages wrongly.
Firstly, what is the word for god/ diety in hebrew??
ELAH/ ELOH perhaps???
'IM' does not stand for plurality in the sense of numbers but plural for RESPECT.
Both the hebrew and arabic language use 'IM/IN' as a plural of honour.
This 'IM' is not only used with names for God but for all names which are entitled to respect eg. Muhammadim (hebrew)/ Muhammadin (arabic).
"The suffix "IM" of the word "Elohim" is a plural of respect in Hebrew. (Remember that in Arabic and Hebrew there are two types of plurals. One of numbers and the other of honour as in Royal proclamations. Since the plural of honour is uncommon in the language of the European, he has confused these plurals to connote a plurality in the "godhead," hence his justification for his Doctrine of the Holy Trinity - the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.)
Hence ELOHIM = ELOH + IM. Now I want you to perform an exercise. Do you see the words : YA-HUWA ELOH-IM? Place your left hand index finger on the first two letters "YA" meaning oh! and the other index finger on the "IM" a plural of respect. What you now have remaining in Huwa Eloh or Huwa Elah. El in Hebrew means god, and Elah or Eloh also stands for the same name - god. Therefore, "Huwa el Elah" or HUWA 'L LAH, which is identical to the Quranic expression - Huwal lah hu (meaning : HE IS ALLAH) of the verse QUL HUWAL LAH HU AHUD ("Say: He is Allah the one and only.") (112:1).
The above exercise proves that El, Elah, Elohim are not three distinctly different words. They all represent the single Arabic word Allah." - (What is His Name? ; Allah in the Bible)
When the Bible says "Let US" or "We" referring to God it doesn't mean there is more then one god.
Even the arabic language has this. Many times in the Qur`an you see God saying "We". Even when Islam is the purest monothestic religion, we have God saying "We" in the Qur`an.. but we understand what this means.
- This is just the language of honour and respect. Even royalties around the world use this same language referring to one person.
Stop following your vain desires. There is only one God -La ilaha illAllah, and only He is worthy of your worship.
..Also, where does you bible stand?? Were both men and women created in the image of God or is it only men?
"Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head - it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head" (I Corinthians 11:3-10).
Questions to you.No score for this post
|October 17 2006, 11:39 AM |
Simeon circumcised Jesus the Christ when Christ was a mere an eight day old baby. When Christianity did away with circumcision, what did it replace circumcision with?
Over to you.
You read the BibleNo score for this post
|October 17 2006, 4:33 PM |
You read the bible yourself. And don't inteprete the bible like a newspaper because bible is a word of God. If the infant is created in the image of God, it is important to baptism him or her. Treat any human being from the womb to adults as image of God. Your concern is a narrow minded believe. Please see God in a bigger picture of his CREATION, (infant and Adult) all belong to God.
Teach, Baptize & Observe ; Matt 28:19-20No score for this post
|October 22 2006, 7:44 PM |
We don¡¯t have to go into conclusion, as a matter of fact, this issue is to be discussed openly and in a christian way. Fighting doesn¡¯t really depict the type of people we claim to be as christians.
First of all, I¡¯ve done a little bit of reading and found the passage that some one quoted from previously from Matt 28:19. I actually read the whole verse and and also verse 20 and it really made much sense;
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
It is true that the bible is not just a newspaper, therefore when we read, we must also think logically because these people in the bible times were not stupids, they were artisans and scholars.
Think about these 3 main points
 Teach all nations
 Baptizing them
 Observe all things / obey whatso ever Jesus commanded.
The question we have think about is;
Can we teach an infant, especially the bible doctrines? Because an infant will have to make a dessions to be baptised.
Can an infant observe all things that the Lord has commanded?
For more info, bout baptism, read John 1:28, John 3:23
Have nice day
Re: Teach, Baptize & Observe ; Matt 28:19-20No score for this post
|October 23 2006, 2:22 PM |
Ronny, I was watched Ps Mark Finley on the Hope TV Channel last night (Sunday about 9 pm, AEST). The pastor was preaching about the upsurge of Adventism in Russia and Poland. The pastor showed slides of his participation of baptism of Peter, a teenage Polish drug addict who had never heard of God. Peter had a tumour which has spread so fast that he only had days to live. Ps Finley happened to be preaching at a nearby town. Peter's mother heard of Finley's sessions and went to invite Ps Finely inviting him to her home to baptise Peter. In the pastor's own words, "What do I do? We were miles from any river, lakes or the sea." The pastor said he then asked Peter's mother to fill the bath tub with water, which she did. Then he baptised Peter in the bath tub by fully immersing Peter in the tub water. Peter lived one month as opposed to days of life, before cancer eventually claimed his life.
Problem with your posting in relation to Ps Finley's experience Ronny, is that Peter has not heard of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit, yet he was baptised. Sounds inconsistent to me.
Ronny, let us disect the bible on the topic of infant baptismNo score for this post
|October 23 2006, 3:04 PM |
Ronny, the pratice of bible scholarship that you are adopting self-defeating and a topic can be argued willy nilly, depending on what your preconceived ideas are. The question that we should be studying is, does the Bible ever say that infants or young children can be baptised? The indications in the bible are clear.... YES!
In the New Testament we read that Lydia was converted by Pauls preaching and that "She was baptized, with her household" (Acts 16:15). The Philippian jailer whom Paul and Silas had converted to the faith was baptized that night along with his household. We are told that "the same hour of the night . . . he was baptized, with all his family" (Acts 16:33). And in his greetings to the Corinthians, Paul recalled that, "I did baptize also the household of Stephanas" (1 Cor. 1:16).
In all these cases, whole households or families were baptized. This means more than just the spouse; the children too were included. If the text of Acts referred simply to the Philippian jailer and his wife, then we would read that "he and his wife were baptized," but we do not. Thus his children must have been baptized as well. The same applies to the other cases of household baptism in Scripture.
Granted, we do not know the exact age of the children; they may have been past the age of reason, rather than infants. Then again, they could have been babes in arms. More probably, there were both younger and older children. Certainly there were children younger than the age of reason in some of the households that were baptized, especially if one considers that society at this time had no reliable form of birth control. Furthermore, given the New Testament pattern of household baptism, if there were to be exceptions to this rule (such as infants), they would be explicit.
It has become so quiet on infant baptism.No score for this post
|October 25 2006, 2:40 AM |
Fundamentalists, Batists, Pentecostals Charismatics etc etc believe and preach that baptism is not a sacrament (in the true sense of the word), but an ordinance. It does not in any way convey the grace it symbolizes; rather, it is merely a public manifestation of the person's conversion. Since only an adult or older child can be converted, baptism is inappropriate for infants or for children who have not yet reached the age of reason (generally considered to be age seven). Most of these Christian movements say that during the years before they reach the age of reason infants and young children are automatically saved. Only once a person reaches the age of reason does he need to "accept Jesus" in order to reach heaven.
The Apostle who wrote the book of Acts explained what happens at baptism when he said, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). But he did not restrict this teaching to adults. He added, "For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him" (2:39). We also read: "Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name" (Acts 22:16). These commands are universal, not restricted to adults. Further, these commands make clear the necessary connection between baptism and salvation, a
connection explicitly stated in 1 Peter 3:21: "Baptism . . . now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
As for the commandments of Jesus Christ, I totally concur with Ronny. Jesus taught us to observe his commandments, the biggest of which is LOVE for oneself and one's neighbour. When Jesus was asked, "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?" he replied, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind' - this is the great and foremost commandment, and there is a second like it, 'You shall love your neighbour as yourself'. The whole Law and Prophets hang on these two commands." (Mtt 22:37-40, Mark 12:28-34). And Jesus pointed out, "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another." (John 13:34).
The teachings of Jesus on the commandments are detailed by His sermon on the mount, in Matthew chapters 5, 6, and 7.
Infant Baptism.No score for this post
|October 25 2006, 6:24 AM |
so Baptism enables one to wash away one's sins.
What "sin" has a baby accumulated? Or has a baby "original sin"? This is a concept I refute entirely, that of "original sin".
If this is so, (I may be labouring under a misapprehension) I would like your opinion on "original sin". What is it?
Re: Infant Baptism.No score for this post
|October 25 2006, 6:36 AM |
I am apprehensive that you may indeed be labouring under misapprehension, Ralph. Did I mention original sin in any of my posting or merely interpretations on biblical texts in reference to infant baptism?
Yu yet nau.
Just me I guess.No score for this post
|October 25 2006, 6:52 AM |
No or yes Rocky,
you did not mention original sin.
I was merely trying to find out what sins a baby might have, to need washing away. "Original sin" was what a Catonlic nun told me, that even an infant had. Imwas not trying to put words into your mouth. Hehe.
Just an hypothesis.
|La ilaha illAllah|
HELLO! haven't u heard?!No score for this post
|October 26 2006, 3:55 PM |
Geez didn't you know?? The baby inherits the big fat sin that his great grandparents did in the garden of Eden!!
(Funny, even though the bible says no-one inherits the sins of their father - in other words no-one has the burden of another on them, everyone is accountable for themselves...)
You know, even though our great grandparents didn't discuss with us before they were going to disobey God, we still are accountable for what they did!
Unless ofcourse you take Jesus as your lord and saviour... (astaghfirAllah)!!
I see.No score for this post
|October 27 2006, 10:24 AM |
I did not know that.
Fortunately I am immune to most religious superstitons and beliefs. Whilst I know my history quite well, the nitty gritty of "Faith" eludes me. That is why I sometimes ask such basic questions.
"Original sin." Hmm. In the light of your explanation, it is even a stranger concept than I thought it was.