Infant Baptism - False baptism?

[interrapax]

So, lately i've been becomming one of those happy christians we all despise, wearing a big grin and synging hymns all the time. So i need something to get angry about.

I was baptised as an infant, and came to faith 15 years later. Is my infant baptism sufficient or would do i need to be baptised again? Would it be sufficient to be able to join your congregation? And is it`based on biblical teachings?

The theology concerned would be that children are born with original sin, in my case superficially defined as "born with the will to rebell against/reject God", and we are held accountable for original sin by God. And that it is God, not man who works in the baptism.

Your views on my baptism, and the theology involved are welcome probably soon to be and

Love Pax

[Lazarus]

If you were baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, then no, I don't believe you need to be rebaptized. Other Christian communities, of course, may have a different opinion.

[Kane]

I agree with Lazarus. You've already been baptized, been washed in that sacramental grace; what would you be hoping for doing it again?

Remember believers baptism is predicated on the belief of the individual being baptised; infant baptism is predicated on the command of Jesus to "go out into all the world and preach the good news, baptising in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit" (para.). So infant baptism, even if a person comes to disagree with it, is still valid because it is a Christocentric grace rather than an anthropocentric activity.

[Sparko]

Yes you would need to be baptized again.

Baptism is a ceremony where you publically declare your allegiance to Christ. You are symbolically sharing in his death and resurrection.

That is something you do AFTER (or when) you choose to become a Christian, not 15 years before.

[whilletal]

My denomination does both. We view infant baptism more along the lines of dedication. However when it is done it always includes the phrase "knowing that one day ...... will have to make his/her own decision to serve Christ" (paraphrase). So when a person becomes accountable (different ages for different people) the normal thing is to reach a point where either you can be baptized as an adult or you do a re dedication. Oh Wesleyan btw.

[interrapax]

Yes you would need to be baptized again.

Baptism is a ceremony where you publically declare your allegiance to Christ. You are symbolically sharing in his death and resurrection.

That is something you do AFTER (or when) you choose to become a Christian, not 15 years before.

will it have any consequense if i dont? i've allready publicly declared my faith to a few thousand people... And who else knows the heart of the one being baptized but the Lord?

[Sparko]

will it have any consequense if i dont? i've allready publicly declared my faith to a few thousand people... And who else knows the heart of the one being baptized but the Lord?

Well you would be disobeying a command from Christ. That's no way to start off a new relationship with him is it?


But baptism itself does not save. You are saved through faith by Christ's sacrifice for your sin.

[interrapax]

Well you would be disobeying a command from Christ. That's no way to start off a new relationship with him is it?


But baptism itself does not save. You are saved through faith by Christ's sacrifice for your sin.

Actually i disagree, how can i be disobeying Jesus' word in Matthew 25:19 when I've allready been baptised? And where do you get the notion of baptism as symbolic?

Romans 6:4 "Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death"
There is nothing here that indicates symbolisisme.
Colossians 2:12 Same here.

1 Peter 3:20-21
I'd say that pretty much states that someone else works in the baptism than man himself.
Titus 3:5 Is baptism really just a water fight + declaration of Jesus? The latter part something the person has most likely done before.
Ephesians 5:26 Cleansed by the water with the word.

I agree that if baptism is nothing but mans work for God, then you are right Sparko.
But it isnt.. The baptism is most clearly Gods work with man. And who are you to judge Gods work as inadequate?

Love Pax, baptised by God.

[Adrift]

Actually i disagree, how can i be disobeying Jesus' word in Matthew 25:19 when I've allready been baptised? And where do you get the notion of baptism as symbolic?

Romans 6:4 "Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death"
There is nothing here that indicates symbolisisme.
Colossians 2:12 Same here.

1 Peter 3:20-21
I'd say that pretty much states that someone else works in the baptism than man himself.
Titus 3:5 Is baptism really just a water fight + declaration of Jesus? The latter part something the person has most likely done before.
Ephesians 5:26 Cleansed by the water with the word.

I agree that if baptism is nothing but mans work for God, then you are right Sparko.
But it isnt.. The baptism is most clearly Gods work with man. And who are you to judge Gods work as inadequate?

Love Pax, baptised by God.

If you've got it all figured out, why'd you ask?

[Sparko]

If you've got it all figured out, why'd you ask?

that's what I was thinking. sounds like he just wanted a reason to soapbox.

[Sparko]

Actually i disagree, how can i be disobeying Jesus' word in Matthew 25:19 when I've allready been baptised? And where do you get the notion of baptism as symbolic?

Romans 6:4 "Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death"
There is nothing here that indicates symbolisisme.
Colossians 2:12 Same here.

1 Peter 3:20-21
I'd say that pretty much states that someone else works in the baptism than man himself.
Titus 3:5 Is baptism really just a water fight + declaration of Jesus? The latter part something the person has most likely done before.
Ephesians 5:26 Cleansed by the water with the word.

I agree that if baptism is nothing but mans work for God, then you are right Sparko.
But it isnt.. The baptism is most clearly Gods work with man. And who are you to judge Gods work as inadequate?

Love Pax, baptised by God.

No matter what you believe about whether baptism is symbolic or not, when you were baptized as a baby you did not believe. You could not. It was not even voluntary. So how can that "count?" You admitted yourself you were not a Christian until recently.

It never ceases to amaze me the excuses people come up with so they don't have to be baptized. If it is more than just a symbolic ceremony as you think it is, then wouldn't you want to make sure it "took" by doing it right, voluntarily being baptized as a believer in Christ?

Surely you don't think it would hurt, do you?

[BoranJarami]

Actually i disagree, how can i be disobeying Jesus' word in Matthew 25:19when I've allready been baptised? And where do you
get the notion of baptism as symbolic?

I'm not sure what Matthew 25:19 has to do with this issue and whether or not it is symbolic has no bearing on this issue. Thequestion is, do you need to be baptized after salvation if you were baptized at birth.

Romans 6:4"Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death"
There is nothing here that indicates symbolisisme.
Colossians 2:12Same here.

It is important to note that there are many different kinds of Baptism described in the Bible. Baptism of water, Holy Spirit, and fire (Matthew 3:11). A Baptism of tribulation (most likely the same as baptism of fire) (Matthew 20:22). And in the case of these verses a baptism unto death.

Only in the case of water baptism is the baptism literal. In these instances the word baptism is symbolic of partaking with. Or perhaps God has thrown a bucket of fire on top of you?

1 Peter 3:20-21
I'd say that pretty much states that someone else works in the baptism than man himself.

I agree, but Peter also makes clear hear that he is not talking about water (the washing away of filth) but baptism by the blood (washing way of sin).

Titus 3:5Is baptism really just a water fight + declaration of Jesus? The latter part something the person has most likely done before.

Here we again see not a baptism by water, but baptism of regineration (washing here comes from the Greek to baptize)

Ephesians 5:26Cleansed by the water with the word.

Again we see a symbolic application as Paul qualifies the statement with "in the word".

Even if water baptism was something more then baptism, that it somehow washed us of our sins, this still does not justify infant baptism. Every instance of Baptism in the Bible was a) done to an adult b) by there own choice and c) after they accepted the gospel of Christ.

Also, don't we continue to sin today? Haven't you sinned since your infant baptism? Why then wouldn't you need baptism again?

Would you need to be baptized again? Of course not. In fact, you would not need to be baptized in the first place. Just look at the thief on the cross. He was never baptized and he did okay.

[Spacefoetus]

yu don't think it would hurt, do you?

In R.E we learned about this guy who was getting baptized by full emersion when some electrical equipment fell into the tank and killed him and the preacher.

But anyway, I've always wondered this too.

I was baptized as an infant. But is the whole point of baptism not going under the water an being pulled out to represent you going to the grave with Jesus then being raised to life again?

The point ofbaptism was raised at Discipleship groups and our leader siad he wouldn't risk gtting baptized twice because in the n.T is says "there is one baptism" ect. But if infant baptism inst baptism then there hasnt been on yet!

But yeah, its interesting. We're entire familes not baptized in Acts though?

[Adrift]

The point ofbaptism was raised at Discipleship groups and our leader siad he wouldn't risk gtting baptized twice because in the n.T is says "there is one baptism" ect.

One shared baptism among the saints, not one baptism per person.

makes one wonder if you could go to hell for being double dipped.

[interrapax]

I agree that if baptism is nothing but mans work for God, then you are right Sparko.
But it isnt.. The baptism is most clearly Gods work with man. And who are you to judge Gods work as inadequate?

First of all i'd say that it is clear that entire households where baptised in the bible.

It is important to note that there are many different kinds of Baptism described in the Bible. Baptism of water, Holy Spirit, and fire (Matthew 3:11). A Baptism of tribulation (most likely the same as baptism of fire) (Matthew 20:22). And in the case of these verses a baptism unto death.

Only in the case of water baptism is the baptism literal. In these instances the word baptism is symbolic of partaking with. Or perhaps God has thrown a bucket of fire on top of you?

Baptism in the holy spirit, isnt that litteral? i think we disagree about what baptism being symbolic is, when i state that baptism isnt just symbolic i am saying that it we ACTUALLY are baried with Christ, yes, maybe in a spiritual sense, but it still happens, it is not just a picture, or analogue..

If you've got it all figured out, why'd you ask?

Because i think discussion is healthy, and since it's been awhile since i've thought this through.. btw, i became a christian at 15, i'm 24 now, so it's not really that recently sparko..

And i'd like to know where people stand here on tweb and why

Boranjami, your entire argument is based on "there is alot of different kinds of baptism"

Are these usually conected? when do each of these concur?

In response to 1 Peter 3:20-21

I agree, but Peter also makes clear hear that he is not talking about water (the washing away of filth) but baptism by the blood (washing way of sin).

Actually Peter connects THIS baptism with water, in reffering to the flood. There is nothing here to make up your "blood baptism". i deem these "20 different baptizm" arguments as poor attempts to explain away the FACT that God is the one who acts in baptism, He is the acting subject, we are the object of the act.

Titus 3:5

Here we again see not a baptism by water, but baptism of regineration (washing here comes from the Greek to baptize

Nope the sentence itself, and the context indicates that regeneration, happens in baptism. and washing here comes from the greek word: lOUTRON wich is defined: bathing, bath, the act of bathing and translated washing in NASB and KJV...

Even if water baptism was something more then baptism, that it somehow washed us of our sins, this still does not justify infant baptism. Every instance of Baptism in the Bible was a) done to an adult b) by there own choice and c) after they accepted the gospel of Christ.

Actually the point is if God is the acting subject in baptism, then the baptism of an infant valid. Is the baptism to salvation without faith? no, is the baptism a valid baptism, yes.

Can a infant have faith, now there is a nice theological question :D