|
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| Sprinkling vs. Immersion |
|
| |
I was baptized when I was a baby by being sprinkled by the minister of my church, the Episcopal church. I never knew there was any other way of being baptized, until I was older and into my teenage years. And even then, I thought those other ways were wrong, and the only way I had ever known was right.
6:1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 6:2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 6:3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 6:4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
2:12 and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.
The following definition and paragraph are from this website...
http://home.att.net/~fifth.street/Bulletin_8-21-05.htm “baptizo (bap-tid'-zo); to immerse, submerge; to make overwhelmed (i.e. fully wet)” (Strong), “consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence (from bapto, ‘to dip’)” (Vine)
How then did baptism by sprinkling come to be accepted? Sprinkling was initially called clinical baptism because it had earlier been used for the sick and elderly. Sprinkling evolved from pouring water over one who was sick. The first recorded case of baptism by pouring was that of Novation in 251 A.D. Sprinkling was accepted by the Catholic church in 1311 A.D. “The Council of Ravenna, 1311, legalized the baptism of sprinkling, but the practice of ‘clinical’ or bedside baptism had long been in use and had spread from the sick room to the churches” (Johnson’s Universal Cyclopedia, Vol. 1, p. 488).
Some would say that baptism by sprinkling is not the right way to be baptized. Since the bible says nothing about sprinkling, then it isn't what God intended when he said we needed to be baptized.
After I joined the church I now attend, (New Life Church of Christ), the preacher told me that I might want to consider being immersed, based on what the bible tells us. I had to think about it, since all my life I only knew of sprinkling, and didn't see anything wrong with it. But after studying the bible, and praying about it, I decided I needed to be immersed. Being "buried" with Christ in baptism suggests being "covered"...immersion covers us, and as we go down to be immersed we are being buried in our sin...then when we come up out of the water, we are being washed clean, raised to new life.
I can't tell you whether sprinkling is "wrong", or if it "doesn't work". Only God can make that decision. I do think that when an infant is sprinkled, that baby has no way to think or decide that on his own, but a parent must make the decision for him. Who knows what kind of a life he is going to live...he could be an axe murderer, and if he is baptized, does that mean he will go to heaven? But if as an adult, I make the decision to live my life for Christ, and choose to be immersed, then I am making a committment...it may very well apply to sprinkling too. Like I said, only God can really make that decision.
What do you think? Have you been immersed? Sprinkled? Do you think it really matters? |
|
| To leave a comment or start your own blog: |
 |
or |
 |
Already a member? Login |
|
|
|
|
opening a can of worms, ey Deb?!! :) |
|
|
Cathy |
 |
July 10, 2007 at 1:18pm |
|
| All I know, is that on a hot day like today, I'll go all the way under !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 10, 2007 at 1:26pm |
|
Lisa, I hope I am not opening a can of worms, but I know it is a sensitive subject. I am just interested in what other people think about it. It has been a subject that I have struggled with, so I can see both sides...
Cathy, it is hot here too, and I nice cool dip sounds great! |
|
|
AndyM |
|
July 10, 2007 at 1:34pm |
|
This goes into the area that we refer to as "negotiables" in our church. I was raised Methodist and was sprinkled. I later decided to be immersed when I was in the Baptist church. I actually don't see a necessary conflict either way. In the church where I was raised they sprinkled, but had a baptismal in the floor for those who wanted immersion.
This is one of those areas where some people (not saying anyone here, before any discussion starts) have used this as a guideline for deciding whether a person was a Christian or not. I believe that if we are going to refer to so many churches as "Christian" then we have to accept some diversity within these areas to be ok. |
|
|
There was a Christian comedian in the '70s named Grady Nutt who said, "'Baptize' literally means put 'em under 'till they bubble!" Not a very theological answer, but it makes me laugh when I think of it. For what it's worth, I was dunked. As far as whether it matters or not, I can only look to scripture:
2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God-- 2:9 not because of works, lest any man should boast.
Whether grace is imparted by faith alone or through baptism is something each person has to figure out on their own. When I read scripture it tells me I am saved by faith alone. Baptism is the outward testimony of what has happened to me inside, but it doesn't save me. |
|
|
| The idea behind sprinkling was to remove the stain of original sin which everyone is born into. Baptism, whether one is aware of it or not plants a "seed" of the Spirit within one. This was done, at least originally at a time when child mortality was quite high and people wished fir their children to die in a state of grace. |
|
|
AndyM |
|
July 10, 2007 at 2:02pm |
|
| Some of us though, Dark, do see it the way that Soozanne was speaking: As an outward testimony. I like the visual of what you are saying. For me that's a wonderful representation (with absolutely no degredation meant towards your statement). I tend to see it more metaphorically than physically, I guess. |
|
|
| Okay ,this one I searched out heavily and discovered if you have the faith and if you believe what god has done for others he will do for you. Then take note even though baptizo (bap-tid'-zo); means as quoted above by Deb the same word (or its Hebrew counterpart was used when the Hebrew children crossed the red sea on dry land though the sea was all around. Also, the same Hebrew counterpart was used each time the Isrealites crosed the Jordan on dry ground. This is where the Catholic Monks who transcriped the bible for so many (hundreds of )years got the Idea if God could and Had baptised with the mist his people who didn't know they were biing baptised then surley god's way must be the right way. However, Jesus was baptised by John in the Jordan by submersion. My personal experience with baptism is confused by the lack of faith. I was first baptized full submersion in the San Frando Church of Christ Age about 21 in the name of Jesus. I had been taking my son to church per a promise to God for about a year in 112th & Main Church of Christ had got married to a Catholic and We both decided to Join the Church (Become baptized) I still did not believe I could be saved. years went by and the marriage disolved I had to give him back his name so he could mary his mistress in his catholic church He had dot married me in the church so that was not a marriage and as it turned out it really was not as we were married in Idaho in 1972 and the Judge who took our fees and made us get blood tests ect. did not record the cerimony per an old blue code law for we were not of the same race. It took 8 years to get that divorce and a court clearc who was married to a civilian employee who came to a shop picnic to explain that to me I was engaged nearly 7 years of those to a man who went into a coma the day of my divorce and lived 6 months 4 out of coma before he died. So I was Married and divorced and married (common Law) and widowed all ablut the same time. My exhusband married his mistress in the church before my divorce was final. Now you know I violated at least two of God's commandments. My punishment the loss of my fiancee(love) our baby (was still born1978) my husband and my daughter died in 1982 and the ablility to have more children 1978. Thank God for my two older sons and their children. I finally got faith from the story of the woman at the well John Chapter 4. And was baptized in the Holy Ghost verymuch the same as on the day of pentecost in the basement of Sinclair Missionary Baptist Church in Bremerton, Washington 5/6/92 and water baptized in the name of the Father the Son and The Holy Ghost 11/8/92 Church sancuary baptismal Sinclair Missionary Baptist Church. Back in my fathers faith though with more undrestanding of being a christian if asked I am a Christian =. |
|
|
Sue |
|
July 10, 2007 at 11:17pm |
|
| I believe the Word is clear, we are saved by grace through faith. Since baptism is an outward expression of an inward belief, how can a baby do this? I was "sprinkled" as a baby, but really baptized at the age of 25, in my opinion. I have heard the argument, and I don't think it is a heaven vs hell issue. But I am for immersion, based on what I read in the Word. Great question Deb! |
|
|
Catholics look at it a bit differently. Since it is a sacrament it can only techinically be done once. I think in the beginning many people got their babies baptized as a way to put them in a state of grace. However, I think in the countries in which infant mortality is not a problem, that baptism should be delayed until the age of reason. Unfortunately, I think many people do infant baptism more as a cultural rite of passage than actually considering the theological reasoning behind it.
A similar thing occurs with people crossing themselves with holy water at the stoup in the church. This is to remind the person of their baptismal vows, unfortunately too many people just do it as a habit. |
|
|
| I am reading a book about baptism now, so I may have to get back to this blog when I'm finished. But before anyone casts aspersions on the practice of baptism by sprinkling, they should research the topic of covenantal baptism. This view of infant baptism is very similar to the Jewish practice of circumcision, which is also done to babies, and specifically babies whose parents are both in covenant relationship with God. ~mike |
|
|
Cathy |
|
July 11, 2007 at 9:15am |
|
| I'm amazed that people actually argue over something like this !!!!!!!! LOL |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 11, 2007 at 9:24am |
|
Thank you all for your comments...I think they have been very interesting to read!
Andy M, like you I decided later in life that I wanted to be baptized by immersion. This was done because I wanted to show that I chose to follow Jesus, not because my parents decided it for me.
Soozanne, so you are saying that a person doesn't have to be baptized in order to be saved?
Dark Radiance, my dad always told us that he didn't know if he was baptized as a baby, so he would never get baptized, because he said you could only be baptized once. I didn't realize that was actually fact, but you are saying that in the Catholic church it is. I was in the Episcopal church, which is similar to Catholic in many ways. And I agree, that people crossing themselves can be a habit...at the Episcopal church any would bow when they passed in front of the cross...does the Catholic church do that too? That can become routine too.
Valerie, it sounds like you have been through quite a lot...I am glad that you found your way back to your Father and your faith.
Sue, I too have heard the argument, and I have to believe the what is in a person's heart will be the true test of whether we go to Heaven or not.
Mike, I look forward to hearing what you have to say after you finish your book... |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 11, 2007 at 9:29am |
|
Cathy, I am amazed that people do argue over this...I know of people who have left the church because of it!
Zach, I know the bible doesn't say anything about sprinkling, that was something that developed later on for the sick and elderly, and like Dark said above, when infant mortality is high. And like I said above, Colossians 2:12 says... "and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead." |
|
|
So...if the Bible doesn't tell us to do it...is sprinkling just a man-made tradition? Or can you find Biblical roots for it?
I know that Catholics, Episcopals (anglicans), Methodists, and Presbyterians all practice sprinkling (mostly infant baptism), but I want to know why they do from a Biblical standpoint. Can you back it up with scripture? |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 11, 2007 at 9:44am |
|
| Zach, I do believe that sprinkling is a man made tradition...I don't know of any biblical roots for it. Does anyone out there know of any scripture that backs up sprinkling? |
|
|
I was baptized via immersion however the Israelites were baptized via the water in crossing the red sea...a sprinkling at best! Often scriptures are used about being buried with him (being used as an emphasis in being UNDER the water). However, how were they buried in examples that we see in Jerusalem for instance are they under the earth? Jesus and others were placed into tombs not really buried in the way we use it. Presently, I see it as a sign or seal of a work already done. To Dark above, What do you mean age of reason? Age of accountability? And, if so, where would you find that in scripture? If there is an age of reason what of the disabled mentally, do they ever reach that age? If not, then how can they ever get baptized????? An interesting point to me is that Jesus never personally baptized (or so it appears). Also, is he not the one that baptizes with the Spirit and Fire? IOW, not water, like John?? |
|
|
Linda |
|
July 11, 2007 at 10:04am |
|
Right off I'd just like to say that I am not commenting for sake of argument, only as stated in your post, Deb, just to say what I believe; not to criticize, only to try to clarify what I understand as truth based on the Bible.
First of all, in the great commission Jesus commands that we:
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (Matt. 28;19), - so, no I do not think infants should be considered as candidates for baptism because they obviously cannot fulfill the command to be taught.
Then, as you believe, Deb, I too share the same understanding that one is to be "buried" with him in baptism, indicating that our whole bodies should be submerged or immersed because that is the only way that a 'burial' by water could take place.
I think the apostle Peter explains quite nicely how baptism should be accomplished in the 2nd chapter of the book of Acts starting in verse 37:
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 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. 40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
And then Peter also says in 1 Peter 3:21:
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
In conclusion, yes, I do believe the mode of baptism matters.
Thanks for the nice post, Deb.
<><
|
|
|
To answer your question, Deb, no; I don't believe a person needs to be baptized to be saved. 16:30 and brought them out and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house.
I looked up the word "believe" to be sure it meant what I think it means and it does. I am saved by pledging my fidelity, placing all of my confidence in Christ. Baptism is not mentioned as a requirement for salvation here.
However, others may point out Mark 16:16
16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
In the first part of this verse, baptism is mentioned. It isn't mentioned in the latter part, though. It is definitely an area in which we all need to prayerfully consider and seek the Holy Spirit's leadership. It certainly shouldn't be a source for tension between denominations, at least I don't think it should. I am the Godmother to a beautiful little boy and stood by him when he was sprinkled in his family's Episcopal church. It meant a great deal to his family that he recieve the sacrament and I was honored to pledge my dedication to helping him mature in his faith as he grew into adulthood. His family knows I do not think baptism is necessary for salvation and they were proud to have me as his Godmother anyway. It simply isn't a big enough issue to fight over.
My understanding of Scripture tells me that, while I do need to be baptized to be saved, if I call myself a disciple of Christ, I need to follow his example. Jesus was baptized, so I need to be baptized. If I don't follow that example, then Christ is not in me. Baptism is my first act of obedience after I become a Christian. Baptism may not save me, but it shows the world that He has saved me. That is what I believe. If scripture speaks otherwise to you, then please follow the Holy Spirit's leading! Either way, we're both getting wet! ;-) |
|
|
Oopsie. Last paragraph, sirst sentence should read, "...while I do NOT need to be baptized to be saved..." Sorry about that! |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 11, 2007 at 10:22am |
|
Recon, we just talked about this in a bible study group last night, about whether or not Jesus baptized anyone...John 4:1-2 says "The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John, although in fact, it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples."
Linda, thanks for your thoughts and the scripture references! |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 11, 2007 at 10:30am |
|
| Soozanne, thanks for helping me to understand what you were saying a little better. I do think that this is something that each individual person has to figure out on their own. Like you said, we need to follow the example of Jesus and be baptized...thanks for your thoughts, I appreciate it! |
|
|
| There is a passage in Ezekiel that mentions God sprinkling the people to make them clean. |
|
|
I have had both. As a baby, I was christened. In the church we went to , they would sprinkle water on the baby's head, as I'm sure many churches do. When I was a teenager, I was at the Creation Festival (in PA) and made the decision to give my life to Christ. My youth group was in attendance: I chose the full-body baptism. I honestly feel that there is a difference between being christened (which traditionally entails the parents dedicating their child to God) and being baptized (which, in my own experience, was a personal decision that I consiously made on my own to dedicate my life to the Lord). I can't imagine completely immersing a baby in water, although I'm sure it's done... The christening was deeply meaningful for my parents and family. Rationally, I think that's more symbolic of the commitment made by the parents to raise their child as a Christian. Honestly, the baby has no idea what's going on (although, God does). The baptism, however, was deeply meaningful to me, and was symbolic of the consious life-altering decision I made that day. I was fully-immersed, but that too is symbolic, isn't it? I made the choice to become fully-immersed in God. That said, I would say that's my view based on those things that I have experienced in my life (recognizing that everyone is different): christening (sprinkling) was done to me, representative of the choice my parents made to dedicate me to the Lord. The full-body immersion was a choice I made for myself to dedicate myself to the Lord. For me, it was the way to go. Do I think that people can be loved and forgiven and saved if they don't have the opportunity to have a full-body immersion? Sure! I'm thinking people who accept Christ as their personal savior on their death beds, or are too frail or sick to have a full-body immersion, or don't have the way or means to have that experience for whatever reason - there are way too many individual circumstances (that I wouldn't even pretend to understand) for me to speculate... But I think that God will reach all of those who ernestly seek Him no matter what the circumstance. He loves so deeply - as Jars of Clay says, "More deeply than the oceans" (God is so good, isn't He?? It just gave me chills). But personally, I feel that the full-body immersion brought me to a new level, and I changed with that experience. I wouldn't trade that for anything. :o) |
|
|
| So...i guess no one knows any scripture to back up sprinkling? |
|
|
| Aren't there any Presbyterians on here who can clear this up for us? |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 12, 2007 at 10:19am |
|
Kristen, thank you for your thoughts...I feel too, that my baptism at an age when I could choose to be fully immersed, had much greater meaning for me spiritually. I am so glad that I decided to do it, even though I was baptized by sprinkling as a baby.
Zach, I am going to send a message to my pastor, and see what he has to say...I'll get back to you. |
|
|
| The way I see it is that baptizing babies is more for the parents benefit and getting baptize in an accountable age is for our benefit ;-) |
|
|
| Let me clarify the end of my comment... (Not for salvific benefit), but for our declaration of faith. |
|
|
| but Lourdes, where do we find a scriptural basis for baptizing babies? |
|
|
Zach, Off the top of my head I'd say that the direct parallel between circumcision and baptism would lead to this. Babies were circumcised on the 8th day. Just as circumcision is a sign and seal of the old testament so is baptism in the new. In the OT children had no say in the matter, they were born into the covenant of Israel, were they not? Just the same, those of us born into the US had no say, we were automatically citizens (and the citizens of a Christian nation on top of it). This is not to say that the Hebrew children were believers for we see that only Joshua and Caleb made it into the promised land. All the rest died in unbelief. I'm saying all of the above as one who has been immersed but I think the above is the start of a good argument. Oh, also, one could say that Cornelius (and his household) this could mean that he either did or didn't have children present. Either way would be an assumption but I'd say with equal ammo possibly on either side, though maybe a little more toward the child side??!! |
|
|
| If in the above, they were immersed!! |
|
|
Zach and j...
Hey, I totally agree with total immersion at the age of accountability like is shown in the NT, but I understand that some people feel that following the ritual of baptizing their babies is something they need to do. They do not need a verse to prove it to them, just cultural tradition is enough ;-) |
|
|
Recon...Thanks for making an attempt to find scripture about this issue
Lourdes...I believe that everything we do in church should have its basis in scripture, otherwise it is just an empty man-made tradition. |
|
|
Zach and J...
You are correct!!!, but my point is that not everyone see the baptism of babies the same way we do. They follow church rituals and/or family traditions, and even if it is an empty man-made tradition, they still are very passionate about it. |
|
|
ali |
|
July 12, 2007 at 12:43pm |
|
| Im sure glad I was baptized as a baby! without that grace I wouldn't have made it into adulthood! Ha! |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 12, 2007 at 12:44pm |
|
Lourdes, you are right. Many people I know in the Catholic or Episcopal faith, may not go to church very often, but they have to have their kids baptized or christened as babies. That is very important to them. Those old churches are steeped in tradition. |
|
|
Eric |
|
July 12, 2007 at 8:50pm |
|
| Deb, you indeed have opened a can of worms! ;) Your blog is an excellent starter to get the conversation going, but you've barely scratched the surface. The first part of Valerie's comment has taken this an excellent step forward. Mike makes very good comments, too, especially covenental baptism. I wrote a huge comment but ended up making it a full blog post. It's not an end-all, but an open-end. Feel free to continue this discussion over there. As Sooz said: "it is definitely an area in which we all need to prayerfully consider and seek the Holy Spirit's leadership." |
|
|
Lourdes, You say, "Hey, I totally agree with total immersion at the age of accountability like is shown in the NT, ..." My question is where oh where in scripture is the above statement found????? Just wondering!!! |
|
|
Greek Word: βαπτιζω "baptizo" (to baptize) - to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk) -to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe -to overwhelm
Age of accountability – 'a person who is young enough that he is not yet able to understand fully the results of his actions'. AND yes Recon77, you are absolutely 100% correct, there is not a verse in the whole Bible with this phrase :-(
My point in this blog is not a theological (verse by verse) debate. I am not an expert in baptismal theology. My point is that there are some people that believe in baptism by sprinkling babies with as much passion as some of us believe in immersion. They strongly believe there is no need for another baptism. You can bring billions of verses proving otherwise, and they might not change their position. My family came from this mentality.
I was baptized when I was a baby (my parents were Catholics then). Having this ceremony was very important and sacred for my mom and dad, and important in our community. When we began attending a protestant church I made a conscious decision that I wanted at the age of 12 to be baptize by immersion because it was meaningful to me and it was a decision I was making. A declaration of my faith before many witnesses (it was in a public beach in Puerto Rico in the middle of summer… yes… a lot of witnesses.) So you see, like many of you I have experienced both. Did baptism save me? NOT… Jesus did!
Hope this clear my point. But if I confuse you more “I apologize”. As I stated above I am not a theologian, so I look at our religious practices from a layman or layperson point of view and willing to learn if I am incorrect in my interpretation.
By the way, my parents retired from the pastorate last summer ;-) |
|
|
There are alot of things here I would like to address. Sorry for coming in so late.
The crossing of the Red Sea by the chiildren of Israel is a perfect picture of Water Baptism by immersion. They are surrounded by water on both sides and a cloud above- hence they are "covered" by water. Way more than a sprinkling. They were lead by a cloud by day, and further evidence would be the "tempest" that held Pharoah back.
The issue of babies being circumsized is void. When the Abrahamic covenant was instituted, Abraham was grown. He and all the men in his house were circumsized. Later when the Jews argued that proselytes were to be circumsized in the new testament, The decision was made not to make them by the Jerusalem Council. The Abrahamic Covenant was to him and all his decendants hence the continuation of that performed on children. Interestingly, Paul points out in Romans that Abraham's circumcision did not save him. I believe the word Paul uses is justified.
The age of accountability is not taught by number, but the teaching that there was belief then baptism is taught. The arguement could then be made that at the age one can decide whether to believe or not would be the "age".
The Catholic teaching of sacramentalism is not biblical. Sacrament comes from the same Latin root word that Sacred comes from. There is no saving efficacy in Baptism. None! The Bible is clear that it is the first step of obedience after belief. Communion is a sacrament in the Catholic Church. There is no saving grace in that. If I am wrong, show me from the Bible. |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 13, 2007 at 10:09am |
|
Zach, I asked my pastor to comment about biblical passages that might support sprinkling, and the following (in blue) is what he had to say...
I don't find any biblical background for sprinkling.
The Old Testament comments about the mist from the Red Sea and the connection with circumcision are interesting but unconvincing. There was a lot of sprinkling in the OT (see dedication ceremony of the tabernacle) which may possibly be a reason that immersion was used by God in the New Covenant. Sprinkling (as a form of Christian Baptism) came along a long time after Christ and so is not grounded in OT Judaism, but rather in the fear of infants going to hell because of "original sin".
Original sin is the concept that all of Adam's descendants are tainted with the guilt of Adam's sin. Thus we are said to be born worthy of hell. Romans 5:1-12 discusses this. What most seem to miss in that passage is that it describes Christ's sacrifice as undoing whatever Adam's sin did. So if Adam's sin tainted all subsequent humans, then Jesus Sacrifice removed the taint from all humans. So if there is such a thing as original sin, Jesus removed it and infants who are innocent of sin go to heaven if they die.
As for those who take the baptism as an outward sign approach. Notice that they think of baptism as something that is intrinsictly(sp?) their own action. It is an outward act that I DO. So they see baptism as a humanly centered action. The scriptures emphasize that while we are outwardly getting wet, it is God who is doing the work in baptism. (Forgiving, cutting off the sinful nature, making us alive, giving us the Holy Spirit) In scripture, baptism is pictured as a GOD centered action that we submit to.
Does that help any Zach?
|
|
|
| Well...I think that I must strongly disagree with your pastor about original sin being taken away. That would mean we are born sinless and therefore have no need of a savior. The only child ever born sinless was Jesus. Even if I agree that there is no support for sprinkling in scripture (which I have not given up on yet), I do not agree that baptism is necessary to save us, which is what seems to be implied in the last paragraph. I believe that baptism is an outward sign of the inward seal of the Holy Spirit's indwelling. I do believe that baptism (spirit baptism, and I am not talking about tongues here) is done completely by God's hand and we reflect that outwardly by being baptised before witnesses. All that to say...not really, but thanks for asking him :) |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 13, 2007 at 10:45am |
|
Recon, interesting thoughts!
Lourdes, thanks for the definitions you added to support what you are saying. I did not want to start a theological debate, although I do realize that could happen. This subject is one that is viewed differently by everyone.
Eric, I read your blog and made my comment there...as you and Soozanne said..."it is definitely an area in which we all need to prayerfully consider and seek the Holy Spirit's leadership."
Youth Pastor, thank you for your comments. Are you saying that a person does not need to be baptized to be saved? I just wanted clarification on that point. |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 13, 2007 at 10:55am |
|
| Zach, you're welcome! :) |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 13, 2007 at 11:59am |
|
| Zach, I wanted to add a thought I had...I think my pastor is trying to say that babies are unable to make the choice to sin. I think we can agree that they are not able to reason at that age, and therefore are innocent of the sins they may do...like being demanding for a feeding, etc. So if a child dies at a young age, before they are able to reason and make choices by reasoning, then they are innocent and will go to heaven. While we all sin, we make the choice to sin, which is a big difference. Don't know if that makes sense or not. |
|
|
I am saying that a person does not need to be baptized to be saved.
Babies are still born with a sin nature. Romans 5:1-12 makes the point that death came before the Law. Death existed before there was knowledge written down or spoken to point out sin. Death still comes to all men and women. The second death is what Jesus frees believers from. So, I too would have to disagree with Jesus taking away original sin. I do however believe babies who die and those who cannot make that decision go to heaven. Not heathen unrepentent men, but babies, children, and the mentally handicapped. |
|
|
Even if babies don't make choices, they still have the inherent disposition to sin...it does not have to be learned. That is why it is called a sin nature. As far as whether or not babies go to heaven or not, I don't know...I would like to think that they do, but scripture doesn't give us any way to take a stand one way or another.
When babies are born, what is the first thing they feel? Fear? Anger? or is it just hunger? I would say one of the first two or perhaps both. So immediately, if they had a clean slate, it is wiped away.
Whether we are conciously choosing to break God's law or not...it is still sin. |
|
|
| Zach: there is one place where the Bible points this out. When David and Bathsheba's child dies and David stops mourning, his attendents ask him why he had stopped. He replies, "I cannot bring the child back, but I can one day go to him." Based on the fact that David was also a prophet of God, everything he said had to come true. Babies would have to go to heaven since we can be sure David is there. Yes? |
|
|
| That sounds like a good thing to me...but just for fun...is David's child representative of all? |
|
|
Deb |
|
July 13, 2007 at 4:56pm |
|
I can understand how you are thinking, that babies are born sinning...but they are still not able to make conscious choices, so I would say based on that, even though there isn't biblical facts to back it up, (unless you look at the example Youth Pastor used), that babies, and yes, young children and the mentally retarded also, will go to heaven. Of course, the only one that truly knows is God Himself.
One question I want to put forth that I was thinking about...let's say someone who is mentally ill, commits a horrendous crime (for the sake of argument, let's say they committed murder), are they going to heaven based on the fact that they are mentally ill, and therefore not able to make rational choices? Anyone have any thoughts on that? |
|
|
Lourdes, From whence did you find this definition? Greek Word: βαπτιζω "baptizo" (to baptize) - to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk) -to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe -to overwhelm It's certainly not in Strongs, which speaks of washings. And again, you've offered absolutely NO verse and I can't think of any that speaks to an age of accountability???!!! I know preachers speak of it but where is the scriptural evidence that such a creature exists??? |
|
|
Zach: If you believe that God is just, then yes he is representative for all. Justice renders the same pnishment to all. One exception would render the judge unjust. Since we know God is just, if this were an exception then one would have to be made for all.
There is no numerical age given in scripture for accountability. |
|
|
Youth Pastor...While I certainly believe that God is just, He is also the God who "has compassion on whom He has compassion and whom He wills He hardens." If we follow your line of logic it would mean that if God saves one person He must save them all or if God condemns one person He must condemn them all.
Deb...the only response that I can give to our question is this: God is holy, but merciful. Righteous, but gracious. I can only trust that God, in His infinite wisdom, knows what to do in a case such as you have described. My heart and mind wants there to be a special mercy for those people, but I am not God. He is God and there is no other 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. 9:14 What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
|
|
|
| Zach: He must save all who believe. He has promised to have compassion on those who believe by keeping them from His wrath. |
|
|
| |
