What age is too young to be baptized. (preach, scripture, ritual)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It was when I was growing up. And I grew up in one heckuva Catholic home. But many things in the Catholic teachings have changed.
Don't let ted intimidate you. It has never been defined dogma, but it was a widely believed idea on how to deal with the issue of those who die unbaptized. I think the Church leans against the idea now, but has not officially declared it as false.
As to the OP as a Catholic I believe in infant baptism, but what is correct in Catholicism is not necessarily relevant to the OP. So if his/her denomination teaches you must be aware first than I think six-years-old probably is too young. I would think from your denomination's understanding it might be better to wait until ten or possibly older.
However my main advice is to consult someone at your specific church on the matter.
No infants were baptized in the Bible. The chief example, Christ, was baptized at 30.
But He was dedicated as a baby!
LK 2:22 "And when the days of her [Mary's] purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought Him [Jesus] to Jerusalem, to present Him to the Lord;
LK 2:23 (As it is written in the law of the LORD, Every male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord"
For sure this was a Jewish law that does not apply to the Gentles, but a ceremonial dedication to the Lord by the Gentiles can be done for a baby if you want to. It does no harm, but is rather a beautiful thing to do and a good public testimony and a thanksgiving to Gods goodness. After when that person is older that person can dedicate themselves by baptism as a conscious act of obedience.
1COR 7:14 "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy."
If the children are Holy already unto the Lord, then what is the problem of dedicating them by baptizing them if you want to. There is no need to baptize a baby as there is no command to do so but if you want to then go ahead. It is just one more beautiful thing to do.
You may not understand that the children are Holy already because of a believing parent or both, but it is written, "My ways are not your ways says the Lord."
LK 2:22 "And when the days of her [Mary's] purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought Him [Jesus] to Jerusalem, to present Him to the Lord;
LK 2:23 (As it is written in the law of the LORD, Every male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord"
For sure this was a Jewish law that does not apply to the Gentles, but a ceremonial dedication to the Lord by the Gentiles can be done for a baby if you want to. It does no harm, but is rather a beautiful thing to do and a good public testimony and a thanksgiving to Gods goodness. After when that person is older that person can dedicate themselves by baptism as a conscious act of obedience.
1COR 7:14 "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy."
If the children are Holy already unto the Lord, then what is the problem of dedicating them by baptizing them if you want to. There is no need to baptize a baby as there is no command to do so but if you want to then go ahead. It is just one more beautiful thing to do.
You may not understand that the children are Holy already because of a believing parent or both, but it is written, "My ways are not your ways says the Lord."
The only people baptized in the Bible were old enough to understand. It may bed a beautiful thing to do in your eyes but it says in Scripture to 'not go beyond the things written'. 1 Cor 4:6.
The only people baptized in the Bible were old enough to understand. It may bed a beautiful thing to do in your eyes but it says in Scripture to 'not go beyond the things written'. 1 Cor 4:6.
I said . If you want to but there is no need scripturally. I do not make a doctrine of it and say you have to. The scriptures do not say that you can not. So to say you can not or that it is sin, is to go beyond and make an absolute doctrine of forbidding as you are doing. Baptism is another form of dedication to the Lord. I'll stand by what I said. If a parent goes to a minister to dedicate a child by prayer or prayer and sprinkling of water as symbolic of the Holy Spirit, then that would be a fine tradition but not a law.
MT 19:13 "Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them.
MT 19:14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
MT 19:15 And he laid his hands on them, and departed from there.
You seem to want to rebuke me for a good thing as did His disciples to Him.
There are many things not written that are good for you to know.
REV 2:17 "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcomes will I give to eat of the hidden manna [the hidden truths of God],"
JN 16:12 "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
JN 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." The Scripture itself allows for new truths but not contradicting ideas.
MT 13:51 Jesus saith unto them, Have you understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.
MT 13:52 Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which brings forth out of his treasure things new and old.
Be careful you do not end up being a stiff necked Pharisee and unable to receive the new.
Be careful you do not end up being a stiff necked Pharisee and unable to receive the new.
It was the Pharisees Jesus condemned for their overbearing rules and traditions of men. In some religions it is not just a 'beautiful' thing to baptize infants. There is a lot of pressure on the parents to have the child baptized from family and congregation.
Baptism is a complete immersion of the person in symbol of their dedication to God, which takes place when that person is fully cognizant of what that means, as in the case of the Ethiopian Eunuch, who became a believer, through knowledge and symbolized his dedication to God through baptism, something no baby can do.
Anyway, looking it up on the web, there are many arguments for and against infant baptism, which is typical of Christianity and why there are 1000's of different sects, and one reason why I dont subscribe to any of it anymore, just putting forth the arguments I was brought up with.
It was the Pharisees Jesus condemned for their overbearing rules and traditions of men. In some religions it is not just a 'beautiful' thing to baptize infants. There is a lot of pressure on the parents to have the child baptized from family and congregation.
Baptism is a complete immersion of the person in symbol of their dedication to God, which takes place when that person is fully cognizant of what that means, as in the case of the Ethiopian Eunuch, who became a believer, through knowledge and symbolized his dedication to God through baptism, something no baby can do.
Anyway, looking it up on the web, there are many arguments for and against infant baptism, which is typical of Christianity and why there are 1000's of different sects, and one reason why I dont subscribe to any of it anymore, just putting forth the arguments I was brought up with.
The bottom line is that I never said it was a law or that you have to do it. It is only for those who want to.
Baptisn is meaningless if the baptized doesn't know what's going on. Nowhere in the Bible do we see anyone baptizing babies or children too young to understand baptism's significance. Indeed, as far as baptism is concerned it should be sufficient that the baptized were required to exercise faith. Obviously an baby can't do that now can he? So if indeed there is confusion it definitely isn't because the Bible misleads or conveys an unclear message concerning this subject.
Baptisn is meaningless if the baptized doesn't know what's going on. Nowhere in the Bible do we see anyone baptizing babies or children too young to understand baptism's significance. Indeed, as far as baptism is concerned it should be sufficient that the baptized were required to exercise faith. Obviously an baby can't do that now can he? So if indeed there is confusion it definitely isn't because the Bible misleads or conveys an unclear message concerning this subject.
Obviously you also didn't get it. I am just defending parents right to babtize an infant. Of coarse a baby can not exercise faith. When Jesus was dedicated to the Lord He had no idea what was going on as a baby either. On the surface that does not since either but to God it did. So in His case and for all other new born males, they were dedicated to the Lord as required by the law to honor the Lord. Today that requirement is not commanded. Like I said, I am only defending parents right to baptize a baby if they want to. I see no wrong in that as some would even dare to suggest. I mean really, are you going to call it sin? Well it is not, because the Word of God does not address that issue. I would not tell a parent that it is required but I would not try to stop them either. I remain mute on that as does the scripture. If you want to try and stop them or preach that it is somehow wrong then be my quest.
There are things not written in the scripture required to do and yet are good to do as the following scripture alludes to:
1COR 7:25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.
And also this one:
2THESS 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. What are these tradtitions that Paul speaks, of but not law because they are called traditions. Well I suggest they are good things for one to do.
Obviously you also didn't get it. I am just defending parents right to babtize an infant. Of coarse a baby can not exercise faith. When Jesus was dedicated to the Lord He had no idea what was going on as a baby either.On the surface that does not since either but to God it did. So in His case and for all other new born males, they were dedicated to the Lord as required by the law to honor the Lord. Today that requirement is not commanded. Like I said, I am only defending parents right to baptize a baby if they want to. I see no wrong in that as some would even dare to suggest. I mean really, are you going to call it sin? Well it is not, because the Word of God does not address that issue. I would not tell a parent that it is required but I would not try to stop them either. I remain mute on that as does the scripture. If you want to try and stop them or preach that it is somehow wrong then be my quest.
There are things not written in the scripture required to do and yet are good to do as the following scripture alludes to:
1COR 7:25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.
And also this one:
2THESS 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. What are these tradtitions that Paul speaks, of but not law because they are called traditions. Well I suggest they are good things for one to do.
I agree that things need not be spelled out in detail in order for one to know what to do. That's what Bible principles are for, to provide us with general guidelines for behavior and keep us on the narrow road that Jesus described as leading to life.
However, the real question here is whether indeed infant baptism is as inoffensive as you describe it. The truth is that from as biblical standpoint it does constitute a serious deviation from of what baptism as a symbol of repentance and death (being submerged) toward sin and being reborn (being lifted out of the water) as a new creation entails because such symbolism isn't applicable to infants who lack the necessary faculties by virtue of being infants.
If indeed we find that kind of casual unconcerned trivialization of such symbolism OK, then that's our choice. However, to say that the Apostles or Jesus himself would have approved of such a trivialization is to disregard the seriousness with which that baptism ritual was originally intended to be taken.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"
