Subject: Is infant baptism Biblical? |
Bible Note: Dear orthodoxy, Indeed, 'household' does appear to mean every member of the house, including slaves, also their menagerie, and the utensils. But you are still assuming the presence of children, and assuming that the people of those times did not require faith to be a part of a holy rite, but neither of these has any Biblical proof, one way or the other. As to evidence that the church has been baptizing for 1850 years, we have no such proof that all churches did so, or that this was approved by God. Even so, 150 AD is not good enough. When we ask if infant baptism is Biblical, we use the Bible as the source of the answer. Otherwise, the question becomes, "Is infant baptism traditional?" The answer to this one is 'Yes.' How many complete copies of the New Testament we have from when is irrelevant. (Just ask Josh McDowell :-) The original question was from a sincere believer seeking the opinions of this forum, but moreover seeking the leading of the Holy Spirit. I did not ridicule his baptism as a baby, or say it was meaningless or based on heretical teaching. I simply pointed out that the Bible should be the source of his decision. I still pray that he is baptized (if he so chooses) in accordance with the leading of the Spirit, not in accord with his church's tradition. Orthodoxy, I do not ridicule your opinion, I just prefer my understanding of Scripture, praying before God that it may be acceptable to Him. Blessings in Jesus' name, charis |