The undisclosed age of “X”

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
No, its just that people generally consider a person in his teens old enough to understand the profession he makes.
There is a lot of hard science that shows that the body and brain continues to undergo significant chemical and structural changes until the end of “Puberty”, so while I do not agree with the Mennonites (which is good since I am not a Mennonite), thier position is not without some biological grounds.


Well, forgive me for saying it, but all of this simply illustrates the impossibility of going by the Credobaptist method of judging who is in and who is cut out. It sounds sensible and reasonable at first glance, the other theological issues aside; but when we consider how to implement the idea, this is what we get.
Perhaps, but that is why Credobaptism is bigger than just “infant baptism” and (in my opinion) needs a topic of its own to do it justice.
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Thank you. I did not want to make assumptions about what you believed, so it was better to confirm it from your own lips.

and so are you (by your own statement).
So you believe. I believe that it is not impossible for a 4 year old to believe and to communicate that belief.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
There is a lot of hard science that shows that the body and brain continues to undergo significant chemical and structural changes until the end of “Puberty”, so while I do not agree with the Mennonites (which is good since I am not a Mennonite), thier position is not without some biological grounds.[/quote
I don't see that this unremarkable fact makes any difference, one way or the other.

[quote
Perhaps, but that is why Credobaptism is bigger than just “infant baptism” and (in my opinion) needs a topic of its own to do it justice.
OK, but the minute we move beyond NO INFANTS!, the application of your system becomes a jumble of uncertainties.

Just look at the various ins an outs and maybes, not to mention the fact that different Credobaptist churches will baptize (or not) at widely different ages. Some want teens. Some will go for a 9 or 8 year old. You will baptize a 4 year old, but none of the foregoing will. And so it goes. That's not true of the Paedobaptists who all baptize, Protestant or Catholic, according to the same age policy.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Thank you. I did not want to make assumptions about what you believed, so it was better to confirm it from your own lips.

So you believe. I believe that it is not impossible for a 4 year old to believe and to communicate that belief.



?? Did you not state in an earlier post that you do baptize 4 year olds, have done so, would do so, or something like that??

You wrote--

atpollard said:
I have admitted that I will baptize PEOPLE that believe, even if they are children so young that YOU CLAIM they cannot comprehend. There are adults that claim to have believed since 4 years old. Why should I assume that no 4 year old can believe when some people tell me they believed at that age?

and you can see from the wording there that this was not the first mention of it.

atpollard said:
Now, for me personally, I would be hesitant to baptize under the age of 4.



.
 
Last edited:

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
[MENTION=334]atpollard[/MENTION]


Josiah said:

Wrong.


There were many dogmas invented (out of thin air) by the Anabaptists in the late 16th Century, some of these involve Baptism.


Among them are:


Anti-Paedobaptism.


Anti ("Against""Forbid") Paedo ("person under 20 or so) Baptism.


The Dogma is that we are forbidden to baptize "Paedo." The word "paedo" has to do with age, it is exclusively about age, it has nothing to do with anything except age, its entirely about age.


But the term Baptists use is extremely generic and general; it CAN refer to an unborn children but it equally can mean one in their late teens. It's VERY indefinite. But the Dogma is that "Paedo" are forbidden to be baptized. Never is that age given, and we find Baptists themselves very conflicted by this, some welcoming baptisms of 3 or 4 year olds, some not until the teens. Since what age is meant by "Paedo" is NOT defined, it can be expressed as "X." "That age is never defined, however." as stated above.


We find Baptists insisting that Baptisms of some are forbidden because "they are too young" They speak of the recipient being "too young." The issue there is AGE. This is the Anti-Paedobaptism dogma invented by the Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.



.

Can you show any modern church or denomination that restricts baptism based on age


Sure. See posts 4 and 12.


MennoSota proved his does, he gave an official declaration that states one must attain "The Age of Accountability" which MennoSota was quick to point out is never identified.


And the very name of this Baptist dogma MEANS age; the name is "anti" (against) "paedo" (an AGE range between preborn and about 20) "Baptism" The entire title is about AGE and being "against" baptisms of those under an age (which MennoSota was eager to point out is never defined; this best conveyed by "X" (X being unknown)




atpollard said:
Credobaptism and Immersion Baptism have nothing to do with “The undisclosed age of X” and deserve a topic of there own, so I will address them later in a topic specifically for each of them.[/I]]


I never claimed they did; I simply noted 3 of the most common, best known Baptism Dogmas invented by the Anabaptists in the late 16th Century and parroted today by Baptists (those dropping the "Ana")



.
 
Last edited:

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
?? Did you not state in an earlier post that you do baptize 4 year olds, have done so, would do so, or something like that??

You wrote--



and you can see from the wording there that this was not the first mention of it.





.
I stated that I came to faith at age 4. I have known God's gift of faith since that age. I stated that had someone desired to baptize me then, I could have articulated my faith and been baptized. However, the Elders wisely held off until I was 20 to observe the faith I claimed. I am no worse the wear for having waited and God's grace, through faith would have secured my presence with God had he chosen to bring me home between the ages of conception to 20. Water baptism was not required to save me.
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
?? Did you not state in an earlier post that you do baptize 4 year olds, have done so, would do so, or something like that??

You wrote--

and you can see from the wording there that this was not the first mention of it.
.
OK, enough now. Repeating my position over and over has become tedious and you are deliberately ignoring most of what I am saying. For example, the post you bothered to quote that begins “Now for me personally...” goes on to explain what I believe in detail. So if you were sincere in your inquiry about my beliefs, you would not have ignored the rest of that post.

I said that I have personally baptized children as young as 5 (because I was convinced their faith was genuine).
I have said that I would reluctantly baptize a child as young as 4 if I believed that their faith was genuine and that my reluctance is only because a 4 year old is unlikely to remember the event, not because the Bible forbids it.
I have said that adult Christians have claimed to have been saved since age 4 and their earliest memories are of believing in Jesus, so to argue that a 4 year old cannot believe is to call all of those who claim they did believe at 4 years old “liars” with no evidence.
I have also offered the statistic that the Southern Baptists baptize several thousand children “under the age of 6” each year, so I am not alone in my position. It is the belief of the Southern Baptist Convention Member Churches.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,311
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Catholics are not ageist about baptism, we baptise from age 0 to Age(max). But more fit in the age 0 group than any other, I think.

:smirk:
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I never claimed they did; I simply noted 3 of the most common, best known [snip] Dogmas invented by the Anabaptists in the late 16th Century
Whether they are relevant to the topic or not.


and parroted today by Baptists (those dropping the "Ana").
You are displaying an ignorance of the history of the various non-Paedeobaptist families of Churches.
Modern Baptists are not 16th Century Anabaptists that dropped the “Ana”.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,311
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
OK, enough now. Repeating my position over and over has become tedious and you are deliberately ignoring most of what I am saying. For example, the post you bothered to quote that begins “Now for me personally...” goes on to explain what I believe in detail. So if you were sincere in your inquiry about my beliefs, you would not have ignored the rest of that post.

I said that I have personally baptized children as young as 5 (because I was convinced their faith was genuine).
I have said that I would reluctantly baptize a child as young as 4 if I believed that their faith was genuine and that my reluctance is only because a 4 year old is unlikely to remember the event, not because the Bible forbids it.
I have said that adult Christians have claimed to have been saved since age 4 and their earliest memories are of believing in Jesus, so to argue that a 4 year old cannot believe is to call all of those who claim they did believe at 4 years old “liars” with no evidence.
I have also offered the statistic that the Southern Baptists baptize several thousand children “under the age of 6” each year, so I am not alone in my position. It is the belief of the Southern Baptist Convention Member Churches.

I like your post. I do not quite see why remembering is important. I was baptised in a Lutheran church when I was an infant, probably 2 years old or about that. I do not remember the event but I know the name of the church and the pastor who baptised me. I managed to contact them and obtain a record of my baptism when I was going through RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults) in the Catholic Church. I did not need the record because the priest trusted my assurance that I had been baptised but it was available if it were needed. But I do not miss having a vivid memory of whatever method of applying water was used in that Lutheran church.

Biblically there is, as you observe, no age specified, though 8 days old is the age at which circumcision is commanded to occur in the old testament and many Catholics make an effort to baptise at or near that age but many more do not. And the holy scriptures do not emphasise remembering the event of baptism but for an adult remembering it would be common, the norm I would think.

It is interesting to read that Southern Baptist Convention (is that still the formal name?) ministers baptise over a thousand young children each year. I would not have credited that had you not been the one saying so. But if a child under 6 is okay to baptise then why not a child under 1 :)
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I like your post. I do not quite see why remembering is important. I was baptised in a Lutheran church when I was an infant, probably 2 years old or about that. I do not remember the event but I know the name of the church and the pastor who baptised me. I managed to contact them and obtain a record of my baptism when I was going through RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults) in the Catholic Church. I did not need the record because the priest trusted my assurance that I had been baptised but it was available if it were needed. But I do not miss having a vivid memory of whatever method of applying water was used in that Lutheran church.

Biblically there is, as you observe, no age specified, though 8 days old is the age at which circumcision is commanded to occur in the old testament and many Catholics make an effort to baptise at or near that age but many more do not. And the holy scriptures do not emphasise remembering the event of baptism but for an adult remembering it would be common, the norm I would think.
Here is an irony, an atheist father and a Catholic mother had me baptized in a Lutheran Church as an infant as a compromise to get my Catholic Grandparents that never attended mass and Methodist Grandparents that attended regularly (every Easter and Christmas without fail) off their backs. The Protestants were adamant that I would not be baptized Catholic, and the Catholics were adamant that I would be baptized as an infant. The Lutheran Church was the only church that would meet the needs of the compromise. I was then promptly raised in the family tradition of religious lip service twice a year with no real belief that it was anything more than a social obligation ... like Jury Duty.

So I don’t think that a baptism of a faithless infant by two faithless parents followed by an atheist upbringing is really what anyone believes that the Bible had in mind. The irony is that God still claimed me, transformed my, indwellt me, and utterly saved me without any adult baptism. It was only 15 years later that I was at church watching a baptism ceremony at the Church of God of Anderson Indiana, that I mentioned in passing that because I was saved outside of any normal Church (it was a Catholic Charismatic Fellowship of laypeople that shared the gospel with a gang member), I never happened to get baptized. They viewed it as a much bigger deal than I did, so I agreed to be baptized as an adult. It sort of made sense given the gross insincerity of my infant baptism.

Anyway, when I later studied the meaning of Baptism with a Southern Baptist Convention Church, the memory of the event and the meaning of the event added extra impact and personalization to many verses in scripture for me. When scripture talks about how we have been buried with Christ, I can remember the water closing over my face as I plunged into the water. When it talks about washing away our sin, I can remember the feel of the water that washed away my sin. The Church of God used a Baptismal Pool (as does the Pentecostal Church I currently attend), but a part of me wishes that they had used “living water” ... a moving stream or river to more perfectly allow us to visualize the water carrying away our sins. When scripture talks about how we arise a new creation, I can remember the exhilaration as I emerged from the water. God had promised that I was now a new creation, and I felt like a new creation. It actually FELT like a rebirth as a new person.

That is why baptizing infants makes ME (personally) sad. I get that something to mark their admission into the Covenant is a good idea. Good enough that Credobaptists often have “baby dedications”. However you have created a wonderful memory for the parents and the grandparents, by stealing that memory from the child. He or she can never know the feeling that I felt and read those scriptures with the memories that I can apply to them. That makes me sad.


It is interesting to read that Southern Baptist Convention (is that still the formal name?) ministers baptise over a thousand young children each year. I would not have credited that had you not been the one saying so. But if a child under 6 is okay to baptise then why not a child under 1 :)
Welcome to seeing how sausage is made. ;)
The Southern Baptist Convention is something like a group of little old men and little old ladies, 80% are always arguing about SOMETHING unimportant while 20% are getting all of the important work done. So the SBC tracks baptisms (I guess they think it is an important metric of something) and they track them by broad age groups. For a very long time, the youngest group was “Pre school aged” or “age 6 and under” with the next group being something like “7 to 12” and then “teens” that general idea. (I may be off on the exact age breaks). Around 2014 there was an uproar that the fastest growing segment for baptisms was the so-called “Dora Generation” (a clever name for children age 6 and under). The data was about 4000 children age 6 and under were being baptized per year (out of something like 15 million members). Remember those 80% that like to worry about unimportant things, well some of them started complaining that 6 and under was too young. The SBC did what any good bureaucracy would do, they stopped counting children age 6 and under. They simply rolled them into the next age group. So the latest data has the youngest group as “children age 12 and under”.

I suspect that the majority of 6 and under were age 6 with a few age 5. They just don’t keep that detailed of records on exact age and it is probably deliberate, so those are just my wild guesses.

Why not age 1?
If the Elders of a Baptist Church were convinced that a 1 year old had genuine faith in Jesus as their Savior, they would baptize them. I doubt that any Elder is comfortable with the evidence of belief presented by a 1 year old. Apparently there are some elders that are convinced of the genuine faith of some age 6 and under, and some that are not.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Are you admitting that you are baptizing people that have no more belief in Jesus than “a parrot”?
Some padeobaptists have claimed that God gives faith to infants at their baptism,
yet you now claim that it is “ludicrous” to think that even a 4 year old can believe.

Does someone keep the Holy Spirit away from babies do ya think???

The Disciples tried it with Christ...

And they were sternly rebuked!


Arsenios
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Why not age 1?

We Baptize newborns into Christ at 40 days of age...

And they do not have to know Jack Schnartznikoff about nuttin'!!

"Suffer the little children unto Me!"

3 year olds are some of the cutest and most pious Christians ever!


Arsenios
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Does someone keep the Holy Spirit away from babies do ya think???

The Disciples tried it with Christ...

And they were sternly rebuked!


Arsenios
Careful, you are reading things into that story that it does not claim. There is no baptism by Jesus in that story, nor is there reference to the Holy Spirit. Are you really attempting to claim that Jesus gave those children something (the Holy Spirit) while He was alive that his Disciples had to wait until after the resurrection to receive?
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
We Baptize newborns into Christ at 40 days of age...

And they do not have to know Jack Schnartznikoff about nuttin'!!

"Suffer the little children unto Me!"

3 year olds are some of the cutest and most pious Christians ever!


Arsenios


I understand.
The person whose question I was responding to (MC) had specifically asked about age 1.

You and I view the purpose of baptism differently.
As a sacrament to admit a person (including a 40 days old, or even an 8 days old) into the New Covenant Family, baptizing infants makes perfect sense.
As a sacrament to admit persons who have heard and believed the gospel, repented of their old life, and committed their lives to the service of Jesus into the Body of Christ, with the ability to join in the other sacraments (like the Eucharist), not baptizing those who do not profess belief makes perfect sense.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
OK, enough now. Repeating my position over and over has become tedious
If so, it is only because you keep running away from it and/or denying it after posting something; and I feel that that it is only right that we stay on topic and see whatever it is through to some conclusion. Wouldn't that be the best thing to do for the sake of all readers?

I said that I have personally baptized children as young as 5 (because I was convinced their faith was genuine).
I have said that I would reluctantly baptize a child as young as 4....
All right. So I was correct about that after all. This is important if anyone is going to go on extolling "Credobaptism" and claiming to be one himself.




.
 
Last edited:

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The last paragraph states an "age of accountability." That age is never defined, however.


Confession of Faith


Article 11. Baptism


We believe that the baptism of believers with water is a sign of their cleansing from sin. Baptism is also a pledge before the church of their covenant with God to walk in the way of Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. Believers are baptized into Christ and his body by the Spirit, water, and blood.

Baptism is a testimony to God’s gift of the Holy Spirit and the continuing work of the Spirit in the lives of believers. Through the Spirit we repent and turn toward God in faith. The baptism of the Holy Spirit enables believers to walk in newness of life, to live in community with Christ and the church, to offer Christ’s healing and forgiveness to those in need, to witness boldly to the good news of Christ, and to hope in the sharing of Christ’s future glory.

Baptism by water is a sign that a person has repented, received forgiveness, renounced evil, and died to sin,1 through the grace of God in Christ Jesus. Thus cleansed, believers are incorporated into Christ’s body on earth, the church. Baptism by water is also a pledge to serve Christ and to minister as a member of his body according to the gifts given to each one. Jesus himself requested water baptism at the beginning of his ministry and sent his followers to “make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”2 Baptism is done in obedience to Jesus’ command and as a public commitment to identify with Jesus Christ, not only in his baptism by water, but in his life in the Spirit and in his death in suffering love.

The baptism of blood, or baptism of suffering, is the offering of one’s life, even to death. Jesus understood the giving of his life through the shedding of his blood for others as a baptism.3 He also spoke about his disciples’ suffering and death as a baptism.4 Those who accept water baptism commit themselves to follow Jesus in giving their lives for others, in loving their enemies, and in renouncing violence, even when it means their own suffering or death.

Christian baptism is for those who confess their sins, repent, accept Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, and commit themselves to follow Christ in obedience as members of his body, both giving and receiving care and counsel in the church.

Baptism
is for those who are of the
age of accountability and who freely request baptism on the basis of their response to Jesus Christ in faith.




http://mennoniteusa.org/confession-of-faith/baptism/



This view is called, "Anti-Paedobaptism."

MennoSota felt honesty required he note that this "AGE" is not disclosed; it is not determined or stated. An unknown number is often conveyed as "X".




.
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
If so, it is only because you keep running away from it and/or denying it after posting something; and I feel that that it is only right that we stay on topic and see whatever it is through to some conclusion. Wouldn't that be the best thing to do for the sake of all readers?

All right. So I was correct about that after all. This is important if anyone is going to go on extolling "Credobaptism" and claiming to be one himself.
All of it is important, like reading a verse in its context.
I said that I have personally baptized children as young as 5 (because I was convinced their faith was genuine).
I have said that I would reluctantly baptize a child as young as 4 if I believed that their faith was genuine and that my reluctance is only because a 4 year old is unlikely to remember the event, not because the Bible forbids it.
I have said that adult Christians have claimed to have been saved since age 4 and their earliest memories are of believing in Jesus, so to argue that a 4 year old cannot believe is to call all of those who claim they did believe at 4 years old “liars” with no evidence.
I have also offered the statistic that the Southern Baptists baptize several thousand children “under the age of 6” each year, so I am not alone in my position. It is the belief of the Southern Baptist Convention Member Churches.

and my position stated back in Post #9:
You will have to present the specific post in order to speak in specifics, however for myself, the opposition to baptizing infants is not because of their age, but rather, it is because infants have not and cannot do the other things that all people seem to be instructed in scripture (by word and example) to do together with or prior to baptism. I have never heard an infant profess belief or offer confession. So it is about obeying instructions and not about age for me ... hence my willingness to baptize a 4 year old that can profess belief and offer confession. I have stated that I would prefer a later age, but only for human memory development reasons. If someone meets God’s criteria to become a full member of the Body of Christ, who am I to say no ... and if someone does not meet God’s criteria to become a full member of the Body of Christ, who am I to say yes.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
This view is called, "Anti-Paedobaptism."

MennoSota felt honesty required he note that this "AGE" is not disclosed; it is not determined or stated. An unknown number is often conveyed as "X".




.

The Bible never teaches paedobaptism. Since it doesn't teach it, does that make the Bible anti-paedobaptism?
Since the Bible only reveals confessing saints as person's being baptized does that mean there is an unknown number?
No, God knows the exact moment in which he will give the gift of adoption and faith, which will result in confession and repentance. God knows the very moment and God never once. Let me repeat...never once...reveals a person being baptized before they have confessed and repented.
What then do we discern about God's direction regarding baptism? Does God endorse the baptism of the faithless, non-confessor, who is unrepentant of sins? We find no endorsement in scripture. What we see in scripture (everytime) is that the person confesses faith and repents...then they are baptized.
What Josiah proposes is that we ignore the evidence in scripture and promote an entirely silent doctrine of baptizing the unregenerate, faithless, unrepentant sinner...with the hope that those who have faith will save the sinner by their faith rather than by God giving the sinner faith when/if God so chooses.
Really, the paedobaptism view attempts to manipulate God and force God to do what He has never promised to do. It teaches a doctrine not found in scripture, but asserts it is from God anyway. That is extremely dangerous to teach what God has not taught.
Therefore one should conclude that a false teaching was introduced to the church that the EOC, Roman Church and Lutheran Church have failed to extracate from their midst. Such failure requires Reformation and return back to the days of the Apostles when we see only the regenerate, repentant, confessional believer being baptized. This is the practice of the Apostles. Do what the Apostles did.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,311
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Here is an irony, an atheist father and a Catholic mother had me baptized in a Lutheran Church as an infant as a compromise to get my Catholic Grandparents that never attended mass and Methodist Grandparents that attended regularly (every Easter and Christmas without fail) off their backs. The Protestants were adamant that I would not be baptized Catholic, and the Catholics were adamant that I would be baptized as an infant. The Lutheran Church was the only church that would meet the needs of the compromise. I was then promptly raised in the family tradition of religious lip service twice a year with no real belief that it was anything more than a social obligation ... like Jury Duty.

So I don’t think that a baptism of a faithless infant by two faithless parents followed by an atheist upbringing is really what anyone believes that the Bible had in mind. The irony is that God still claimed me, transformed my, indwellt me, and utterly saved me without any adult baptism. It was only 15 years later that I was at church watching a baptism ceremony at the Church of God of Anderson Indiana, that I mentioned in passing that because I was saved outside of any normal Church (it was a Catholic Charismatic Fellowship of laypeople that shared the gospel with a gang member), I never happened to get baptized. They viewed it as a much bigger deal than I did, so I agreed to be baptized as an adult. It sort of made sense given the gross insincerity of my infant baptism.

Anyway, when I later studied the meaning of Baptism with a Southern Baptist Convention Church, the memory of the event and the meaning of the event added extra impact and personalization to many verses in scripture for me. When scripture talks about how we have been buried with Christ, I can remember the water closing over my face as I plunged into the water. When it talks about washing away our sin, I can remember the feel of the water that washed away my sin. The Church of God used a Baptismal Pool (as does the Pentecostal Church I currently attend), but a part of me wishes that they had used “living water” ... a moving stream or river to more perfectly allow us to visualize the water carrying away our sins. When scripture talks about how we arise a new creation, I can remember the exhilaration as I emerged from the water. God had promised that I was now a new creation, and I felt like a new creation. It actually FELT like a rebirth as a new person.

That is why baptizing infants makes ME (personally) sad. I get that something to mark their admission into the Covenant is a good idea. Good enough that Credobaptists often have “baby dedications”. However you have created a wonderful memory for the parents and the grandparents, by stealing that memory from the child. He or she can never know the feeling that I felt and read those scriptures with the memories that I can apply to them. That makes me sad.



Welcome to seeing how sausage is made. ;)
The Southern Baptist Convention is something like a group of little old men and little old ladies, 80% are always arguing about SOMETHING unimportant while 20% are getting all of the important work done. So the SBC tracks baptisms (I guess they think it is an important metric of something) and they track them by broad age groups. For a very long time, the youngest group was “Pre school aged” or “age 6 and under” with the next group being something like “7 to 12” and then “teens” that general idea. (I may be off on the exact age breaks). Around 2014 there was an uproar that the fastest growing segment for baptisms was the so-called “Dora Generation” (a clever name for children age 6 and under). The data was about 4000 children age 6 and under were being baptized per year (out of something like 15 million members). Remember those 80% that like to worry about unimportant things, well some of them started complaining that 6 and under was too young. The SBC did what any good bureaucracy would do, they stopped counting children age 6 and under. They simply rolled them into the next age group. So the latest data has the youngest group as “children age 12 and under”.

I suspect that the majority of 6 and under were age 6 with a few age 5. They just don’t keep that detailed of records on exact age and it is probably deliberate, so those are just my wild guesses.

Why not age 1?
If the Elders of a Baptist Church were convinced that a 1 year old had genuine faith in Jesus as their Savior, they would baptize them. I doubt that any Elder is comfortable with the evidence of belief presented by a 1 year old. Apparently there are some elders that are convinced of the genuine faith of some age 6 and under, and some that are not.

I think that since it is God who does all the heavy lifting in baptism the age of the baptised person, their ability to articulate faith and repentance and so forth would not be very significant unless we're considering an adult who refuses to confess faith and refuses to repent of sins but that would be an anomaly wouldn't it, very few candidates for adult baptism would deny faith in Jesus Christ and be firmly unrepentant. So if God is the one who commands baptism, gives grace in baptism, and works in the persons baptised why worry so much about infants being baptised? Unless baptism is more about the person baptised than about what God does in baptism.
 
Top Bottom