Are babies sinners?

[MennoSota]

When a child is born, is it born a corrupt sinner or is it born an unblemished holy creation?
Psalms 51:5
For I was born a sinner— yes, from the moment my mother conceived me.
I ask this question as I wonder what the justification is for baptizing an unrepentant baby sinner?
If a child is born a sinner, how does a person justify baptizing an unrepentant sinner?
If a child is born perfectly holy, what is the reason for baptizing that which is already perfect?

 

[Andrew]

They are dirty little sinners in dire need of a bath or else!

 

[Andrew]

To be frank I do believe that any child ignorant of faith "ye or nay" especially prepubescent, to be blameless and actually used as an example, by Christ himself!
A 12 year old is what we should be like (as Christians!!) they should be baptising us!

 

[Lamb]

When a child is born, is it born a corrupt sinner or is it born an unblemished holy creation?
Psalms 51:5
For I was born a sinner— yes, from the moment my mother conceived me.
I ask this question as I wonder what the justification is for baptizing an unrepentant baby sinner?
If a child is born a sinner, how does a person justify baptizing an unrepentant sinner?
If a child is born perfectly holy, what is the reason for baptizing that which is already perfect?

No one can justify a human except for God. Babies need a Savior as much as an adult does and one was provided. You assume that God cannot reach an infant and nor can can God give an infant faith to believe in Him?

 

[Josiah]

Some are not convinced that we are dogmatically forbidden to baptize those under the never-disclosed age of X because the inventor of this dogma in the late 16th century was never able to show where the Bible forbids it.

 

[MennoSota]

No one can justify a human except for God. Babies need a Savior as much as an adult does and one was provided. You assume that God cannot reach an infant and nor can can God give an infant faith to believe in Him?

I don't make the assumption that God cannot reach an infant. I ask how we can baptize an unrepentant sinner.
Lamm, what evidence would you look for to discern if an infant had been given faith as opposed to an infant that had not been given faith? No colic?
Since we only see people who have been given faith being baptized in the Bible, what is the discerning feature that causes us to declare that infant X has faith, but infant Y has no faith, thus we can baptize baby X, but cannot baptize baby Y?
Is there no discernment by anyone? Does no one ask what Peter asked as to why Cornelius couldn't be baptized?

 

[Josiah]

Sin/Sinner


A "sinner" by definition is one who falls short, who misses the target. It's what the very word means.

In the olympics, if an athlete archer missed the bullseye, he "sinned"

One who is not a sinner, perfectly hits the target always, perpetually.



What is the target?

Essentially, that our character be identical to His.


Matthew 5:48, "You must be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect."

1 Peter 1:16, "You must be holy even as God in heaven is holy."

John 15:12, "Love all people just as I (Jesus) first loved you."

Ephesians 4:32, "forgiving one another, just as God in Christ first forgave you."

First John 2:6, "Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did."

Philippians 2:5, "You must have the same attitude that Christ did."

To the question: Does a newborn hit the bullseye? Do they do all the above? Perfectly, perpetually, always without exception? In their thoughts, words and deeds?




What Does the BIBLE state?


Psalm 51:5 "I was sinful at birth"

Psalm 58:3 "The wicked are estranged from the womb; These who speak lies go astray from birth."

Genesis 8:21, "Every inclination of people's heart is evil from childhood."

Romans 5:12, "Sin entered the world through one man's sin, and death through sin, and therefore death came to all people for all have sinned."

Romans 3:12, "There is no one who does good, not even one."

Romans 5:17-18

Mark 10:18, "There is none who is good but God exclusively."

First John 1:10, "If we claim we have no sin, we make God a liar and His word is not in us."



There's NOTHING in Scripture that says, "But those under the age of X cannot sin cuz they are equal to God."

There's also no verse that says, "When one celebrates their Xth birthday, they FALL from being perfect and divine in thought, word and deed - and at that moment, start to fall short in fulfilling the Law."


Consider Romans 6:23 "For the result of sin is death." IF those prior to celebrating their Xth birthday have no sin, then none under that age would die.

And the way to be sure all people go to heaven would be to kill them the day before they celebrate their Xth birthday.





.

 

[Lamb]

I don't make the assumption that God cannot reach an infant. I ask how we can baptize an unrepentant sinner.
Lamm, what evidence would you look for to discern if an infant had been given faith as opposed to an infant that had not been given faith? No colic?
Since we only see people who have been given faith being baptized in the Bible, what is the discerning feature that causes us to declare that infant X has faith, but infant Y has no faith, thus we can baptize baby X, but cannot baptize baby Y?
Is there no discernment by anyone? Does no one ask what Peter asked as to why Cornelius couldn't be baptized?

Baptism gives us the gift of the Holy Spirit and in baptism we are given faith. That's why you shouldn't doubt that God can do His job in baptizing a baby...it's His work, not something you can do to yourself.

 

[Albion]

I don't make the assumption that God cannot reach an infant. I ask how we can baptize an unrepentant sinner.

You're still looking at the issue through the lens of the Anabaptist movement. So long as every inquiry builds in a presumption derived from that theology (and your own definitions), those questions will continue to be seen by us more as pronouncements than questions. You decide.

 

[MennoSota]

Baptism gives us the gift of the Holy Spirit and in baptism we are given faith. That's why you shouldn't doubt that God can do His job in baptizing a baby...it's His work, not something you can do to yourself.

Wait, so faith doesn't come from grace, it comes from water baptism?
Why don't we just go and baptize all humanity regardless of their consent? Why do you restrict it to just babies?
Is it possible that water baptism does not give us the gift of the Holy Spirit? For example, when Peter meets with Cornelius the Holy Spirit is given and then, after that, Peter asks why the gentiles cannot be water baptized.
So, since I agree that God is the only one who can gift faith, I question the idea that our water baptizing someone forces God to gift the Holy Spirit and faith to that someone. I don't see any teaching in the Bible that cooperates with your claim. If I am missing that statement in the Bible, please provide it.

 

[Albion]

To be frank I do believe that any child ignorant of faith "ye or nay" especially prepubescent, to be blameless and actually used as an example, by Christ himself!

Andrew, I get it. We here belong to different denominations. That really is the bottom line in most of these Baptism-related threads, not Baptism itself.

The probing questions, the posturing, the hair-splitting definitions an all of that which we have been reading on these various threads lately are made to look like there is some common ground that can be reached by mutual effort, but its not so.

 

[MennoSota]

You're still looking at the issue through the lens of the Anabaptist movement. So long as every inquiry builds in a presumption derived from that theology (and your own definitions), those questions will continue to be seen by us more as pronouncements than questions. You decide.

I'm asking for the lens of scripture. Let us lay aside the dogmas of any given church denomination and observe scripture. God has given us his word to seek him and his will. It is in scripture that we will find his desire. I'm not sure you are willing to do that. If you are willing to let go of your church teachings and observe scripture alone, I would welcome it.

 

[Josiah]

I don't make the assumption that God cannot reach an infant. I ask how we can baptize an unrepentant sinner.
Lamm, what evidence would you look for to discern if an infant had been given faith as opposed to an infant that had not been given faith? No colic?
Since we only see people who have been given faith being baptized in the Bible, what is the discerning feature that causes us to declare that infant X has faith, but infant Y has no faith, thus we can baptize baby X, but cannot baptize baby Y?
Is there no discernment by anyone? Does no one ask what Peter asked as to why Cornelius couldn't be baptized?

You have the wrong thread. Read the title of this thread.

If you want to comment on the Anabaptist invention of Credobaptism, there's a thread on that (well, several). If you want to comment on the anabaptist invention of ANTI-Paedobaptism, there's a thread (well, several) on that. If you want to comment on the Anabaptist invention of Immersion-Only Baptism, there's a thread (well, several) on that. THIS one is about whether people are perfect BEFORE a certain birthday and then, by virtue of that birthday, suddenly aren't.

To the issue of this thread, see post # 7. But only if you are interested in lens of Scripture rather than parroting the tradition of a single denomination (like "Age of Accountability")




.

 

[MennoSota]

Andrew, I get it. We here belong to different denominations. That really is the bottom line in most of these Baptism-related threads, not Baptism itself.

The probing questions, the posturing, the hair-splitting definitions an all of that which we have been reading on these various threads lately are made to look like there is some common ground that can be reached by mutual effort, but its not so.

Are babies sinners at birth or not?

Do you baptize people who know nothing of Christianity and do not care?

 

[MennoSota]

You have the wrong thread. If you want to comment on the Anabaptist invention of Credobaptism, there's a thread on that (well, several). If you want to comment on the anabaptist invention of ANTI-Paedobaptism, there's a thread (well, several) on that. If you want to comment on the Anabaptist invention of Immersion-Only Baptism, there's a thread (well, several) on that. THIS one is about whether people are perfect BEFORE a certain birthday and then, by virtue of that birthday, suddenly aren't.

Josiah, if you refuse to address the topic of this thread, please refrain from speaking.
Lamm made a very specific statement. I have asked a question. STOP YOUR FOOLISH DEFLECTIONS.

 

[Albion]

I'm asking for the lens of scripture.

No, you are not. You have dismissed scripture time and again in these exchanges.

Any time we offer scripture, your interpretation of the meaning is whatever your denomination tells you it must be, and further, that everybody else in the 2000 years of Christian history was wrong, period, end of discussion. Or shall I say, "end of discussion" until you start all over again with the same questions asking, in effect, why we are all not Anabaptists.

If you are willing to let go of your church teachings and observe scripture alone, I would welcome it.

Enter into a serious give and take, stop the name-calling, shelve the attempt to put your own definition on words, and approach the questions you want to ask with a cooperative spirit. That would be my suggestion.

 

[Josiah]

Josiah, if you refuse to address the topic of this thread

Actually, you posted off-topic. But moving on as you request:


The issue is whether those who have not yet celebrated a (not yet disclosed) birthday are perfect (but on that birthday, as a result of that, cease to be). That's the topic.


If you actually want to discuss Scriptures, see post # 7. So far, all the Scriptures mentioned are there. And if you have a verse that says, "EVERYONE is everything God desires and remains so in every way - until they celebrate their ______ birthday, but as a result of that birthday, stop being so." Then enter that quote into the discussion. Make sense?

 

[MennoSota]

No, you are not. You have dismissed scripture time and again in these exchanges.

Any time we offer scripture, your interpretation of the meaning is whatever your denomination tells you it must be, and further, that everybody else in the 2000 years of Christian history was wrong, period, end of discussion. Or shall I say, "end of discussion" until you start all over again with the same questions asking, in effect, why we are all not Anabaptists.



Enter into a serious give and take, stop the name-calling, shelve the attempt to put your own definition on words, and approach the questions you want to ask with a cooperative spirit. That would be my suggestion.

What specific scripture?
I will address every scripture you believe is specifically related to babies spiritual condition at birth as well as why the church would baptize an infant who cannot express saving faith.
Here is you opportunity. Please don't back out by saying the verses have already been shown. You do some actual digging and share them here.

 

[MennoSota]

Actually, you posted off-topic. But moving on as you request:


The issue is whether those who have not yet celebrated a (not yet disclosed) birthday are perfect (but on that birthday, as a result of that, cease to be). That's the topic.


If you actually want to discuss Scriptures, see post # 7. So far, all the Scriptures mentioned are there. And if you have a verse that says, "EVERYONE is everything God desires and remains so in every way - until they celebrate their ______ birthday, but as a result of that birthday, stop being so." Then enter that quote into the discussion. Make sense?

You quote post 7.
Specifically, address each verse and tell me why it relates to the human condition at birth and why it justifies you baptizing the infant.

 

[Albion]

He referred to a post. That is not a "quote."