₦airaland Forum

immortalcrown:
This arguement goes on because people do not understand the meaning and purpose of baptism in the Catholic Church. I mention Catholic here because that is the denomination that is constantly criticised for infant baptism.

did bible support that is another question we need to ask

Wrong

immortalcrown:
A pupil of a school going to the school without the school uniform doe not mean the pupil is not a member of the school. But wearing the school uniform helps to project the pupil's identity as a member of the school. The Catholic Church has never sent anybody out of the Church for not being baptised. So, do not twist things unnecessarily. When Christian parents fail to do child dedication in church, it does not change the Christian identity of the family. But the child dedication helps to project the family's Christian identity. This is the same thing that infant baptism can do in the Catholic Church.

Is Child Dedication even Biblical?

Lukuluku69:
Do what Jesus did. Follow his examples. If you do, you are on right path and not those of men.

So, search scriptures and see what Jesus did and commanded his disciples to do.

Chikena.

Jesus did a lot of things especially raising the dead, walking on water so which of them should you do and walk on the right path

Alfred200825:
Is Child Dedication even Biblical?

It certainly is not against it

adebowales:
did bible support that is another question we need to ask

The Bible did not condemn it either

gohf:
Jesus did a lot of things especially raising the dead, walking on water so which of them should you do and walk on the right path

He raised the dead? Good of him.

Now you are talking baptism of a child if I am correct, did he command you to such? If yes, then do it.

That's the right path.

BrosG007:
Whether it is right or wrong is not the issue here, the issue is what's does a child knows or what's his or her conventions, intentions - no perspectives or ideologies to warrant baptism?

This is just one of the flaws of religion....truth every new born are born atheist.....his or her religion or ideologies are derived from his or her surroundings or family of birth

There is no flaw here for are you saying that a baby should be left alone to form his mind?

If it’s not done in the bible , then it’s wrong.

Baptism is for those who accept Christ, children can’t make that decision

Dtruthspeaker:
It is the guilty that are cast in prison, so what offences would a child be guilty of to be delivered to hel?

Even, ye ivu men acknowledge that a child under 7yrs is not criminally responsible. Child Rights Act/ Criminal Code

CRA was done in 2003, Criminal Code in 1916 so before then what happened? Were there no children?

Even thou Deut. 21 mentions stoning a rebellious child I doubt a 3yr old counts (I haven't seen a toddler be a drunkard)

Does the law of God have an age prohibition or exception because can't say children don't do wrong and seeing as the said laws doesn't excuse ignorance and it is still punishable

gohf:
As many around the world celebrate a festive season they believe to be the birth of Christ Jesus, who later at around 30yr of age got water baptized by his cousin, John the Baptist, we try to consider what appropriate age is right for water baptism if it is required at all.

On the subject of age, of all those recorded baptisims in the new testament only the age of Jesus was mentioned.

I have heard some argue that if a child wasn't baptized or holy water didn't touch the child, if the child died they would go to hell. While I have also heard some others say no to child water baptism, and among them some claim a certain age where it doesn't matter what they do they are innocent before God and as such if they die they go "back to their maker".

I believe the whole purpose of water baptism was to reveal who the anointed son of God is and that's why Jesus went to fulfill and do what was right and was revealed as God's son in whom God's well pleased. Shortly after Jesus's baptism, John gets arrested and beheaded. Now some may say John's disciples and those of Jesus baptized with water but Jesus didn't do so.

Jesus does baptize us but with the living water, the Holy Spirit. So I like Paul believe in this baptism and not water baptism, which nullifies the argument of if a new born or toddler or children of certain age bracket should be deeped into water or not. Though children are not innocent as many of them lie, steal and do a lot of wrong things mainly out of ignorance. I doubt John the Baptist deeped them into the Jordan River, well maybe he did, as it won't kill even an infant to be deeped into water but the whole purpose of that baptism was a symbol that those who went to John were repenting from their sins and forsaking their past lives. It's also possible that the household baptisms mentioned in acts were not water nor involved deeping little children into water.

What do you think should your child be deeped into water to receive salvation or not?

If one possess the right understanding of Scripture as it is written the that individual knows that child baptism is not of God and it's not in any way a means to receive SALVATION.

SALVATION, can only be received by one who has heard and willingly accepted the WORD of God and make confession of JESUS as LORD.


This is all what the Scripture says on baptist from the below verses......



Matt.28.19 - Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,



Mark.16.15 - And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mark.16.16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.



Acts.2.38 - Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts.2.39 - For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call."
Acts.2.40 - And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, "Be saved from this perverse generation."
Acts.2.41 - Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them.







NB: If one's beliefs and understanding of the WORD of God contradicts what God has said then it is no longer of God but either sensual or demonic.

Lukuluku69:
He raised the dead? Good of him.

Now you are talking baptism of a child if I am correct, did he command you to such? If yes, then do it.

That's the right path.

water baptism(which is of John)? Or baptism of Jesus Christ?

femi4:
It's wrong if the child have no knowlege of the act.

The knowlege is as important as the act..that's why it is done after confession / repentance

Which means that the child must first become guilty for him to require repentance, confession etc.

And by nature and Natural Law children cannot be held guilty until they reach as certain age.

manuelkel:
You don't receive salvation by being deeped into water, baptism is a segregation of Christian faith. It significance rests on the acceptance of Christian faith and not salvation. Every religious belief have a way of accepting such religious faith, accepting a religious faith like Christianity through baptism does not mean you already have achieved salvation.....

true

gohf:
water baptism(which is of John)? Or baptism of Jesus Christ?

Are you a follower of John the Baptist or Jesus of Nazareth?

Follow the examples and commands of whom you follow.

Do Whatever Works For Your BELIEF SYSTEM....!

Child water baptism is very wrong by not letting that child grow enough to decide if he or she wants to be baptized, baptizing should be a choice and not hereditary

gohf:
As many around the world celebrate a festive season they believe to be the birth of Christ Jesus, who later at around 30yr of age got water baptized by his cousin, John the Baptist, we try to consider what appropriate age is right for water baptism if it is required at all.

On the subject of age, of all those recorded baptisims in the new testament only the age of Jesus was mentioned.

I have heard some argue that if a child wasn't baptized or holy water didn't touch the child, if the child died they would go to hell. While I have also heard some others say no to child water baptism, and among them some claim a certain age where it doesn't matter what they do they are innocent before God and as such if they die they go "back to their maker".

I believe the whole purpose of water baptism was to reveal who the anointed son of God is and that's why Jesus went to fulfill and do what was right and was revealed as God's son in whom God's well pleased. Shortly after Jesus's baptism, John gets arrested and beheaded. Now some may say John's disciples and those of Jesus baptized with water but Jesus didn't do so.

Jesus does baptize us but with the living water, the Holy Spirit. So I like Paul believe in this baptism and not water baptism, which nullifies the argument of if a new born or toddler or children of certain age bracket should be deeped into water or not. Though children are not innocent as many of them lie, steal and do a lot of wrong things mainly out of ignorance. I doubt John the Baptist deeped them into the Jordan River, well maybe he did, as it won't kill even an infant to be deeped into water but the whole purpose of that baptism was a symbol that those who went to John were repenting from their sins and forsaking their past lives. It's also possible that the household baptisms mentioned in acts were not water nor involved deeping little children into water.

What do you think should your child be deeped into water to receive salvation or not?

Your BELIEF SYSTEM Is What Matters Most In Life!

You Cannot Be Here And There !

Do Whatever Works For Your BELIEF SYSTEM.

Disenfranchised:
Baptism is a conscious decision by the person to be baptized. A child can not make conscious decision.

Another error by the Catholic is baptism is by emersion in water and not by sprinkling of water.

Education is a conscious decision. But you take your child to school before the child becomes conscious enough to decide whether to be educated, the same way you take the child to Church or even dedicate the child on the Alter before the child becomes conscious enough to decide whether to be a Christian.

So, what is your logic?

gohf:
CRA was done in 2003, Criminal Code in 1916 so before then what happened? Were there no children?

Even thou Deut. 21 mentions stoning a rebellious child I doubt a 3yr old counts (I haven't seen a toddler be a drunkard)

Does the law of God have an age prohibition or exception because can't say children don't do wrong and seeing as the said laws doesn't excuse ignorance and it is still punishable

Before, the white bandits brought their writing down of laws, the Yorubas, ibos, Benins, Ijaws etc were already practicing all the laws you know today as Criminal Law, Law of contracts and upholding the rights of a child.

And no where have you seen a child younger than 7years being held criminally responsible.

And even from back then till tomorrow you would hear "leave am. Na pikin. When hin grow, hin go understand say dis things no good as you dey teach am".

And go and examine the Bible, no where did you see God or anyone put a child on trial.

From Genesis to revelations, they are all adults or young people. No child

creolehunt:
Wrong, unless your own Roman Catholic church is different.

What qualifies one to revceve holy communion is the ceremony of First Holy Commuinion which is preceded by Catechism classes. Of course one has to be baptized, perform penance and recieve First Holy Communion before receiving recievwing Holy Communion.

Confirmation is a totally different ritual and isn't a prerequisite for Holy Communion and serves as a Confirmation of Faith by adults. Confirmation too isn't a mandatory requirement for Catholics and most Catholics didn't end up being Confirmed

Thank you for pointing it out. I omitted it in my correction. But you saw a part that says that those who become adults before baptism do not need the confirmation.

Dtruthspeaker:
If you watch my tone you would see that I am not exactly attacking the practice of child baptism. And neither did I say it violates any Law in the bible.

But it does not directly violate a Law, it however, does not follow The Law but departs from it.

As you said Baptism and your holy communion are 2 separate matters in your church. So according to your church baptism is not about your holy communion.

However, I dispute in support of others that baptism means a person qualified to break bread with Christ and to eat the body and blood of Christ which your church technically calls your holy communion.

Which is what I stated above

One, whatever does not follow the law goes against the law. Tell us how infant baptism goes against baptism in the Bible. Two, point out where the Bible says that baptism and communion must follow together.

paxonel:
You are very right!
A student can go to school without school uniform and still perform better academically than those with the school uniform and identity.
Afterall, the essence of going to school is to acquire the knowledge and not necessarily to project the school identity since there are other schools that can still offer the service of imparting the same knowledge.

This is why the question reasonable Christians ask:
Of what use is the identity of the church denomination in a society that is dominated by Christians which is the body of Christ?

A student can as well wear the school uniform and become the best student. Therefore, there's nothing wrong with a student wearing school uniform to school.

paxonel:
You mean, if the child is not baptized, he or she does not have Christian identity?

No part of my comment sees this. You are the one that manufactured it in your mind.

immortalcrown:
One, whatever does not follow the law goes against the law. Tell us how infant baptism goes against baptism in the Bible. Two, point out where the Bible says that baptism and communion must follow together.

That is not how Law works.

Everything that is bad The Law, condemns it and this is the principle of law saying "When The Law did not want it, it Spoke"

And that is why I clearly said that you guys have not violated any Law here save that you have not followed it either.

But however, no one can rightly say you guys are Wrong rather child baptism is a vanity as we all know that a child will grow up to become guilty. And then he would require repentance and baptism and all those things we all have pointed out

Dtruthspeaker:
That is not how Law works.

Everything that is bad The Law, condemns it and this is the principle of law saying "When The Law did not want it, it Spoke"

And that is why I clearly said that you guys have not violated any Law here save that you have not followed it either.

But however, no one can rightly say you guys are Wrong rather child baptism is a vanity as we all know that a child will grow up to become guilty. And then he would require repentance and baptism and all those things we all have pointed out

The Bible is the law in this case. The Bible has not spoken against it.

This is the order: we receive salvation by confessing Jesus Christ as our Lord and personal saviour then we proceed to the baptism by water. You must be conscious of your actions and not using someone's conviction. Your salvation doesn't translate to your children's salvation. So infant water baptism is nothing but a mere traditional ritual that holds nothing. The child is conscious of nothing. Only spirit can not come upon someone that's not yet born again. Was Jesus baptised as an infant? Did the apostles in the bible practiced infant baptism? No

We follow what was handed over to us and follow the rediments of the scriptures and not men tradition.

immortalcrown:
The Bible is the law in this case. The Bible has not spoken against it.

That is what I said

Dtruthspeaker:
That is what I said

So, why did you argue against what the Bible does not condemn?

immortalcrown:
So, why did you argue against what the Bible does not condemn?

Is it that you cannot read?

Dtruthspeaker:
Is it that you cannot read?

You are the one that cannot read. That's why you started the argument.

immortalcrown:
Education is a conscious decision. But you take your child to school before the child becomes conscious enough to decide whether to be educated, the same way you take the child to Church or even dedicate the child on the Alter before the child becomes conscious enough to decide whether to be a Christian.

So, what is your logic?

Your education anology and my posit on baptism is mismatched. Basics education is not a conscious decision a child can make for he or herself.

Baptism is dying to sin. It's not a gift 🎁 a father can pass to his child. A person to be baptized must make the decision and a child cannot.