-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is it necessary to be baptized as an adult, if you were baptized as a baby?
- Thread starter Deidre
- Start date
obry
Member
No, you must confirm with your actions your "place".
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Trinitarian churches accept each others baptisms as being valid but not those of non trinitarian churches.
A valid baptism can not be "redone" (not that it would do any harm if it was)
They do not accept as valid baptisms performed by Jw, unitarian, or mormon amongst others.
However they do accept emergency baptisms by any member of their churches even if the words used may not have been perfect.
A valid baptism can not be "redone" (not that it would do any harm if it was)
They do not accept as valid baptisms performed by Jw, unitarian, or mormon amongst others.
However they do accept emergency baptisms by any member of their churches even if the words used may not have been perfect.
Stalwart
Member
Correct, but in fact, any person can administer the sacrament of baptism - non-believers included. Even then, God is not limited in the distribution of His own sacraments - including that of baptism. The Church recognises that those who are not members of the Church in a visible sense, but who conform their conscience to the natural order (God's law), and who act in accordance with it are blessed with the virtue of Charity, despite not being physically baptised due to physical separation from the physical Church, and can be saved through the Church in that way. Those who remain truly ignorant of Christ and His Church but who are not blessed with the necessary virtue of Charity by purely supernatural means (in other words, are not physically baptised by another person) are those who, even if made aware of Christ and His Church, would not have been saved anyway.
Stalwart
Member
I'm getting quite fed up of seeing this absolutely mediocre objection to Apostolic teaching.
The verse relevant to the notion of repentance in conjunction with baptism (in reference to which you've said "the Bible says one must repent and be baptised") is Acts 2:38, wherein Saint Peter tells us:
But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38)
Additionally, we hear from Our Lord in Mark 16:16:
He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mark 16:16)
Peter's use of 'and' in Acts 2 does not infer that repentance (denoted by 'do penance', and written as 'Repent, and be baptised' in more modern translations, such as the RSV) is necessary for the reception of baptism. He is saying that one must both repent and be baptised; not that they must repent so as to have access to baptism. This separation of the two from each other is made clear in Mark 16:16 wherein Our Lord tells us that baptism is a necessary element in attaining salvation (while also making clear that baptism alone is not sufficient, and that faith must also be present), but makes no mention whatsoever of repentance being necessary for the reception of that same baptism. What is necessary for baptism is desire; in the case of an infant, this desire is imparted by one's parents on the child's behalf, as they have authority over the child as he is the fruit of their marriage.
If it is that children and infants cannot sincerely repent, and can therefore not receive baptism, then children and infants cannot be saved until they reach adulthood, because baptism is necessary for salvation (John 3:5; 1 Peter 3:21), due to the fact that baptism makes us members of the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13) -- that is to say that it makes us members of the Church. We also know of whole families (that is, 'houses' and 'households', for one certainly cannot baptise a building) being baptised in 1 Corinthians 1:16 and Acts 16:33, indicating that children are also to be brought into the Body of Christ through baptism. Child baptism is Biblical.
In addition, we have the following statements from Fathers of the Early Church (among many others):
Saint Irenaeus, 189: "He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age."
Saint Hippolytus, 215: "Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them."
Saint Cyprian, 253: "As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born."
Saint John Crysostom, 388: "You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his members."
Saint Hippolytus, 215: "Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them."
Saint Cyprian, 253: "As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born."
Saint John Crysostom, 388: "You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his members."
But Jesus said to them: Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such. (Matthew 19:14)
For the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call. (Acts 2:39)
capumetu
Active Member
Jesus himself was 30 when he was baptized. Baptism is an outward display of the death of your former course of life and a dedication to doing God's will for an eternity. No child under the age of accountability is qualified to make that decision. And no non-consensual baptism is valid, each individual has to make that choice on their own.
I don't know but it seems to me, if I saw someone who impressed me as a grea
It seems useless to be baptized any other way since the Catholics seem to have imposed their baptism on all the churches. I have yet to see any churches that are worth doing a baptism. Hopefully just knowing that Jesus is Lord is enough.
It seems useless to be baptized any other way since the Catholics seem to have imposed their baptism on all the churches. I have yet to see any churches that are worth doing a baptism. Hopefully just knowing that Jesus is Lord is enough.
There are 2 basic baptisms--John's with water; Jesus' with fire and the Holy 'spirit.
Water baptism is the persons public testimony that they have ask Jesus to come into their life.
]There are 2 basic baptisms--John's with water; Jesus' with fire and the Holy Spirit.
Water baptism is the persons public testimony that they have ask Jesus to come into their life. It does not save the person.
The baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs when the person believes the gospel of their salvation
(Eph 1:13.). Since there is only 1 baptism(Eph 4:5) that saves, it is Jesus's Baptism. When one is truly born again, they are saved before any water is applied.
Baptism of infants is more of the parents dedicating their child to the Lord, and their promise to raise it in a godly fashion, teaching it the doctrines of their faith.
Water baptism is the persons public testimony that they have ask Jesus to come into their life. It does not save the person.
The baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs when the person believes the gospel of their salvation
(Eph 1:13.). Since there is only 1 baptism(Eph 4:5) that saves, it is Jesus's Baptism. When one is truly born again, they are saved before any water is applied.
Baptism of infants is more of the parents dedicating their child to the Lord, and their promise to raise it in a godly fashion, teaching it the doctrines of their faith.
Too bad the Bible doesn't say that, unless they Are referring the the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Last edited:
Catholic have not imposed baptism, God did, and it is not imposed on churches, it is imposed on individuals. Chuches don't baptize, men do the water baptism as seen by John the baptizer. Jesus does then only one that counts(Eph 4:5).
Let me add one thought; water baptism is the outward and public sign that the person has ask Jesus into their life. It is unfortunate that when baptism is mentioned, most assume it means water baptism. We should consider that many times it refers to Jesus's baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is not public.
That is because the Bible requires the baptism to be done in then name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Jumi
Well-Known Member
No they mean the water baptism when one is born. A second baptism would be disrespect of the original baptism. Well I'm just quoting directly, I'm not even Christian. I've been baptized though after I was born.
Follow your heart
For the dense ones. Catholics have imposed theire own wording for baptism, which carries a different meaning than the baptism set forth by the Apostles examples.
james bond
Well-Known Member
Poor baby
.Just my 2¢. I do not think you do even if it's a different Christian church.
What I've learned is the baptism, ceremonial with water or the spiritual kind, implies there is a change within. That's the key part.
I grew up Catholic in a parochial school and dealt with the guilt of sin until I rebelled at 13. Since then, I came back to Christianity in 2012 and have learned the key is to help others and find happiness.
Last edited:
Are you looking for baptism specifically, or would other ways of marking your newfound faith do?
Another way of putting it: it's hard to say whether you should get baptized without knowing what you want to accomplish with the baptism.