• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Sermon #1310 Is Infant Baptism Biblical? Infant baptism is a doctrine linked to the erroneous idea that we discussed last week, namely, that babies inherit the sin of Adam. The “Catholic Church” recognizes that baptism washes away sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). Since they teach that infants inherit original sin, they have also taught that babies must be baptized. But, if this is true, since life begins at conception, then any infant not baptized due to an abortion, miscarriage, or death in early childhood would stand before God in sin. The Scriptures plainly and repeatedly teach that sin (and only sin!) can separate us from God (Isaiah 59:1-2; Romans 6:23; Galatians 5:19-21). The April 20, 2007 edition of the Vatican City Catholic News Service reported on the Vatican’s International Theological Commission that was wrestling with the fate of unbaptized infants in light of the doctrine of original sin. The article reads: “In the fifth century, St. Augustine concluded that infants who die without baptism were consigned to hell. By the 13th century, theologians referred to the ‘limbo of infants’ as a place where unbaptized babies were deprived of the vision of God, but did not suffer because they did not know what they were deprived of.” In other words, since it didn’t seem right to send unbaptized babies with their inherited sin to heaven, but didn’t quite seem right to send infants to hell, either, the leading voices in the Catholic church came up with door number three. How unfortunate for the Catholic families with unbaptized infants who passed away that this Roman Catholic commission could report no better news than, “It must be clearly acknowledged that the church does not have sure knowledge about the salvation of unbaptized infants who die.” The next day Nicole Winfield reported in an Associated Press release, “Pope Benedict XVI has reversed centuries of traditional Roman Catholic teaching on limbo, approving a Vatican report released Friday that says there were ‘serious’ grounds TO HOPE that children who die without being baptized can go to heaven.” A USA Today analysis of the report read, “No one can know for certain what becomes of unbaptized babies since Scripture is largely silent on the matter.” Those who trust in Scripture over uninspired religious leaders never had to worry about the fate of unbaptized infants. Jesus taught that little children were innocent and citizens of the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 18:3, "Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” Again Jesus says in Matthew 19:14, "Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven." Surely, we understand Jesus was not instructing children to become like children; He was referring to the mature among us who have personally committed sin. We consult Scripture and even leading authorities in religious institutions that practice infant baptism, after our song... Should babies be baptized? There is only one baptism (Ephesians 4:5) and that baptism is to “wash away sins” (Acts 2:38; 22:16). Therefore, if babies have sins, they MUST be baptized to wash away those sins, but if those babies do not have sins, then infant baptism introduces a second baptism in contradiction to the Spirit’s words in Ephesians 4:5. 1 Is Infant Baptism Biblical, by Brett Hickey, sermon # 1310 2 of 6 We find several prerequisites for the one baptism taught in the New Testament. The one baptism presented by the Holy Spirit must meet these prerequisites (Jude 1:3). One reason the Holy Spirit presents thousands of examples of men and women being baptized but NEVER an example of a baby being baptized is because baptism was always preceded by faith. Jesus said in Mark 16:16, “He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; he that does not believe shall be damned.” In the Ethiopian eunuch’s conversion (Acts 8:34-38), after hearing Philip the evangelist preach Christ, the eunuch exclaimed, “Here is water; what hinders me from being baptized?” Philip responded, “IF YOU BELIEVE with all your heart, you may.” Infants are incapable of belief, and cannot, therefore, be scripturally baptized. Furthermore, one must repent before he can be baptized. In Acts 2:38, Peter preached, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins…” Infants, however, as we noticed last week, are without sin, are incapable of recognizing sin, and so, would be incapable of repentance. Moreover, those who say babies are born with the stain of sin have not carefully considered the implications. First of all, NO ONE stained with sin can enter heaven. Period! Sin separates us from God (Isaiah 59:1-2). And if, as some claim, we inherit the guilt of Adam’s sin (and not merely the earthly consequences), then Mary, the wife of Joseph was stained with inherited sin. New doctrines were invented (like the Immaculate Conception) to accommodate the obvious logical flaws of this false doctrine. The Catholic Encyclopedia tells us “In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin." This doctrine was not pronounced in the FIRST century by Jesus or the apostles, but in the 19TH CENTURY by so-called Pope Pius IX. Way too late to be inspired New Testament teaching! Since Jesus was born of Mary and took on flesh (John 1:14; Romans 1:3), and since the Apostle Paul insists in Hebrews 2:14, 17, Jesus had to be made like us in ALL THINGS, the doctrine of original sin would suggest Jesus was tainted with sin from conception. This CANNOT be the case! The Holy Spirit points out in 2 Corinthians 5:21, “For He made [Jesus] who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” The doctrine of original sin or total hereditary depravity contradicts Holy Spirit teaching. Next, the one baptism the Apostle Paul taught must be preceded by confessing that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (Matthew 10:32; Acts 8:34-38). Of course, infants cannot speak; nor can they connect the dots to make a confession. Infants, therefore, fail to meet yet another prerequisite of New Testament baptism. Similarly, Jesus taught in Matthew 28 that DISCIPLES were to be baptized. Infants are unable to begin the process of discipleship. Bottom line: when we read the Bible we have to decide to believe what we have always believed--no matter what!--or to follow the truth wherever it leads. Which is it with you? 2 Is Infant Baptism Biblical, by Brett Hickey, sermon # 1310 3 of 6 The reason we have so many divisions in Christianity today is because people stubbornly take the first approach no matter how clearly Scripture contradicts their previous doctrinal positions. Catholic authorities recognize the importance of understanding a religious ordinance before participating in it. In fact, they do not let small children partake of the Lord’s Supper. Consider this excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia: The existing legislation with regard to the Communion of children has been definitely settled by the Fourth Lateran Council, which was afterwards confirmed by the authority of the Council of Trent. According to its provisions children may not be admitted to the Blessed Eucharist until they have attained to years of discretion, but when this period is reached then they are bound to receive this sacrament. When may they be said to have attained the age of discretion? In the best-supported view of theologians this phrase means, not the attainment of a definite number of years, but rather the arrival at a certain stage in mental development, when children become able to discern the Eucharistic from ordinary bread, to realize in some measure the dignity and excellence of the Sacrament… https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04170b.htm The reason that there is no Bible for baby baptism is that babies cannot discern its significance and make a faith-based decision. Is it not as important for participants to understand the meaning of baptism as it is to understand the meaning of the Lord’s Supper? Next, prominent Catholic and denominational scholars from religious groups that practice infant baptism make some honest admissions: Roman Catholic Bishop of Baltimore, Francis Patrick Kenrick, writes in his Treatise on Baptism, “Whether infants should be baptized, cannot be inferred with certainty from the words of the commission...But, then, it may be asked, on what authority can they be baptized? If the commission [does] not regard them, they are necessarily beyond its reach, and the attempt to baptize them is an unauthorized measure” (1843, 128-129). J. J. Dollinger, a Roman Catholic Professor of Church History in the University of Bonn, Germany, confessed in his book, The First Age of Christianity and the Church, "There is no proof or hint in the New Testament that the Apostles baptized infants or ordered them to be baptized. When the baptism of whole households is spoken of, it is left doubtful whether they contained little children, and whether, if so, these also were baptized" (325). Joseph Langen, Roman Catholic Professor of Theology in Bonn University in his 1893 letter to J.

Load more

  6

Copy Link