Baptisim

[overnight]

Ok call me stupid but what is it that the UMC (or close relatives ie naz, congo, etc.) believe about baptism and how it relates to salvation. DO you have to be baptized? Why do we baptise infants? Is this biblical? :help:
I would like to have a greater understanding and please try and not use too many $20 words. Thanks

[Reborn_in_Christ2003]

:priest: This is straight from the Nazarene website.:priest:

XII. Baptism
16. We believe that Christian baptism, commanded by our Lord, is a sacrament signifying acceptance of the benefits of the atonement of Jesus Christ, to be administered to believers and declarative of their faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior, and full purpose of obedience in holiness and righteousness.

Baptism being a symbol of the new covenant, young children may be baptized, upon request of parents or guardians who shall give assurance for them of necessary Christian training.

Baptism may be administered by sprinkling, pouring, or immersion, according to the choice of the applicant.

(Matthew 3:1-7; 28:16-20; Acts 2:37-41; 8:35-39; 10:44-48; 16:29-34; 19:1-6; Romans 6:3-4; Galatians 3:26-28; Colossians 2:12; 1 Peter 3:18-22)

[WesleyJohn]

.

[overnight]

:scratch: :confused:

I am still somewhat confused but I think I have the infant baptism part of it farily good. My big question is "Is water baptism nessasary for salvation?"

[elanor]

:scratch: :confused:

I am still somewhat confused but I think I have the infant baptism part of it farily good. My big question is "Is water baptism nessasary for salvation?"I have to go with Jesus on this one:

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. --John 3:16

I believe baptism is an outward sign of any inward commitment. Does it matter? Yes. Is it required for salvation? No.

One woman's opinion. :)

[WesleyJohn]

.

[wvmtnkid]

This is how I look at the issue: baptism is not a means of salvation. If it were, then you are believing that the water is the agent of salvation and not Jesus's death on the cross or Jesus's blood. Can you be saved and not be baptized? I think you can. The thief on the cross is why I believe that. It was his faith alone that saved him.

However I do believe that you should be baptized as a symbol of your committment to God. To me it is a declaration to the world of who you belong to. You are saying that you are God's and that you belong to Him.

[WesleyJohn]

.

[overnight]

:idea:
I think I have it now. It is about grace and sybolism not about salvation, per say. Thank you for helping me clear this issue up more. :bow:

[WesleyJohn]

.

[kayanne]

I came over here to the Wesleyan board specifically to ask a baptism question, and lo and behold you already have one going on. :)

I grew up in a UMC and was baptized as a baby. I never understood why though. I've been chatting with the catholics over on OBOB, and their belief is that the baptism itself actually brings salvation to the baby. (well, I'm probably not stating it exactly right, but the point is, if the baby has been baptized, then dies, they belief the baby will definitely go to heaven. If the baby had not been baptized, then no one can know for sure).

I am now a part of a church that teaches baptism in an outward symbol of an inward change, of one's acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior.

I can't quite figure out the UMC position on infant baptism. I've read this whol thread, but I'm still confused. :scratch: You don't believe it saves the baby, you believe it's an outward sign, right? An outward sign of what? The baby doesn't believe yet. Can someone help me understand this?

[Islander]

I guess I'm influenced by Calvinism on this subject but I believe in infant baptism despite coming from a Baptist background that said baptism should only be done after accepting Christ. The Bible puts a lot of emphasis on having a covenant relationship with God and in the OT that was symbolized by circumcision on the 8th day. In the NT baptism is that symbol. Also Luke 7:29-30 says those who had been baptized were more likely to accept Jesus's message than those who hadn't. Calvin could explain it better although I now disagree with many of his doctrines.

[ceedaisy]

I never thought an infant baptism would do any good and now after reading this thread I do! I get what is being said here! I myself was baptised as an infant, but never raised in Christian ways. I didn't even know I was supposed to accept Jesus. Now here I am saved and lovin every minute of it. So YES the Baptism does work on infants. What they are saying is that the Baptism helps guide the child into a Christian life sometime down the road. Keeping the heart open and waiting to hear the "Good News". I hope this helps!!

Thanks for this great thread!! :pray:

[wvmtnkid]

I can't quite figure out the UMC position on infant baptism. I've read this whol thread, but I'm still confused. :scratch: You don't believe it saves the baby, you believe it's an outward sign, right? An outward sign of what? The baby doesn't believe yet. Can someone help me understand this?
My understanding of infant baptism is that the parents are dedicating the child to God, vowing to have him or her brought up in the church and in a Christian household, and asking the church to take part in the bringing up of the child. When the child later goes through the confirmation process, they are affirming this decision for themselves. During the confirmation service, if you, the child, have already been baptized, you are called on to remember your baptism and the vows that were made.

I am not against infant baptism, but since I have been working with our youth in the confirmation class for the past few years, several of them who were baptized as infants have told me they wish they were not because they don't remember anything about it. They want to remember their baptism. I was baptized when I was confirmed so I have a fairly good memory of what happened. I think if I ever have children, I will have some type of dedication ceremony while they are infants, but I will wait until they are older to let them be baptized, when they will have a memory of it.

[kayanne]

I was baptized when I was confirmed so I have a fairly good memory of what happened. I think if I ever have children, I will have some type of dedication ceremony while they are infants, but I will wait until they are older to let them be baptized, when they will have a memory of it.

I agree with you on that. I was still in the Meth church when our children were born, and we asked the pastor if we could do a dedication ceremony instead of baptism. We explained our reasons, and he said "Well, I've never heard of anyone doing that, but I like your thoughts on it." He helped us write the words, and after we did the dedication ceremony, it started "catching on" at that church. It was 18 years ago that we dedicated our first son. It was wonderful to see him grow in his faith as a child, and then come to a point where he *chose* baptism for himself!
For me, baptized as a baby, I chose to be baptized (immersed) as an adult, and it also was a wonderful experience. I think that everyone should be given the opportunity to choose and consciously participate in their baptism (even if they were baptized as a baby).

[ceedaisy]

My son is two and half and I didn't have the infant baptism, I did the Dedication! And I was Baptised again three years ago! And being baptised has totally changed my life!

[Celticflower]

Personally, I have a problem with the idea of being "re-baptized". I was baptized as an infant and confirmed as a youth. Knowing I had been baptized as an infant always gave me a sense of security and acceptance, esp. in the teen years. I was overwhelmed by the idea that my parents loved me so much that they would have made the committment for me. I have tried to live up to their, and later, my committment to God. I have never seen a need to be baptized again, even tho the church we currently atttend will not accept my baptism. Whenever it is brought up, I get the overwhelming feeling that it would be wrong. Maybe because of our current church's view on baptism and tying the form to whether or not you can be a member.

Llike I said, this is just me personally. If you have been re-baptized and feel it has added to your spiritual life, I am happy for you. But at this point the original is just fine with me.

Celtie

[kayanne]

:pink: Personally, I have a problem with the idea of being "re-baptized". I was baptized as an infant and confirmed as a youth. Knowing I had been baptized as an infant always gave me a sense of security and acceptance, esp. in the teen years. I was overwhelmed by the idea that my parents loved me so much that they would have made the committment for me. I have tried to live up to their, and later, my committment to God. I have never seen a need to be baptized again, even tho the church we currently atttend will not accept my baptism. Whenever it is brought up, I get the overwhelming feeling that it would be wrong. Maybe because of our current church's view on baptism and tying the form to whether or not you can be a member.

Llike I said, this is just me personally. If you have been re-baptized and feel it has added to your spiritual life, I am happy for you. But at this point the original is just fine with me.



Celtie

Celtie, I can totally understand what you are saying. The church that I am in now in does require baptism *after* one's acceptance of Christ as Savior (ie not infant baptism) and it must be immersion (they hold to the definition of baptism which means "to immerse.") For 3 years at this church, I would not go through "another baptism" just so I could "join" that church (since "church membership" is not really mentioned in the Bible anyway). I knew that being baptized just to join a church would not be right, plus I felt like it would be real "slap in the face" to my parents to be baptized as an adult, as if I was saying "the baptism you had for me as an infant wasn't good enough." I did not want to offend or hurt them.

But I did eventually get to a point where I came to view baptism differently than I had before. I studied all the Scriptures I could find about baptism, and I eventually got to the point where I truly wanted to be baptized out of obedience to the Scriptures, not out of obedience to church rules. I don't say that I was "re-baptized" (I personally don't like that phrase). Though others view it differently, I really don't consider what my parents had for me as a "baptism." I consider it to have been more like a dedication. Many verses that speak of "repent and be baptized" said *to me* that my repentance needed to be there first, then the baptism.
I totally respect others who feel that infant baptism is acceptable, that it is a parallel to Jewish infant circumcision, or other explanations I've heard. I'm not trying to "prove" that anyone should be "re-baptized," but rather just sharing my thoughts and my journey.

[ceedaisy]

These are all very good points of view. I also do not agree with just doing it because the Church says so. It is an act of obedience. I just feel that being baptised as an infant isn't an act of obedience on the receivers part. When you are past the age of innocence, it is time to speak for yourself and declare on your own where your heart lies. Well I don't feel like I made sense, but hey I tried!

[kayanne]

These are all very good points of view. I also do not agree with just doing it because the Church says so. It is an act of obedience. I just feel that being baptised as an infant isn't an act of obedience on the receivers part. When you are past the age of innocence, it is time to speak for yourself and declare on your own where your heart lies. Well I don't feel like I made sense, but hey I tried!

I think you made perfect sense, and I agree completely.

[Celticflower]

When you are past the age of innocence, it is time to speak for yourself and declare on your own where your heart lies. Well I don't feel like I made sense, but hey I tried!


That is where confirmation comes in.

When I was in confirmation class there was one night when the minister asked us point blank "is this truely what you believe, or are you here because it is expected or your parents made you come?" At that point anyone in the class could have turned their back and walked away. No one did, but we did take the time to examine our own hearts and make an honest declaration of our faith. Maybe this is why I feel no need for another water baptism. The "public declaration" that the church I attend stresses has already been done.

(of course, I also disagree with the tying of baptism by immersion to salvation, but at the moment I am ultra confused about their stand. The preacher has been preaching salvation by faith alone :confused: . So I'm not sure WHAT they believe.)

[ceedaisy]

I think you made perfect sense, and I agree completely.
Thank You Kayanne! I try my darndest! :D :blush:

[ceedaisy]

That is where confirmation comes in.

When I was in confirmation class there was one night when the minister asked us point blank "is this truely what you believe, or are you here because it is expected or your parents made you come?" At that point anyone in the class could have turned their back and walked away. No one did, but we did take the time to examine our own hearts and make an honest declaration of our faith. Maybe this is why I feel no need for another water baptism. The "public declaration" that the church I attend stresses has already been done.

(of course, I also disagree with the tying of baptism by immersion to salvation, but at the moment I am ultra confused about their stand. The preacher has been preaching salvation by faith alone :confused: . So I'm not sure WHAT they believe.)
I do not know what confirmation is. Is that where you have already been baptised before, but when you pass the age of innocence you declare your faith pubically without baptism?

Now I'm not going to touch on how baptisms should be done. I know people are deathly afraid of water. I think you should put your faith in Jesus and do the immersion. (and think of it this way, no one died from it! ^_^ ) One girl in my baptismal party wanted to be sprinkled and she went first. After seeing the second girl go, she actually asked to go again and do a full immersion. I thought that was awesome, and being obedient to her spirit! What an awesome thing to see right before my eyes!

On the salvation part, Baptism does not give you salvation. Only Jesus can do that if you repent your sins. Baptism is not a way into Heaven, but is an act of obedience and in my case has erased all my guilty feelings of my "past life" and has helped me walk a bit closer to God.

What a great discussion! What great thoughts everyone has!! I wish everyone could get baptised and have their life changed like mine did!! :clap:

[suzie]

We have been attending a Methodist church and this is one of the reasons we havent joined. Infant baptism. Well the sacramentals in general. Although none of them are core Christian values, they are the means that you live out your faith. I have not found Scipture to support infant baptism, nor needing consecration, confirmation, etc, etc.....

Please note I am really not trying to bash your denomination, and in reality, many of the devouts that attend this church actually do not believe in these either. The assistant pastor as well. I found that very interesting.

[Celticflower]

I do not know what confirmation is. Is that where you have already been baptised before, but when you pass the age of innocence you declare your faith pubically without baptism?
[


Pretty much. After a course of study (about 8 weeks) that touches on the history of the church and its beliefs, you are given the opportunity to confirm your infant baptism, without water. Some people at this point reject all church teaching and fall away, but the majority choose to confirm the baptism with a public declaration of faith and become full members of the church.

Sometimes I think the differing ways people are raised is what leads to the baptismal conflicts we seem to find. If you were baptized as an infant, but never set foot in a church again until many years and hard falls later, then I can see being re-baptized.
But if you were raised in the church, never had that massive falling away/lost time were confirmed as a teen and held fast to your faith it is hard to see the need for it.

And just because one church does it one way and the church down the road does it another does not mean that one church is all right and the other all wrong. I think it all depends on the heart of the individual and their relationship with God, not on churches, ceremonies or amount of water.

I have felt God leading me to do many things. Until he leads me to the "bapistry" (something I have asked for direction on in prayer), then I will assume things are fine as they stand, remember my infant baptism and confirmation and rejoice in what God has done for me.

Celtie

[ceedaisy]

Thank you Celtic Flower. Then I was confirmed when I joined my church! Phew, hard for me to get all the words down right sometimes.

You explained it very well! And you are exactly right, when no one is right or wrong! All of our main focus is on God!