Is Infant Baptism Biblical?

Infant baptism is done in many types of churches. But the question is; Is this Biblical? Can an infant repent or believe as we see mentioned in the Bible?

If you feel led to support this ministry , you can do so here:

music youtube free: beat your competition

#IsInfantBaptismBiblical #InfantBaptism #BelieverBaptism

[saarapollonen]

Well I was born in a Lutheran family, deeply devouted Christians and I was baptized as a baby. They're reasoning was that they wanted me part of God's family and under His grace from early on. Also told me that it's the God's work in the baptism that counts, not my own or anyone's deeds since it's only based on mercy. I was praying and struggling with this and open my Bible from
Ephesians 4:5 that says "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" - I felt like God showed me this specifically, that I don't need another one. The one that my parents did out of love was enough.

[doraashby]

I was baptized as an infant in the UMC, but I view it as my parents making a promise to raise me in the Christian faith. In 2019 I made the decision to follow Jesus, and about two weeks ago I made the decision to be baptized as a believer.

[MrsDVK]

All three of my children were Dedicated to the Lord as infants. They grew up in church, Sunday school, bible study, Sunday sermons, and I taught them at home. I allowed them to make up their mind when they were ready for baptism without any pressure. I wanted to make sure they understood the significance of the act. They were baptized at different ages, but all made the decision before they were 13.

[popjawandOnly]

My former Lutheran pastor said his saliva fingered onto a forehead qualifies as "baptismal water." Yuk. I found that to be unbiblical and gross even *before* coronademic.

[J-PLeigh]

We gotta understand the context of who Peter was talking to in his sermon (Jewish adults that didnt believe in Christ) but also says the Promise is to you & your children, also we are told to have faith as a child so children do have faith, even great faith. Mat 19:14 Jesus said, let the little children come to Me, & do not HINDER them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven. I've been back & forth on this issue, but we want our children, even infants to be in our great faith as soon as possible. Many early church fathers practiced infant baptism, also the study of circumcision to baptism is an interesting study

[signposts]

The Bible doesn't need to have a doctrine of "infant baptism" as if children are a separate category of people in the church. The children of Christian parents are regarded as holy and as belonging to God (see 1 Corinthians 7:14; Ephesians 6:1). This is why there are commands specifically directed at children and instructions about their being brought up in the fear of the Lord towards parents (Ephesians 6:1-4, Colossians 3:20-21). The reality is children in the church are part of the church community. Ergo, baptizing them shouldn't be denied to them on the flimsy pretext that they can't repent or believe when the Bible says they can come to Jesus, are regarded as holy and be discipled a la Matthew 28:19 by their being brought up with the discipline and instruction that comes from God.

The simple truth is that the idea that little children can't repent or believe and therefore shouldn't be baptized has no biblical support whatsoever. Jesus already opened up the kingdom of Heaven to them when He said, “Let the children come to me. Don’t stop them! For the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to those who are like these children.” (Matthew 19:14 NLT). These words make one thing clear. The fact that children can and should be brought to Jesus because the kingdom of heaven also belongs to them. Keep in mind that Jesus is talking about the same kingdom of heaven He told Nicodemus no one can see unless they're born again of water and the spirit (see John 3:3-6). He here also commands that no one stop children from being brought to Him. There's just so much more on the side of baptizing children of Christians no matter their age than the side that exempts little children from participating fully in the commonwealth of believers.

[SGOV]

What people need to understand is that "household" can also rever to slaves and/or servants of a certain home. Not only or specific to wife and kids.

[dyerseve]

No. They cannot repent and it is not advised in scripture. It's that easy to understand.

[JCDiva]

it's just like asking people where in the Bible did Jesus tell us to celebrate His birth and there are no verses for it...people fight to celebrate Christmas without realizing that it is pagan...and when I tell people that we cannot rely on an infant baptism, i get yelled at...we have to confess that we are born again and get baptized...thanks for doing this video Sean.

[whisperstv]

I actually remember being baptized as a toddler at our Syrian Orthadox church and I def was not old enough to repent or know why it was happening, so it really has to be for the parents and grandparents similar to dedication, right?Idk, but why else would I still want to be baptized as an adult. Really great vid.💯👍All awesome points made👌Thank you so much🙏God bless you💛☺️.

[jchapman]

Nothing but a empty ritual. Stop being soft on the Catholic cult and other fallen denominations.
I'm sure many have been baptised prior to being a sinner, but it is not what saves us. You must be baptised in the spirit, you must believe in Jesus. Infants are pure, it is us who have grown old enough to choose the truth, that must be baptised.

[oracleoftroy]

A bit of a poor video for assuming the Bible restricts baptism for infants without any supporting evidence. The one thing everyone should agree with is that the clear pattern in Acts is that when someone came to belief, their household was baptized. Baptists need to argue for why none of these households contained infants and every baptized person believed. It can't just be assumed.

Noting that these are household baptisms is important especially if we read Acts 2: 38 and keep reading. Verse 39 uses the same formula given by God to Abraham when establishing circumcision in Gen 17, and the Jewish audience would have picked up on that. God instructed Abraham to not just circumcise the believer, but their children, even newborns after 8 days, and all the servants in their household, even the foreign ones born far off. Peter notes that the promises are to you, your children, and to those who are far off. Thus it is no surprise that the practice in Acts was the same as given in Gen 17, and since the Jews already understood God's word as given to Abraham, no additional instructions were needed. In fact, if the sign of God's covenant promises was no longer to be applied to infants, I would expect just as much controversy in the Bible around infant baptism as there was around circumcision, but there is complete silence on it.

[frankmckinley]

The greater question is why these huge missunderstanding of Scripture?! I submit it is because these various sects/denominations have no historical or linguistic, and cultural understanding of the passages in most cases.

[carlhaydock]

No it's not. Thats before I've even watched it.

[ComeOutOfHerMyPeople]

No. Baptism is for the remission of sins. Infants can’t acknowledge their sin natures and repent. End of.

[yuypergollece]

Hey Sean, I'm a Presbyterian. For quite a while I've been leaning over Reformed Baptist or Presbyterian prior to April because of this exact issue, and I settled on being a Presbyterian for I found infant baptism to be biblical. This is my own personal conviction and understanding from Scripture and from Church history (people need to stop thinking that we must abandon tradition for we all go by some sort of tradition; plus the early church demonstrates the practice of early Christians). Since I am a Presbyterian, I believe circumcision is succeeded by baptism. I can not give you the best information for infant baptism, but I suggest you to watch Matthew Everhard's videos on the Reformed view of Baptism and his 4 part video series on infant baptism alone. Matthew Everhard is a PCA pastor and has been a great influence in allowing me to understand why Presbyterians baptize infants. I do not expect you to believe infant baptism, but I think it'll show you our views on the topic and clear up anything if there are any misconceptions.
I know you watch, or have atleast seen, Bezelt3 and Bezelt3 is also a Presbyterian who has also covered infant baptism before.

I'd also like to mention a great deal of people, who are lost, have assurance of their salvation in infant baptism. As a result, many have come to oppose infant baptism for the result of false converts or apostates. As a Presbyterian, we affirm infant baptism does not save. The understanding that baptism does save comes from Catholics, Orthodox, and Lutherans. Also, one need to take into account the fact that the parent(s) who had the child baptize is also responsible. The parent is to raise their child up in the Christian faith teaching them true doctrine and such. If all the child knows as they grow up is that they are saved by baptism, of course they misunderstand. It is the parents' duty, under the authority of Christ, Who is of God, to raise their child up in the Christian faith teaching them sound doctrine and holy truth.

Tell me one bible verse where it says infants cannot be baptized. Do not give me some verse that says something else or what you think it means but give me one bible verse where it says directly do not get infants baptized.

[apologiaromana]

It says something when the majority of Christendom has practiced infant baptism and believe that is has a biblical basis for 2, 000 years

[ethankaryadi]

What about some Reformed churches? There’s a number of them that do teach infant baptism because it’s how they get inducted into God’s family or so I heard. I’d like to think that if I were to have children I’d probably teach them about what sin is and how they can find everlasting life through faith in Christ. The earlier they know the better. Blessings.

[timothyisraeldorr]

Thank you for the scriptural insight, brother Sean.