When to Baptize...

Contact Brother Stacy Shiflett, Pastor of Pleasantview Baptist in Taylors, SC. He was a missionary kid, served on the mission field in S. Africa for 6 1/2 years and now pastors. His testimony is that he was saved at 4 years old.

He can be reached on pleasantview.org

I invite you to correspond with him on this matter.

If God is dealing with a 4 year old, I'm sure He knows what He's doing.:godisgood:

 

Is there a Bible verse that reads something like, "It is expedient for thee to be baptized, speedily go thou into the water"???

 

I was only referring to my own church, for I do not know the partricular practices of many others.

Ed

 

Remember that baptism is obedience and is a sign of commitment; it's not a sign of being saved.

One of the best examples that we have in Scriptures is Jesus, who was baptized at 30 when he was prepared to enter his ministry.

Can a 4 year old believe on the Lord Jesus and be saved? I think so, at least in some cases. In others, they don't quite have the capacity.

But, can a 4 year old be a believer (present tense) including the faithfulness and obedience that that requires, and make a commitment to do that for the rest of his life?

I know 30 year olds who have been saved since they were 5 or 6 who aren't ready for that.

 

I was careful to say that I doubt that "the average 4 or 5-year-old" has much insight into spiritual things.

I was also careful to say "I'm sure there are exceptions."

I have been a member of the same church for 44 years. During that time I have seen a significant number of members who made professions of faith at 6-7-8, even 9 years old, come back a few years later to say they were under conviction, and that they were not saved. One of them was my wife. Two others were deacons.

When 5-year-old wants to talk about being saved, listen to those warning bells and watch for the red flags. Parents and pastors should move verrrrry slowly.

 

Not that I can find. The nearest seems to be the words of Ananias to Paul/Saul in Acts 22.16:

‘And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’​

Could that be the verse you were thinking of?

 

I agree that baptism is an example of commitment in obedience, but it is surely an outward sign of what Christ's death and resurrection have accomplished in the believer's life. Chapter 24 of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith says:

I. Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with Him, in His death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into Him;[1] of remission of sins;[2] and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.[3]

1. Rom. 6:3-5; Col. 2:12; Gal. 3:27
2. Mark 1:4; Acts 22:16
3. Rom. 6:4​

I am also uneasy about your statement about Jesus being baptised at the age of 30. Surely you are not suggesting that He was "uncommitted" before then. At the age of 12, He was "about His Father's business," for instance.

It could well be, though, that I have misunderstood your words. If so, it's my fault, not yours, and I apologise.

 

That's why we've gone progressive and use baptistries now Bro. Bob.:laugh:

There's one PB church in Houston that even heats up their water.

 

The evidence of the simultaneous baptism of the Holy Spirit is particularly evident during wintertime outdoor baptisms. Many more people come up out of the water leaping and running to embrace those on the shore, who for some reason throw blankets at them and run away.

:godisgood: <--------signs and wonders!!

 

:godisgood: <--------signs and wonders!!

 

Just an observation:

I've quizzed a lot of adults in classes, asking how many made a profession of faith before age thirteen. Then I ask how many of those had to go through the process again after age eighteen because they weren't sure of their earlier experience. It's somewhere between 75% and 100%. And ours is a tradition that doesn't emphasize emotion, high pressure, or "blue socks" altar calls (If you need salvation, you come on this verse. If you need rededication... if you want to pray for someone... if you love your mother... if you have a mother... if you're wearing blue socks... etc.)

So what's happening with these re-professional Christians? I think it has something to do with affective development in adolescent psychology. Don't ask me what. Most psychology sounds like witchcraft to me, anyway.

Our church and its families teach the children carefully and intensively. Most of them are converted young and baptized within a week or two. The little squirts purtnere need a seahorse or inner tube or something just to paddle out to where the pastor stands in the baptistry. Closest thing to infant baptism I've seen in a Baptist church.

I haven't been here long enough to see what fifteen-to-twenty years brings forth in the lives of these young baptizees, but I've seen plenty of oldsters walking the aisle, confessing that they'd lost faith in their original experience, and asking for rebaptism. And I've seen a few of the little ones do it as well.

I favor delaying baptism.

 

Well, baptism obviously has nothing to do with getting saved, or showing that you're saved or anything such as that; Jesus didn't need it.

However, when did he get baptized?

It was when he was prepared to enter into his public ministry.

It wasn't when he was a child and left at the temple and was about his father's business.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, his baptism is the first time (chronologically) that he's directly called a "son". (Position, not relationship.) The heading of Mark says "the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God", but it is after the fact that he's been revealed as a son.)

 

I do hope no one is considering Jesus to be a normal case...

Pipedude, you are noticing something I have seen for years. For many years I worked with teen groups in church. I have seen young teens who seemed totally on fire for the Lord drop out like autumn leaves in their late teens or twenties. And I have seen teen rebels who, within a few years, have done what appears to be a 180 degree about face and become committed adult Christians. Then, of course, there are those who come from Christian families, make an early profession of faith and simply reconfirm it later. And there are those who are rebels at an early age and just keep on going down that path their entire lives.

God indicated something important about that late teen/early twenty age when He declared that the age of twenty marked the division between those Israelites who would die in the wilderness after escaping Egypt and their children who would be allowed into the Promised Land.

Look at children and young teens. Why do they do what they do? Because they want to please someone -- Mom, Dad, friends... -- or to escape punishment, or to get a reward, or for emotional reasons, etc. The concepts of right and wrong apart from what they are told by Mom, Dad, teachers, friends, and such, are not part of a child's life. The law, or Law, as apart from the people around them comes into play in the late teens to early twenties. Interestingly, this is also the time when the brain has finally finished rewiring, which it does during the teen years. There are massive physiological changes in the neuron connections during the teen years -- which is why so many of them seem to check out to another planet for a few years!

In Romans 7, Paul says he was alive until the Law came, and then sin sprang to life and he died. Does that mean he did not sin before? No, it does not. But it does mean that sin did not have the power to separate him from God (spiritual life) until the law came into his life and he could, and would, consciously rebel against it. And that happens in the late teens/early twenties. It is then that a person starts responding to the law instead of another person. It is then when he or she is capable of responding that way.

So while it is charming and heartwarming when a youngster makes a profession of faith, it is not nearly the same thing as a young (or old) adult making that profession. So when should a person be baptized? That, I guess, is up to the church and the pastor involved. I can understand baptizing children who declare their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, but I can also understand waiting until the later teens to do any baptisms. I probably depends on whether the church/pastor think that baptism has to do with a public announcement of a declaration of faith or if it has to do with the testimony of a repentant sinner who has turned to the Lord.

 

Christian = Christ-like

Why should we not emulate his example?

I know that for me, I was saved when I was 9 years old. I had a retired seminary professor start teaching me Greek, etc. I've always been odd in that I pick up things like that. I was reading real books by the time I was 6, and my favorite books were (and still are) history books, encyclopedias, science books, etc.

As a teen, I rebelled. The pastor at the church died, we moved to an SBC church which taught salvational security as a license to sin ("it doesn't matter what you do, we're all treated just the same!"), along with other unbiblical junk.

I ran fast and I ran far.

However, I came back. I was converted (only a saved person is capable of converting, because "converting" is turning back to the right path), and gave my life to the Lord. It was at that poing that I should have been baptized, not when I was first saved.

You seem to be forgetting that those over 20 were already in the Promised Land, and that's where they perished.

Batpism is not a salvation issue. In picture and type, the children of Israel were already saved.

Before they set foot outside their homes in Goshen, they were already in the Promised Land. They were baptized in the Red Sea, after they set out on their journey. After proving unfaithful, they perished in the wilderness, and the better part of their inheritance, the Land Flowing with Milk and Honey, went to those who were under 20.

There were two lands promised: One based on nothing other than being in the family. (Saved.) The second was based on being faithful. It was a better promise, but was contingent upon works. (Kingdom.)

I think we should use the examples we are given. Was Jesus baptized as an infant? Are we given any specific examples in Scriptures in which a young child was baptized? Are we given any examples in which a person who did not understand the full implications was baptized?

 

But Jesus, though fully Man, is also fully God. No He didn't need to be saved (and I must assure you that no way do I believe that baptism saves a person anyway. I wouldn't be a baptist if I did. This was exactly why John the Baptizer was at first reluctant to baptize Him. But don't we need to be extremely careful here? Jesus didn't need to die (in the sense that He had no sins of His own), yet He did. He wasn't forced by God the Father to leave the sinless glory of heaven and come to this sinful world, being laid in an animals' feeding-trough, yet He did it as part of redemption's glorious plan to save sinners. Jesus gave the answer to the question of why He was baptized in Matthew 3.13-15:

13 ¶ Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan to be baptized by him.
14 And John tried to prevent Him, saying, "I need to be baptized by You, and are You coming to me?"
15 But Jesus answered and said to him, "Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." Then he allowed Him.​

Yet baptism is linked so often in the bible with belief.

I'm beginning to ramble - maybe you think that all of the above message is just a long ramble - so I'll come to a close by asking if tHope-of-Glory's belief (that Christian baptism is not a sign of having been saved, but only of committment to Jesus Christ) is one which is widespread. I must admit that this is the first time I've encountered it.

 

Hope of Glory, I was honestly stunned by some of what you wrote.

1. Of course we should emulate Christ, but none of us IS Him. We cannot consideer His experiences normal for us, for none of us is divine in nature as well as being human in nature.

2. You consider that you were saved at nine. I would argue that you were not lost yet at nine.

3. To convert is to turn TO something, not to turn BACK to it. For instance, those Mormons who convert to Catholicism were never 'always Catholics.' (I'm purposely staying away from Christianity here to avoid the Calvinist arguments)

4. The Promised Land was NOT anything but Palestine and the surrounding area. At least according to the Bible. You, evidently, have made up your own definitions about a number of things.

5. You wrote, and I read to my husband, "There were two lands promised: One based on nothing other than being in the family. (Saved.) The second was based on being faithful. It was a better promise, but was contingent upon works. (Kingdom.)" And his first reaction was a strong, "WHAT??"

First of all, there is no promise implied in being born into a family. A person is not saved because of the family he is born into. The fact is that John, in his Gospel, tells us that believers are then ADOPTED into the Family of God. No one but Christ was born into it as a human (and He is God, so that point is somewhat moot). Being faithful and doing the works God has prepared for us to do is to HIS glory, not ours. We can win or lose rewards/crowns, but that has nothing to do with our eternal destiny. If you are saved -- if anyone is saved -- then that person is being transformed, slowly sometimes but surely, into the image of Christ (Romans 8:28-30), for the Holy Spirit is faithful in His work -- Phil. 1:6. Those who are part of the family of God will all be with Him eternally. If where He is is not His Kingdom, then what is?

There will clearly be greater and lesser in His Kingdom, as Jesus tells us in Matthew 5, but the point is that they will ALL, who are His, be there.

 

Helen I'm sure HoG will respond to you, but I think you have misunderstood some of what he was trying to say, but I would like to address some of your responses.

Yes we can win/lose rewards/crows and that does not have anything to do with our eternal destiny that is correct. However it has everything to do with our kingdom destiny. You are advocating what the majority of Christendom advocates and that is an absolute sanctification process and a 100% participation in the coming kingdom of Christ, neither of which is supported by Scripture.

The sanctification process is not guaranteed, and not all of the saved will receive the inheritance of the kingdom. Unfortunately that is a terrible misunderstanding in Christendom today, which has led to many problems in other ares of doctrine.

Yes all saved folks will spend eternity with Christ (not in heaven either, but that's being discussed in another thread :laugh, but not all saved folks will have a part in the kingdom. This is evidenced throughout Scripture in both the OT and NT. The biggest example is that of the children of Israel that died off in the wilderness because of their unfaithfulness and unbelief.

You can also see this in the forfeiture of the inheritance from Esau and Reuben. Basically the entirety of the NT is showing us how to live so that we can make our calling and election sure. Paul even tells us he doesn't want to be a castaway at the end of his race of the faith.

 

Hope of Glory said......

I assure you that I have NEVER heard that salvational security is a license to sin in any church, conference, meeting, assembly, any other Christian function, or among family members and friends, formal and informal. That may be what you thought you heard, but I have significant doubts that the pastor stated it that way, based upon my life-long experience in the church. There may well have been some unbiblical junk going on; I don't believe your comment about a license to sin was one of them. I submit that you can contact any SBC pastor who believes OSAS without finding one who will agree with what you have stated here. If you do, please provide his name, address, telephone number, or E-Mail address.

Thanks!

 

IMO, and an opinion only is all it is: When dealing with children and salvation one must be very careful/prayerful. As one poster mentioned, children want to please and are inclined to do what brings approval from others: Children are also very sensitive to rejection; and much of what they understand about God and their relationship to him comes from their relationship to their parents. It helps if adults know this and are careful in their own conduct and instruction regarding the tender leading of children, but it would seem wrong to draw conclusion based solely on a childs age, and only God knows the heart.

Be that as it may, it is essential that a child who willingly comes to Christ and makes a profession, is not turned away, but receives instruction and guidance into knowledge of the Scriptures. Consider teaching directly from the scriptures and ask him questions regarding how he understands it to be saying and present questions on his level for him to ponder and return with an answer, plus guide him to the right answers in the Scriptures.

I refuse to be a KJV only person and yet I love the beauty of that version, the simplicity and ease of understanding its vocabulary when I was a young child, plus the ease of memory (for one who has always been challenged). With so many different versions to choose from, and some churches now prefer one particular version over another, while others site different versions...... It causes a confusion for memory work. But the Scripture which went into my heart as a child, comes forth in my conscience and helps me question when something isn't sound. So knowledge and study of scriptures at an early age helps establish a firm foundation on which to live.
------------
I question the theory of the Israelites being baptised in the Red Sea. Why? Because they didn't get wet. :lol:
----------------------------
Samuel was dedicated to the LORD, actually before conception by the promise of his mother, and delivered to the priest Eli shortly after weaning, by his mother Hannah.

Jesus admonished his disciples to suffer (or have patience with and hinder not) the little children to 'come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of Heaven'[forgive me if I be in error of the Hebrew or Greek meanings .....as I am not a scholar of the languages]. Care must be exercised when accepting a child's faith or understanding that the child does not perceive rejection, not is he falsely reassured.

Personally, I think whether 'real' or not, the acknowledgement of Christ as his Savior by a young child, is a statement of faith, and whether the child continues or not, is something that has brought him personnally to God's attention and may impart some blessing that he who has started a good thing (the Holy Spirit) will not rest until it is completed. Therefore, accept a child where he is: Is he saved? He will tell you. If he is uncertain, inquire of his understanding and have patience to carefully listen: Reinforce the essentials of doctrine and of salvation, being careful to neither impress him with a false assurrance or to legalize his walk with God into doubts and fears of judgement instead of directing towards repentance.



-------------------
The baptism of Jesus was essential to his ministry and the fullfillment of the scriptures. Why? Because he is our High Priest! He satisfied the law in himself, coming to the Jews first then also to the Gentiles. The priest in the temple were required by Jewish/the laws of Moses to be of certain age. Also they must be annointed. Also there was a ritual bath which took place in preparation for their annointing. Now we could ask ourselves whether any of these rituals impart a righteousness to a believer.....no the righteousness we have is that bought and clothed upon us by our precious Lord. So then baptism is not an act of faith but an act of identification and obedience. But this is a stumbling block for the Jews, who do not realize that Jesus was also an annointed priest by God, and legally satisfied the law regarding the office of high priest. See Luke 3: 21-22.

We have two geneologies for Jesus. Luke 3 traces him back to Adam 'which was the son of God'. Matt 1 traces his geneology back to Abraham. One is that of Mary and the other is the geneology of Joseph. Why is this important? For us it may not seem significant, but the Father by whom the children are conceived is the blood line in their veins. (i.e. genetics and blood type: The Bible is not a science book, but good science does not conflict with the Bible.) If the life (nature to sin?) is in the blood, so is the judgement of death which passed upon all mankind in the judgement in the garden. But Jesus's Father was God who is the only one who could supply the pure blood line, the blood of the lamb of God, pure, untainted, without blemish, without judgement, that could take away the sins of the world.

[This I want to study more as Jesus was of the lineage of David, but was he also of priestly lineage, which would answer another stumbling block to the Jews, as their priest required a certain geneology? Though we know that this is not necessary to our belief and acceptance, it may be significant to our semantic friends.]

 

Thanks, windwatcher. Nice start. I'll look forward to your followup.

:wavey: