Why Some Churches Practice Infant Baptism and others do not.

[mike]

A church or an individual loses absolutely nothing by not practicing infant baptism. An innocent infant child is blessed, innocent, and holy in the eyes of God whether or not he is baptized. Of such is the kingdom of heaven, Jesus said.

[Judas Maccabeus]

The fact that Jews of OT had evil and went to war did not make the religion itself Apostate. You do need to learn the difference.

The Religion is Christianity, not Orthodox.
The fact that Orthodoxy is corrupt and wages war against their so called brothers does not impact Christianity but it does make them apostate.

Those who were apostate were not pardoned or shown mercy just because they belonged to Abrahams seed. Nor does God spare the corrupt because they had hands laid upon through history back to possibly the apostles.

All that has nothing to do with the ancient practice of baptizing a Christians infants & children and the other "Protestant" denominations that believe to do so too, which is what this topic was about. Bad behavior does not negate what was taught. We have visited probably 12 different Orthodox congregations. We spent about a year in one and visit periodically and these are very devout Christians. I refuse to see these people as Apostate no matter what's going on. Jesus did not write off the Jews nor did Paul because they messed up and God did command war so that doesn't make their teachings wrong - any more than bad Jews made the teachings wrong

If they are so devout, how come they openly support war? Against each other?

Infant baptism was not practiced by the apostles, you cannot prove otherwise, so that is the MORE ancient tradition.

I would be able to successfully defend the position that what we know as the Orthodox Church (which is anything but);did not exist before 1054, and they have altered their inalterable rites in 1652, particularly In Russia.

[Josh]

The fact some Anabaptists become apostate and turn to Eastern Orthodoxy is not an endorsement of it at all. I will take EO seriously once I see them get together and decide to end this war between Russia and the Ukraine.

The fact that Jews of OT had evil and went to war did not make the religion itself Apostate. You do need to learn the difference.

Russia and Ukraine’s war with each other is complete apostasy. And the Eastern Orthodox on both sides bless and condone troops going to war.

And J M is right - they changed a bunch of traditions. The Old Believers try to stick to the older ones. Which group is right? The EO hierarchy simply claims “We are the authorities so whatever we say is right.”

[Valerie]

The Religion is Christianity, not Orthodox.
The fact that Orthodoxy is corrupt and wages war against their so called brothers does not impact Christianity but it does make them apostate.

Those who were apostate were not pardoned or shown mercy just because they belonged to Abrahams seed. Nor does God spare the corrupt because they had hands laid upon through history back to possibly the apostles.

All that has nothing to do with the ancient practice of baptizing a Christians infants & children and the other "Protestant" denominations that believe to do so too, which is what this topic was about. Bad behavior does not negate what was taught. We have visited probably 12 different Orthodox congregations. We spent about a year in one and visit periodically and these are very devout Christians. I refuse to see these people as Apostate no matter what's going on. Jesus did not write off the Jews nor did Paul because they messed up and God did command war so that doesn't make their teachings wrong - any more than bad Jews made the teachings wrong

If they are so devout, how come they openly support war? Against each other?

Infant baptism was not practiced by the apostles, you cannot prove otherwise, so that is the MORE ancient tradition.

I would be able to successfully defend the position that what we know as the Orthodox Church (which is anything but);did not exist before 1054, and they have altered their inalterable rites in 1652, particularly In Russia.

We don't discuss war. There are Orthodox against what's happening and you know that. God obviously didn't oppose war. I don't question God about that- why he wanted Jews to kill others.

You're entitled to your opinion, I just think it is incorrect and I don't agree with your conclusions

[Valerie]

The fact some Anabaptists become apostate and turn to Eastern Orthodoxy is not an endorsement of it at all. I will take EO seriously once I see them get together and decide to end this war between Russia and the Ukraine.

The fact that Jews of OT had evil and went to war did not make the religion itself Apostate. You do need to learn the difference.

Russia and Ukraine’s war with each other is complete apostasy. And the Eastern Orthodox on both sides bless and condone troops going to war.

And J M is right - they changed a bunch of traditions. The Old Believers try to stick to the older ones. Which group is right? The EO hierarchy simply claims “We are the authorities so whatever we say is right.”

Again. This topic was about which churches have infant baptism. Not supposed to be about EO.

[Josh]

The fact that Jews of OT had evil and went to war did not make the religion itself Apostate. You do need to learn the difference.

Russia and Ukraine’s war with each other is complete apostasy. And the Eastern Orthodox on both sides bless and condone troops going to war.

And J M is right - they changed a bunch of traditions. The Old Believers try to stick to the older ones. Which group is right? The EO hierarchy simply claims “We are the authorities so whatever we say is right.”

Again. This topic was about which churches have infant baptism. Not supposed to be about EO.

The topic is “why”, not “which”.

The “why” has a simple answer: churches practice infant baptism as part of maintaining state control and power over their members, part and parcel with claiming salvation only comes from officially being baptised in the state-sanctioned church. This is what the Anabaptists rebelled against.

[Valerie]

The Religion is Christianity, not Orthodox.
The fact that Orthodoxy is corrupt and wages war against their so called brothers does not impact Christianity but it does make them apostate.

Those who were apostate were not pardoned or shown mercy just because they belonged to Abrahams seed. Nor does God spare the corrupt because they had hands laid upon through history back to possibly the apostles.

All that has nothing to do with the ancient practice of baptizing a Christians infants & children and the other "Protestant" denominations that believe to do so too, which is what this topic was about. Bad behavior does not negate what was taught. We have visited probably 12 different Orthodox congregations. We spent about a year in one and visit periodically and these are very devout Christians. I refuse to see these people as Apostate no matter what's going on. Jesus did not write off the Jews nor did Paul because they messed up and God did command war so that doesn't make their teachings wrong - any more than bad Jews made the teachings wrong

Ancient does not equate to what Jesus and the apostles taught in the scriptures. Christianity is about following Jesus.

Jesus started the Church with His Apostles. The Holy Spirit then was poured out on them and the church began and it was said long before Constantine by Origen that the Apostles themselves taught to baptize infants. This was not a late invention. Certainly the ancient Church can go make a Scriptural case for it even if you don't agree with their interpretations but historically this was practiced and has been for about 2000 years not made up by Roman Catholics later which is what Early Anabaptists thought.

[Valerie]

Russia and Ukraine’s war with each other is complete apostasy. And the Eastern Orthodox on both sides bless and condone troops going to war.

And J M is right - they changed a bunch of traditions. The Old Believers try to stick to the older ones. Which group is right? The EO hierarchy simply claims “We are the authorities so whatever we say is right.”

Again. This topic was about which churches have infant baptism. Not supposed to be about EO.

The topic is “why”, not “which”.

The “why” has a simple answer: churches practice infant baptism as part of maintaining state control and power over their members, part and parcel with claiming salvation only comes from officially being baptised in the state-sanctioned church. This is what the Anabaptists rebelled against.

Wrong. Had nothing to do with the original reason. Reasoning here by most has only endorsed what I now believe but had not for decades until willing to learn

[Soloist]

As long as you keep arguing for infant baptism being taught from the beginning, we will continue to show that you are wrong.

[mike]

All that has nothing to do with the ancient practice of baptizing a Christians infants & children and the other "Protestant" denominations that believe to do so too, which is what this topic was about. Bad behavior does not negate what was taught. We have visited probably 12 different Orthodox congregations. We spent about a year in one and visit periodically and these are very devout Christians. I refuse to see these people as Apostate no matter what's going on. Jesus did not write off the Jews nor did Paul because they messed up and God did command war so that doesn't make their teachings wrong - any more than bad Jews made the teachings wrong

Ancient does not equate to what Jesus and the apostles taught in the scriptures. Christianity is about following Jesus.

Jesus started the Church with His Apostles. The Holy Spirit then was poured out on them and the church began and it was said long before Constantine by Origen that the Apostles themselves taught to baptize infants. This was not a late invention. Certainly the ancient Church can go make a Scriptural case for it even if you don't agree with their interpretations but historically this was practiced and has been for about 2000 years not made up by Roman Catholics later which is what Early Anabaptists thought.

Origen is not one of the apostles, and for this his writings are not part of the canon of scripture. Christianity is based on the teachings of Jesus and the apostles.

Are you part of a church that baptizes infants? If not, why not? Why do you expect most people on a Mennonite web forum not to push back strongly against the idea of infant baptism, a cardinal reason for the beginning of the Anabaptist movement? You seem shocked and disappointed by this. What else would you expect?