[go to: part 1; part 2; part 3; part 4; part 5; part 6]
     Good morning and welcome to the Berean Break.  My name is George Sinkie and I am so glad that you have joined me this morning.  We have been looking at a series of lessons that deal with the topic of baptism.  I hope that you have your Bible handy this morning so that you can see that what is being presented here is the truth from the word of God.  As we begin this morning let’s go to God in prayer.

Almighty God in heaven, may we look to You for our guidance.  We thank You for Your word which provides that complete and accurate guide for our lives.  Help us, dear God, to leave the false doctrine that we may now follow, and to submit to Your will.  In Jesus’ Name we pray, AMEN !!

     So far in our series we have looked at baptism in the teaching of the apostles, as a group, and we looked more specifically at the teaching of Peter and Paul on this topic.  Then last week we examined the modern day question of whether baptism should be a sprinkling, a pouring, or an immersion.  I say “modern day” problem because no one in the first century would have asked this question.  Anyone in the first century would have known it was immersion because the word that God chose to describe it meant to be immersed, thus eliminating the possibility that sprinkling or pouring could fulfill the command of God.  We also learned from these studies that immersion in water was for the forgiveness of sins, it put one into Christ when the spiritual blessings are, or saying it another way, it saves us.  But even with all these things showing that if we want to go to heaven we must be immersed, questions still remain.  One of these questions is the issue of “infant baptism.”  Let’s look at this topic in light of the teaching of God.

     I remember back in my younger years, before I really began to check things out in God’s word, like I encourage you to do.  My girlfriend - soon to be wife - was a Lutheran.  I had been brought up with very little religious training in my life and so I studied with the Lutheran preacher.  I assume I went through a typical set of classes to be a part of this man-made religion, but I have nothing to compare that to, to know for sure.  At the end of my training we had a ceremony in which I had some water sprinkled on me.  As we have seen from our study of God’s word this was not a “baptism” even though I had been lead to believe that it was.  In that same ceremony there was a little baby, perhaps a couple of months old, and they sprinkled water on him as well.  This is the process known as “infant baptism.”  As we have already seen this is a misnomer, or incorrect name, as it would actually have been an “infant sprinkling.”  I have heard of some groups that actually do immersed babies, this would be a baptism, but there is more to Bible baptism than just the immersion.  I don’t believe that I pointed it out before but the Greek word for baptize or baptism is not a religious term.  It referred to the action of dipping or plunging under - immersing into something.  When they dyed cloth they would baptize it into the dye solution, kids in the swimming pool may dunk someone, that is baptize them, but this is not obeying the will of God.  Before a person can receive the baptism that brings salvation they must for one thing have faith or believe.  Consider what Philip told the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts 8:35- 38

   35 And Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.
   36 And as they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, “Look!  Water!  What prevents me from being baptized?”
   37 [And Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”  And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”]
   38 And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch;  and he baptized him.

     The Eunuch had to believe before he could be baptized.  This is in harmony with what Jesus also taught in Mark 16:16

   16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved;  but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

     Here in Mark 16, Jesus is referring to believing the gospel, which He just said was to be preached.  Infants are incapable of comprehending the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, they cannot believe and therefore they cannot be immersed in a proper way.

     The Scriptures teach that a person must also repent prior to being baptized.  As Peter’s audience, in Acts 2, realized they were lost, they wanted to know what to do and listen to what Peter tells them in Acts 2:38

   38 And Peter said to them, “Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

     Again we see that infants are incapable of the actions that God requires prior to being immersed for the forgiveness of sins.

     So far we have seen two problems with the common practice called “infant baptism.”  First it isn’t really baptism, it is sprinkling or pouring, most of the time.  And second, even if it is immersion, the baby doesn’t have the ability to believe or repent, both of which precede baptism in the Scriptures.
     There is however a more fundamental problem with the idea of “infant baptism.”  It is unscriptural, that is, it has no basis within the Scriptures themselves.  While I have come to understand that many of the things taught by Martin Luther and Lutherans today are incorrect, Martin Luther did understand this point as he wrote,
     “It cannot be proved by the sacred Scriptures that infant baptism was instituted by Christ, or begun by the first Christians after the apostles.” (MARTIN LUTHER, On Rebaptism)

     In its article on baptism, Kitto’s Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature has this to say,
     “Infant baptism was established neither by Christ nor the apostles.  In all places where we find the necessity of baptism notified, either in a dogmatic or historical point of view, it is evident that it was only meant for those who were capable of comprehending the word preached, and of being converted to Christ by an act of their own will.” (Vol. I, p. 287)

     These writers can be checked out and found to be teaching what is truth from the Bible.  So now we know that “infant baptism,” is a man-made doctrine, but why would man come up with this doctrine?  The basis for the man-made doctrine of “infant baptism,” is another man-made doctrine called original sin.  Very basically and very simply this doctrine is that all humans bear the spiritual guilt of the sin that Adam committed in the Garden of Eden.  Don’t confuse this with the fact that we do bear some physical results from that sin.  Consider this, a father goes out and gets drunk, then loads up his family and drives away.  The father being drunk and driving has a bad accident.  The family may have physical injuries as a result of that accident, they may even be killed, but will God hold the sin of drunkenness against them?  NO.  God clearly pointed this out in the book of Ezekiel in chapter 18.  I would encourage you to read this entire chapter, but unfortunately we do not have the time to do that right now.  I would like to look at a couple of examples of what is said here though, first in Ezekiel 18:1-4

   1 Then the word of the Lord came to me saying,
   2 “What do you mean by using this proverb concerning the land of Israel saying, ‘The fathers eat the sour grapes, But the children’s teeth are set on edge’?
   3 “As I live,” declares the Lord God, “you are surely not going to use this proverb in Israel anymore.
   4 “Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine.  The soul who sins will die.”

     And then in Ezekiel 18:19-20, God continues to speak,

   19 Yet you say, ‘Why should the son not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity?’  When the son has practiced justice and righteousness, and has observed all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live.
   20 The person who sins will die.  The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity;  the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

     Now unless you are hardened to the truth and are trying to support man-made doctrine, it is clear that God does not pass the spiritual guilt of sin off to someone else.  Now if we sin, then we share in the guilt of Adam.  This is what the Word tells us in Romans 5:12

   12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned —

     Note that death spread to all men, not by inheritance, but because all sinned.  You see I’m not accountable for Adam’s sin, I’m accountable for my sin and you are accountable for your sin, not Adam’s.  Are you listening to God?  While we are each accountable for our own sins, when we are infants we are in a safe relationship with God.  Paul wrote of his coming into this accountability with God in Romans 7:7-11

   7 What shall we say then?  Is the Law sin?  May it never be!  On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law;  for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, “You shall not covet.”
   8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind;  for apart from the Law sin is dead.
   9 And I was once alive apart from the Law;  but when the commandment came, sin became alive, and I died;
   10 and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me;
   11 for sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, deceived me, and through it killed me.

     Note especially there in verse 9, Paul says, “I was once alive apart from the Law...”  If he had inherited the sin of Adam, then he would have been born “totally depraved,” as the false Calvinistic doctrine teaches.  When Paul speaks here of “the commandment came,” he is not referring to God giving the Commandments, because that occurred hundreds of years before Paul was born.  Paul is alluding to his becoming accountable to those commandments.  Accountability deals with the ability to reason and understand right from wrong.  As we have seen a person must be able to hear the Gospel and understand how that applies to them.  With that belief we must also be able to understand that we have sinned and are in need of forgiveness and in need of repenting of our sins.  These abilities all come together around the age of twelve, some earlier some later.
     If being “baptized” as an infant is what you have done, then you need to understand that you have obey the doctrines of men, not the doctrines of God.  Religions that teach “infant baptism” are from men not from God.  God is calling to you to come out from those doctrines and those religions.  Are you listening?

[go to: part 1; part 2; part 3; part 4; part 5; part 6]