Gesunde Lehre | Sound Doctrine

Achtung! Nichts für Leute mit empfindlichen Ohren! Nur für solche die die Wahrheit suchen! (2.Tim4,3-4)| Attention! Not for people with itching ears! Only for those seeking the truth! (2.Tim4:3-4)

Säuglingstaufe - Ist Sie Christlich - in Arbeit (20% übersetzt)

Säuglingstaufe - Ist Sie Christlich



Übersetzungsvorschläge können hier auf github gemacht werden.

Quelle: www.evangelicaloutreach.org/infantbaptism.htm

_Säuglings_taufe - Ist Sie Christlich

Dan Corner

Säuglingstaufe

Lutherische Säuglingstaufe

Säuglingstaufe

Säuglingstaufe

Infant Baptism or Baby Bapism (also called Paedobaptism) Is UNscriptural

Everyone Should Know This Point About NO Infant Baptism

infant baptism baby baptism

On more than one occasion in my Christian life, I've encountered those who are part of Protestantism (Calvinists, Lutherans, Wesleyans, Episcopals, etc.) who reason just like Roman Catholics do for infant baptism, though they may differ over it being the point of salvation. Though there are no Scriptures that show infant baptism (baby baptism) or a command suggesting this, such people have been very vehement at times in trying to force this infant baptism interpretation out from the Scriptures. This is done in two ways:

Säuglingstaufe Wiedergeborener katholisch lutherisch

Säuglingstaufe Argument By trying to compare Old Testament circumcision to New Testament baptism, as done by John Calvin and others.

Babytaufe ArgumentBy dogmatically insisting that the word household found in Scripture must include infants.

The insistence on trying to use circumcision and household as the basis for infant baptism is damaging enough, but this is compounded by a total disregard for all the other many Scriptures which clearly teach water baptism is only for believers in Christ. That Bible truth makes infant baptism a scriptural impossibility.

Säuglingstaufe und Beschneidung

infant baptism baby baptism

Those who argue for infant baptism as a Christian replacement for Old Covenant Jewish circumcision, somehow see justification for this from the following:

​In ihm seid ihr auch beschnitten mit einer Beschneidung, die ohne Hände geschehen ist, durch das Ablegen des fleischlichen Leibes, in der Beschneidung Christi,** ​indem ihr mit ihm begraben seid in der Taufe, in welcher ihr auch mitauferstanden seid durch den Glauben an die Kraftwirkung Gottes, der ihn von den Toten auferweckt hat. (Kol 2,11-12; Schlachter 1905)

That passage speaks of a circumcision, which Jesus does to a believer (that is, to his heart which occurs at the point of a trusting-submitting faith in Christ). This is very similar to what we read in Romans:

Denn nicht der ist ein Jude, der es äusserlich ist; auch ist nicht das die Beschneidung, was äusserlich am Fleisch geschieht;sondern das ist ein Jude, der's im Verborgenen ist und das ist eine Beschneidung, die am Herzen, im Geiste, nicht buchstäblich vorgenommen wird; deren Lob kommt nicht von Menschen, sondern von Gott. (Röm 2,28-29; Schlachter 1905)

Only male infants were circumcised when Old Covenant Jewish circumcision was in effect and never females, but that is not how such advocates regard infant baptism. So, that is another problem for them in trying to connect circumcision to infant baptism. But remember, based on the aformentioned verses circumcision of the heart by the Spirit is the replacement of Old Covenant Jewish circumcision and not baby baptism!

Augustine of Hippo HERETICALLY Trusted In Mary And Taught One Is Born Again At Infant Baptism!

The Believer's Baptism VS Infant Baptism

Jesus commissioned his disciples with the following words:

Und Jesus trat zu ihnen, redete mit ihnen und sprach: Mir ist gegeben alle Gewalt im Himmel und auf Erden. Darum gehet hin und lehret alle Völker und taufet sie im Namen des Vaters und des Sohnes und des Heiligen Geistes! Und lehret sie halten alles, was ich euch befohlen habe! Und siehe, ich bin bei euch alle Tage bis an der Welt Ende. (Mt 28,18-20; Luther 1545)

Säuglingstaufe

Jesus commanded the Eleven to: 1) Go and make disciples, 2) Baptize them [the new disciples] and 3) Teach them [the new disciples, who get baptized] to obey everything the Eleven were commanded to do, which would include this same three step command. The proper Biblical procedure, if followed, forces us to water baptize disciples. [Jesus' disciple is a Christian (Mt. 12:47-50; Lk. 14:26,33; Acts 11:26). Moreover, one must be able to repent of his sins and place his faith in Jesus for salvation to become Christ's disciple (Acts 20:21; 3:19; 26:20; Gal. 5:24; 2 Pet. 3:9; etc.).]

In order for a person to even know that he must repent and place his faith in Jesus for salvation infers that he must be beyond the infant stage. Moreover, it is only such people who can do this that qualify to be baptized, according to Jesus. That clearly destroys the concept of infant baptism. Again, after one becomes a disciple [a Christian] he is to be water baptized and not before.

john calvin infant baptism calvinism

Notice the Mt. 28:18-20 standard being carried out even before Jesus' death:

Als nun der Herr erfuhr, dass die Pharisäer gehört hatten, wie Jesus mehr Jünger mache und taufe als Johannes,(wiewohl Jesus selbst nicht taufte, sondern seine Jünger) (Joh 4,1-2; Schlachter 1905)

Jesus' disciples water baptized those who became Jesus' disciples, that is, those who became new Christians through repentance and faith. Isn't this clear? Nowhere do we see in the Scriptures that infants were ever water baptized. Infant baptism contradicts these Scriptures!

Learn About Baptism For The Dead, a Pagan Practice in Mormonism

Haushalts- NICHT Säuglings-Taufe

Certainly, one of the chief Scriptures which cites the word household and is referred to by paedobaptism proponents is the following one:

Und er führte sie heraus und sprach: Ihr Herren, was muß ich tun, um gerettet zu werden? Sie aber sprachen: Glaube an den Herrn Jesus, so wirst du gerettet werden, du und dein Haus! Und sie sagten ihm und allen, die in seinem Hause waren, das Wort des Herrn. Und er nahm sie in jener Stunde der Nacht zu sich und wusch ihnen die Striemen ab und ließ sich auf der Stelle taufen, er samt den Seinigen. Und er führte sie in sein Haus, deckte den Tisch und frohlockte, daß er mit seinem ganzen Hause an Gott gläubig geworden war. (Apg 16,30-34; Schlachterbibel 1951)

The advocates of infant baptism see this as Scriptural proof for their practice, but is it really that or nothing more than a mere assumption based on the word household? Infant baptism people assume the Philippian jailer must have had infants in his family, but there is absolutely no proof of this. Perhaps, his children were all grown and married or maybe he had only one child 15 years of age. We cannot be sure of any details. But this we do know, the ones that were newly water baptized came to a saving faith in Jesus Christ, v.34, which agrees with the Lord's standard criteria for one to receive Christian baptism (Mt. 28:18-20). Therefore, it is impossible for the Philippian jailer to have had infants in his household, since they can't repent and place their faith in Jesus. Acts 16:30-34 is not proof for infant baptism.

Notice another time household is cited, which the proponents of infant baptism will probably never volunteer:

Da erkannte der Vater, dass es eben in der Stunde geschehen, in welcher Jesus zu ihm gesagt hatte: Dein Sohn lebt! Und er glaubte samt seinem ganzen Haus. (Joh 4,53; Schlachter 1905)

Clearly, everyone in that man's household was old enough to have a personal faith in Jesus, which is needed for salvation. Why then couldn't it be the same way for the Philippian jailer, even apart from Acts 16:34? Moreover, couldn't the same be said about the following household:

Krispus aber, der Synagogenvorsteher, wurde samt seinem ganzen Hause an den Herrn gläubig; auch viele Korinther, die zuhörten, wurden gläubig und ließen sich taufen. (Apg 18,8; Schlachterbibel 1951)

The entire household of Crispus was old enough to believe in the Lord. It was after this act of faith that they were water baptized. That is household baptism, which cannot be the same as infant baptism.

Book Review Of David Bercot's, Will The Real Heretics Please Stand Up

Cornelius and Household Baptism

This is the same truth conveyed elsewhere with the conversion of Cornelius the centurion and his household:

Von diesem legen alle Propheten Zeugnis ab, daß jeder, der an ihn glaubt, durch seinen Namen Vergebung der Sünden empfangen soll. Während Petrus noch diese Worte redete, fiel der heilige Geist auf alle, die dem Wort zuhörten. Und die Gläubigen aus der Beschneidung, soviele ihrer mit Petrus gekommen waren, erstaunten, daß die Gabe des heiligen Geistes auch über die Heiden ausgegossen wurde. Denn sie hörten sie in Zungen reden und Gott hoch preisen. Da antwortete Petrus: Kann auch jemand das Wasser verwehren, daß diese nicht getauft werden, die den heiligen Geist empfangen haben, gleichwie wir? Und er befahl, daß sie getauft würden im Namen des Herrn. Da baten sie ihn, etliche Tage zu bleiben. (Apg 10,43-48; Schlachterbibel 1951)

The same ones who received forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit were the ones who heard Peter's salvation message and placed their faith in Jesus, which again, an infant cannot do. Also, Acts 10:2 states that these same new Christians feared God, which is also impossible for an infant to do. When Peter recapped what happened in Acts 10 in chapter 11, he stated that Cornelius was informed the following by the angel before he was sent for:

der [Petrus] wird Worte zu dir reden, durch welche du gerettet werden wirst, du und dein ganzes Haus. (Apg 11,14; Schlachterbibel 1951)

So, Peter would bring a verbal message (see Acts 10:43) by which Cornelius and all in his household would: 1) Be saved before and without water baptism, 2) Be able to have faith in Jesus for salvation and 3) That included Biblical repentance on their part (Acts 11:18). Again, infants are excluded from this usage of household based on these. That is more undeniable proof that there is no infant baptism.

Stephanas und Taufe eines Hauses/Haushalts

Next we come to the household of Stephanas, whom Paul baptized:

Ich habe aber auch das Haus des Stephanas getauft. Sonst weiß ich nicht, ob ich noch jemand getauft habe; (1.Kor 1,16; Schlachterbibel 1951)

Später in seinem Brief bezog sich Paulus nochmals auf dieselben Leute:

Ich ermahne euch aber, ihr Brüder: Ihr kennet das Haus des Stephanas, daß es die Erstlingsfrucht von Achaja ist, und daß sie sich dem Dienste der Heiligen gewidmet haben; seid auch ihr solchen untertan und einem jeden, der mitwirkt und arbeitet. (1.Kor 16,15-16; Schlachterbibel 1951)

Those included among the household of Stephanas devoted themselves to the service of the saints. Again, with Scripture supplementing Scripture, that is not something an infant can do.

Mt. 19:13-15 is NOT Infant Baptism

Another Scripture misused for infant baptism is Mt 19,13-15:

Da wurden Kindlein zu ihm gebracht, dass er die Hände auf sie lege und bete. Die Jünger aber schalten sie. Aber Jesus sprach zu ihnen: Lasset die Kindlein, und wehret ihnen nicht zu mir zu kommen; denn solcher ist das Himmelreich! Und nachdem er ihnen die Hände aufgelegt, zog er von dannen. (Schlachter 1905)

There is no reference here that the little children (infants) were baptized. The children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them, which has no connection with infant baptism.

The Greek Word For Infant

The Greek word (paidion), which can refer to an infant, has various meanings. Vine writes about this word:

a diminutive of pais, signifies a little or young child; it is used of an infant just born, John 16:21; of a male child recently born, e.g., Matt. 2:8; Heb. 11:23; of a more advanced child, plural, of children, e.g., Matt. 14:21.(B)

From this word alone nothing definite can be stated about the practice of infant baptism. This we do know, however, infants are never shown to be baptized in the New Testament, the Christian's final authority for all spiritual teaching (2 Tim. 3:16,17). In contrast, all believers in Christ, which often included full-grown adults, were water baptized. Even Jesus himself was baptized by John the Baptist at the age of 30. Hence, it is irrelevant what any so-called church "father" might have written, including Augustine of Hippo, Irenaeus or Origen, about getting born again, household baptisms, etc. When such a contradiction occurs between Scripture and anyone or anything else including a dream, vision, prophecy, experience, testimony, report or even something written by someone labeled a church father like those men, then the Bible wins out. (Please know that the so-called ante-Nicean fathers contradicted themselves on many issues, as well as contradicting the Scriptures.)

Die Schlussfolgerung Bezüglich Säuglingstaufe

In conclusion, no Christian should have anything to do with infant baptism for any reason. Infant baptism is not Biblical and therefore not Christian. Furthermore, infant baptism is a baptism in name only. If such a person who was subjected to infant baptism should become a real Christian, he is commanded like all others to undergo true Christian baptism. Moreover, the mode of Christian baptism found in the Bible is immersion, which is also contrary to most infant baptisms. Lastly, infant dedication has been derived by some from Lk. 2:22,23, but this should never be associated in any way with infant baptism. There is no Biblical connection between the unscriptural infant baptism (baby baptism) and infant dedication.


Endnoten bezüglich Säuglingstaufe

(A) John Calvin verbrannte Michael Servetus am Pfahl, teilweise, aufgrund seiner Ablehnung der Säuglingstaufe.

(B) W. E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, 1966, Vol. 1, p. 188.

Säuglingstaufe

WEITERE THEMEN:

Evangelical Outreach
PO Box 265
Washington, PA 15301

www.EvangelicalOutreach.org
www.EternalLifeBlog.com

Kontaktier Uns Oder Geselle Dich Zu Unserer Internetgemeinde