Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!sun-barr!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: farkas@eng.sun.com (Frank Farkas) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Validity of Baptism Message-ID: Date: 9 Nov 90 05:49:11 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Lines: 28 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , esaholm@polaris.utu.fi (Esa Holmberg) writes: >farkas%qual@sun.com (Frank Farkas) writes: > >>I find it strange that a new born needs baptism! Can someone tell me why? > > Simple: even new born babies share the sin of Adam, and > thus do need baptism.. >-- > _________________________________________________________________________ >( Esa Holmberg, Turku Telephone Company, AXE, Linnankatu 4, 20100 TURKU, ) > ) Finland ! Elisa: Holmberg Esa TT (tt) ! fax +358 21 502 298 / >( Internet: esaholm@utu.fi, esa.holmberg/o=tt/@elisa.fi / There are no recorded children baptisms in the Bible. If I read it correctly, baptism is unto repentence. A baby has no capacity to repent. In fact, I don't believe that babies have the capacity to sin. As far as the original sin is concerned, Jesus has atoned for that. We will not be judged by the sins of our parents, but by the sins our own self committed. Christ has atoned for those also, however, his atonement for our own sins is effective only upon the condition of repentance. This is the reason baptism should only be administered to a fully repented person. I suggest that baby baptism is a false concept. With brotherly love, Frank