Baptizing My Baby

Near the end of June, my husband and I had the pleasure of celebrating our daughter’s fourth birthday—and with KatyJane, Kullervo, Katie L., and their children all in attendance, you can rest assured that it was a lively party. We had balloons, a bounce castle, lots of presents, pizza, and a Thomas the Tank Engine cake with delicious cherry filling. It was a great way to ring in this annual milestone.
Another milestone ticked away in my head: our family had reached the halfway point on the road to what might one day become our first serious point of interfaith parenting contention. In four more years, Harley will be eight years old, the age of baptism for children raised in LDS families. Paul firmly believes that eight year-olds are definitively old enough to choose a religion and commit to it for the rest of their lives. I don’t. I’m extremely uneasy about the prospect of baptizing a child that young.
My reasons for being uneasy with this proposal can be broken into three categories.
Experience
The first reason for my uneasiness over the baptism of eight year-olds is fairly simple. I remember being eight, and I certainly don’t remember doing much independent thinking on religious issues. What I do remember is an earnest desire to please the adults in my life, and I remember thinking that laws and rules passed down to me by adults were unquestionable. If my parents said to do it, I did it, and doing it was right. If my parents said not to do it . . . well, I may have done it anyways, because I was a rascal like that. But there was never a doubt in my mind that to go against my parents’ wishes was wrong. The idea that my parents might tell me to do the wrong thing was blasphemy. As the old Eric Draven William Makepeace Thackery saying goes, “Mother is the name for God on the lips and hearts of all children.”
Or in other words, I think children that young will do things because adults tell them to, and not because they’ve developed their own desire to do them for other reasons. I would rather my daughter commit to a church when she’s certain that’s what she wants to do rather than committing to a church out of a desire to please one of us.
Research
Fortunately, I don’t have to rely solely on my own experience. Research on moral development in the human brain does a pretty good job of vindicating my misgivings about letting a child that young make such a monumental religious commitment. For example, see Piaget’s Stages of Moral Judgment:
Piaget studied many aspects of moral judgment, but most of his findings fit into a two-stage theory. Children younger than 10 or 11 years think about moral dilemmas one way; older children consider them differently. As we have seen, younger children regard rules as fixed and absolute. They believe that rules are handed down by adults or by God and that one cannot change them. The older child’s view is more relativistic. He or she understands that it is permissible to change rules if everyone agrees. Rules are not sacred and absolute but are devices which humans use to get along cooperatively.
At approximately the same time—10 or 11 years—children’s moral thinking undergoes other shifts. In particular, younger children base their moral judgments more on consequences, whereas older children base their judgments on intentions. When, for example, the young child hears about one boy who broke 15 cups trying to help his mother and another boy who broke only one cup trying to steal cookies, the young child thinks that the first boy did worse. The child primarily considers the amount of damage–the consequences—whereas the older child is more likely to judge wrongness in terms of the motives underlying the act (Piaget, 1932, p. 137).
There are many more details to Piaget’s work on moral judgment, but he essentially found a series of changes that occur between the ages of 10 and 12, just when the child begins to enter the general stage of formal operations.
See also Kohlberg’s Six Stages, on the same page. Children undergo a serious shift in their understanding of moral actions between the ages of 10 and 12, so I think 12 is a much safer minimum age for choosing a religion than 8.
Theology
I’m rather dissatisfied with the theological justifications my LDS friends have given me for why children ought to be baptized at age 8. Note that I’m not questioning the need for baptism in general; just the need for baptism at such a young age. Let’s look at the usual reasons given one at a time.
- For the remission of sins
This is the official reason for baptism as given in the 4th Article of Faith. Little children have their sins covered by the atonement of Jesus Christ until they reach the age of 8, and then their sins start counting as their own, so children are baptized at age 8 to cleanse them from their sins. This raises the question: is an LDS baptism necessary for the forgiveness of sins? Are Mormons and their alleged ancient predecessors the only people in all of human history who have ever had their sins forgiven on this side of the veil?
Most of my LDS friends would say “no;” non-Mormons can have their sins forgiven as well. So if my daughter can have her sins forgiven through prayer and repentance like the rest of us, I don’t see much imperative for baptizing her at age 8.
If you do believe that an LDS baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins, then your answer makes much more sense and has the benefit of being theologically consistent. Politically incorrect, but theologically consistent. I guess my daughter will just have to live with being as unclean as her mother is.
- To profess membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
We’ve already established that I think 8 is too young to fully comprehend and commit to a religion. I especially think 8 is too young to comprehend and choose between two competing religions. My commitment to free agency dictates that I wait until she’s older and can do a better job of grasping the importance of such a decision.
- To profess faith in Jesus Christ
See my last answer. Besides, since an LDS baptism requires an interview where the candidate affirms LDS distinctives such as the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith, LDS baptism really can’t be separated from the question of LDS membership as a whole.
I’m certainly not denying that young children can have faith in Christ, but I think public profession of that faith is a huge step to take and one that should only be entered into when the child has more understanding of what it means to be a disciple of Christ.
- To obtain the gift of the Holy Spirit
Some parents have pointed out to me that even if there are no theological consequences to delaying baptism until a later date, baptism is a prerequisite for the gift of the Holy Spirit, and they want their children to have that guiding influence in their lives as soon as possible. As I’ve argued elsewhere though, the biblical record shows that neither baptism nor the laying on of hands are requirements for the gift of the Holy Spirit. LDS families are free to believe otherwise of course, but as far as I’m concerned, if my daughter wants the gift of the Holy Spirit, she can receive it the same way I did: by praying to her Father in Heaven and asking Him for it.
- Because God commands it
Some LDS families have simply expressed to me that they choose to baptize their children at age 8 because it’s commanded in the LDS scriptures (D&C 68:27). I respect this reason on the surface, but for my own part, I think “because God says so” is a rather unsatisfying answer when it is not accompanied by a theological or rational framework to explain why God insists on this age for baptism.
Conclusion
To be clear, I’m not looking down in disdain on any Latter-day Saint individuals for having their children baptized at age 8. If I refuse to take a stand against paedobaptism in my own tradition, I’m certainly not about to get up in arms over slightly-delayed-paedobaptism in yours. Besides, they’re your kids, you made ‘em, and I firmly support your right to do what you want with ‘em. Point in fact, if you really want your kids to grow up LDS, it’s probably better that you’re hooking them into the church when they’re that young, before the little demons darlings have truly perfected the art of questioning your authority as a parent.
As far as our own situation goes, while I’m not writing anything in stone, for now my inclination is to say “no” to baptism at eight. And since the LDS church won’t allow my husband to baptize our daughter without my consent, ultimately, I’m the presiding authority in this decision.

Comments

Baptizing My Baby — 28 Comments

  1. Setting aside the issue of child baptism, on which I have no strong opinion whatsoever (seems to me that whether baptism is appropriate for children depends entirely on what you think is accomplished by baptism, so answer the one and the other follows closely), I do want to say that we all had a fantastic time at Harley’s party.
  2. I agree with your reasoning, but I also think you take baptism more seriously than most LDS do. We baptize people after they’re dead and say, “Here, take it or leave it,” and I think our attitude toward baptism for the living is similar; baptism is whatever the person makes of it. This may be overly flip, and my cynical take–because I’m feeling cynical this morning–is that if we didn’t encourage early baptism, too many kids would end up not choosing to be baptized.
    I didn’t think my oldest child would choose to be baptized at 8–she’d been very negative about it right up until that year, but ultimately she ended up choosing to do it. If you asked her now, though, she’d say she regrets her decision. If it were the norm to wait until 10 or 12 to be baptized, I’m pretty sure she would not have done it. But there’s no way to know for sure, of course.
    My third child is autistic (actually, my oldest is, too, but higher-functioning), and his 8th birthday is coming up in a few months. Fortunately my husband and I are on the same page (so far) on the baptism issue. Unless there is a huge developmental leap between now and then (which seems unlikely), our son will not be getting baptized at 8. We haven’t discussed it with that many people, but I’m surprised when some people think we should have him baptized anyway, even though he clearly doesn’t understand what it means. (Most people, including adults, don’t know what they’re getting into when they join the LDS church, but at least they have a basic understanding of the purpose of baptism.)
    I don’t mean for this comment to be so negative about LDS practice of baptism, but baptism happens to be one of the theological thorns in my side, and my comment is already too long for me to start explaining the more positive thoughts I have about it. :)
  3. Congrats on 4 years. Our little one is soon turning 2. As for baptism, my family’s rule was that we weren’t allowed to be baptized until we had our own testimony of the Gospel. My dad felt that being baptized without a testimony was more damning than postponing for a while.
  4. Happy birthday to H!
    I’m not really clear what the purpose of this post is. Is it to discuss the problems with LDS thought concerning baptism, or to justify your misgivings about it? (I don’t mean “justify” in the negative connotation, mind you.) If the latter, it seems like a rather lengthy post given that you could just as easily say, “LDS theology is bogus. QED.” I’m just not sure what kind of response/interaction you were looking for here.
  5. I agree Jack. Eight is too young to make a profound religious decision with that many points of consent.
    I didn’t feel ready to be baptized a Christian until I had already been a believer in church circles about six or seven years – and that was as an adult.
    Especially given your interfaith situation, she deserves the freedom to decide about God for herself and not feel like the decision was already made for her.
  6. #4 BFF ~ The purpose of this post was to explain why I think it’s best to wait until a child is older for this sort of a decision as well as exploring the problems with LDS justifications for baptism at age 8. It’s an issue that interests me because of its relevance to my life situation and because Mormons usually condemn infant baptism so harshly, the latter being something that I’ll probably explore in a future post.
  7. Point in fact, if you really want your kids to grow up LDS, it’s probably better that you’re hooking them into the church when they’re that young, before the little demons darlings have truly perfected the art of questioning your authority as a parent.
    Actually, I think this is exactly why we baptize at 8. It’s old enough to remember it later, but too young for it to really be an individual decision.
    I was baptized at 8 and I remember my parents saying “You don’t have to do this, it’s your decision.” My mind couldn’t even process the possibility of choosing not to.
  9. I agree. I even posted about this issue here – about how much I didn’t know about the mormon faith at 8.
    I think 8 is old enough to understand some rules like “don’t hit your brother”. I don’t think it’s old enough to understand a lifetime commitment (which I made) – and then had my name removed as an adult.
    Each parent chooses differently, however.
    In case you didn’t know, if your daughter doesn’t get baptized at 8, it’s my understanding that she will be treated (even at 9) as an investigator and need to go through the missionary discussions (if she chooses to be baptized LDS). That may be up to the bishop, however, if she is attending meetings regularly with you both or you and your husband.
    With that said, I agree with waiting. I’m not even sure that 10 or 11 year olds are old enough to be baptized (again, that lifetime commitment thing). It would be nice if each child/person could choose what religion they would participate in without fear of negative repercussions from either parent. Although I was still pretty naive at 18, I think 18 is a good age to be able to make personal religious choices.
  10. One time I got in an argument on ninemoons with a guy who made his teenage daughter go to tchurch because she was not mature enough to be able to choose for herself whether or not she should go.
    I asked him how she was supposed to be mature enough to 8 to choose an eternal commitment but not mature enough at 16 to be able to decide whether or not to keep it.
    He was not amused.
  11. #1 Kullervo ~ seems to me that whether baptism is appropriate for children depends entirely on what you think is accomplished by baptism, so answer the one and the other follows closely
    Right, and there’s little doubt in my mind that my theological reasons for practicing baptism are somewhat different from LDS ones. Then again, I don’t understand why age 8 is demanded by LDS theology, either. It seems rather arbitrary.
    #2 Rebecca J ~ I also think you take baptism more seriously than most LDS do.
    In some sense, I think this is true. I take the theology undergirding the act of baptism very seriously. Mormons tend to be very praxis-oriented and don’t think about the theology behind their ordinances as much—or at least, the answers don’t go much deeper than what’s printed in the manuals.
    Thanks for sharing about how your children have done it. With your autistic son, are you worried at all about having him baptized by 12 at least so that he can pass the Sacrament?
    BTW, they want us to have Harley evaluated for ADHD, Asperger’s and autism. She’s probably somewhere on that scale, but we don’t know how severe it is yet. It’s possible her baptism could become a non-issue. However, we’re going to have more kids eventually, so I assume it will come up again.
    #3 Charlie ~ Interesting. At what ages did the children in your home request to be baptized?
    #9 Aerin ~ Thanks for linking to your post. Interesting to see that you’ve had similar thoughts.
    For the record, I’m not saying 12 is ideal or anything. It’s something to play by ear to be sure, but I sometimes wish I had waited longer.
    Thanks everyone for the great comments so far.
  13. My sister is Unitarian. My brother and his wife are Lutheran. So neither joined Dad’s church. I had been praying for sometime before my 8th birthday. I felt moved upon by the Spirit to join the LDS church. I had the privilege of being baptized on my 8th birthday. It totally depends on the person, though.
  14. I’m not sure when my elder siblings were baptized into their churches. I know that it was sometime after I got into high school. They are both significantly older than I am.
  15. BFF: since this is about the problems with LDS justifications, I have several disagreements with your post, although perhaps I misunderstood.
    “I think children that young will do things because adults tell them to…”
    I see that as a good thing.
    “…and not because they’ve developed their own desire to do them for other reasons.”
    Not always the case, but certainly depends on the child. Of course, we probably all know people in their 30′s who still bow to their parents’ wills, so this has a lot to do with how one is raised. Still, the whole point of Sunday School lessons on baptism is to teach kids the reasons for being baptized, so we give our children lots of opportunity to develop “other reasons.” (My own daughter even had reasons that I didn’t personally agree with.)
    “Research on moral development….”
    Why must baptism be a ‘moral judgment’ decision? How are other overtly religious acts—praying, for example—less innocuous than baptism? Also does Piaget discuss potential problems with teenagers’ reasoning skills—such as that teenagers are completely selfish, arrogant, and delusional? ;) In terms of making wise choices, I just don’t see 12 as being much different than 8.
    …make such a monumental religious commitment.”
    Perhaps I don’t see baptism as such a monumental commitment as you do.
    “For the remission of sins.”
    I don’t know of anywhere in LDS scripture where baptism is cited as a pre-requisite for forgiveness—although your post has me wondering whether it is correct to use ‘remission’ and ‘forgiveness’ interchangeably, as you do. I think there is room in LDS theology to see the two as distinct, and baptism (especially by the Holy Ghost) may in fact be required for the remission of sins. Thus, I worry that your yes/no dichotomy is fundamentally flawed (from an LDS theology perspective, which is what you are challenging).
    “As I’ve argued elsewhere though, the biblical record shows…”
    But that is meaningless in a critique of LDS justifications for baptism. Sure, it is an important reason why you are unconvinced that your child needs LDS baptism, but then again you have many other reasons why you would reject it. Several of your other objections fall into this same category. That’s unavoidable, of course, with this type of post, so I don’t say that as a criticism of your post.
    P.S. I though the “presiding authority” part was clever.
  16. Also does Piaget discuss potential problems with teenagers’ reasoning skills—such as that teenagers are completely selfish, arrogant, and delusional? In terms of making wise choices, I just don’t see 12 as being much different than 8.
    To be clear, Piaget was deliberately talking about “stages, not ages.”
  17. With your autistic son, are you worried at all about having him baptized by 12 at least so that he can pass the Sacrament?
    I don’t know how much cognitive progress my son is going to make over the next four years. We’re hopeful, of course, but we’re just taking things one step at a time. As long as he isn’t able to understand the ordinance of baptism, he certainly isn’t able to understand the implications of priesthood ordination. And if he’s not developmentally ready for it, that’s just how it is; I wouldn’t want him made a deacon just so he can be like the other 12-year-olds (although I’ll continue to have some sadness about him not being able to do things that typically-developing children do). So far he’s not much for wanting to do stuff just because his peers are doing it. A lot can change in four years, of course, but we’ll cross that bridge when (or if) we come to it.
  18. #15 BFF ~ Thanks for your thoughtful response.
    I’m not denying that it’s a good thing for children to do what adults tell them to in a lot of cases, but making a lifelong commitment to a religion doesn’t fall into that category for me. If my child(ren) believe in my religion, I want it to be because they’ve developed their own testimony of it.
    depends on the child
    I hear this a lot, and I completely agree. There are 8 year-olds who are surprisingly mature and 18 year-olds who aren’t ready to have their own home entertainment console system, much less the legal rights of an adult. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t general trends we can observe and watch out for, which are what Piaget and Kohlberg argue.
    Why must baptism be a ‘moral judgment’ decision?
    Why wouldn’t it be?
    How are other overtly religious acts—praying, for example—less innocuous than baptism?
    Because these aren’t lifetime commitments. If a child decides at a later point in life that he or she does not want to believe in God, they won’t have to send a letter to a church office building to have their prayers undone.
    In terms of making wise choices, I just don’t see 12 as being much different than 8.
    It’s not about making wise choices; it’s about why wise choices are made. 8 year-olds make wise moral choices because they believe their parents want them to. Older children are more capable of evaluating the merits behind their options and choosing for or against accordingly.
    You’re going to have to explain to me, in your own terms, the theological difference between “remission of sins” and “forgiveness of sins,” because yes, I see them as one and the same. The KJV itself alternates between translating “ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν” as “forgiveness of sins” or “remission of sins;” newer translations almost always translate it “forgiveness of sins.”
    Re: the gift of the Holy Spirit, I was just pointing out that LDS claims to the exclusivity of the Holy Spirit have other issues. It doesn’t exactly help trying to defend one potentially flawed theological concept with another one. However, you’re correct that this is little more than me saying “I don’t buy what LDS theology teaches here” and isn’t going to be the most useful objection to Mormons if we’re trying to isolate this issue.
    I though the “presiding authority” part was clever.
    My favorite line, too, naturally. ;)
  19. Good post. Good questions. I see both sides, but factoring neuroscience into a spiritual decision strikes me as kind of odd. The logical reasoning part of our brain doesn’t mature until our mid-twenties, so if we’re going down that road why not wait to pick a religion at least until we have a fully-formed brain?
  20. 15 – @BrianJ I believe it is seen as a monumental commitment. When I had my name removed, the bishop from the ward my records were in called me to ask if I understood the eternal consequences of nullifying my baptism. He wasn’t joking. He was absolutely serious.
    I think the letter I received from Salt Lake also mentioned those consequences. Again, my argument is not about the commitment itself, but that I didn’t understand what I was getting into at 8. And if a child chooses not to be baptized, so what? Better to be fully aware and informed to my mind. Besides, if your daughter never was baptized and passes away, you can just baptize her in proxy anyway (just like what will probably be done after I pass away).
  21. This is really interesting since, as you note, Mormons usually find themselves in the position of arguing against paedobaptism, so it’s somewhat disorienting to us to have someone making that same argument against our practice. And since it is indeed an argument we make, I think we (or I guess I should just say “I”) tend to have some sympathy for it.
    Like Rebecca, I think Mormons tend to be more laissez-faire in their attitudes towards baptism. I might be tempted to let her get baptized at 8, understanding that she may well choose a different faith and baptism for herself later in life, and that would be fine.
    But I understand that you take it more seriously than that. So that being the case, it’s probably better to wait.
  22. While the revealed designation of eight years as the age of accountability is indeed arbitrary, I don’t think it’s an unreasonable one. Some quick research I’ve done on this matter indicates that many churches that believe in an age of accountability most often act as if that occurs around the ages of 7 through 10 (some others also act in terms of around 12 to 13). This is also an age where children are starting to learn to think abstractly and to gain an understanding of the difference between what’s pretend and what’s reality; it is often around the age when children figure out that Santa Claus isn’t a real person. When our children were baptized at 8, they had a lot more understanding than they would have had only a few years earlier; even so, I don’t think there’d have been much point to it if there weren’t parental support to help them nurture their faith.
    That said, I’d have to agree that (in general) under the circumstances that Jack is talking about, eight is too early to expect a child to make such a decision. At some point, though, perhaps around 12 or in the early teens, if a child really wanted to be baptized in one church or the other and understood the nature of the commitment, and wasn’t doing it to please a parent, I wouldn’t recommend preventing it.
    I don’t have any theological/soteriological concern that waiting beyond the age of eight would mean that the child is “missing out” on anything. First of all, the child isn’t going to be held responsible for any decision that the parents make. Second, God answers the prayers of all who sincerely seek him. I believe that, because of grace, God meets us wherever we are, and God isn’t going to deny the help and comfort of the Spirit to those who are doing the best they know how under the circumstances to follow him.
  23. BFF: “If my child(ren) believe in my religion, I want it to be because they’ve developed their own testimony of it.”
    That’s every (good) parent’s goal. But you undoubtedly instruct your daughter to pray—an overtly religious act—so we’re just disagreeing on where to draw the line when it comes to “pre-faith parentally supervised religiosity.”
    “Why wouldn’t [baptism be a ‘moral judgment’ decision]?”
    Sorry, I mis-read/mis-quoted Piaget’s terms. I thought he was applying the term “moral judgment” to older children, but on re-reading I see that the correct distinction is “moral judgment: intentions style.” My question was meant to ask why baptism must be a “moral judgment: intentions style” and should not ever be a “moral judgment: consequences style.”
    “[other religious acts] aren’t lifetime commitments.”
    On the one hand you view baptism as monumental, yet on the other hand you ask that I view it as minimal as a letter that takes 2 minutes to write and $0.44 to send. (At any rate, all my kids’ names are on Church records once they’re born.)
    “Older children are more capable of evaluating the merits behind their options and choosing for or against accordingly.”
    That’s probably true in most cases. Still, even older children will likely make this kind of decision for immature or naive reasons.
    I got married when I was 24—slightly young by US standards. My marriage meant one thing on the day of my wedding, but over the years (11) it has come to mean very different things—it has both changed in meaning and also had new meaning added to it. I can look back and think, “Not only was I so naive, I also had so little respect or appreciation for what it means to marry someone.” I imagine that someone who didn’t marry until their 30′s or 40′s would avoid some of the ignorance that I exhibited when I first married; i.e., they would have a deeper understanding of the commitment, etc., but I’m not going to encourage people to wait until that day.
    I realize, of course, that this analogy illustrates your point as well as mine. You would argue that baptism at 8 is like marriage at 16. But I think the analogy is still useful in illustrating how we disagree.
    “the theological difference between “remission of sins” and “forgiveness of sins,””
    Well, I’m only just now thinking about it, so I’m not sure how clear my thoughts will be. Nevertheless, I think there may be a similar difference as the one between justification and sanctification—where with the former one is viewed as “not guilty” and the latter as “holy.” Forgiveness may release one from punishment, whereas remission releases one from the grasp of sin; it is transformational. (I’m sure that doesn’t make sense!) This kind of distinction would be in line with the LDS concept of the Holy Ghost as the purifying, sanctifying power; i.e., that it is truly the baptism by fire/Holy Ghost that effects the remission of sins (2 Ne 31:17).
  24. @aerin, 20: I don’t doubt the bishop viewed it as a decision with eternal consequences, but surely you view it differently. You wouldn’t reject something that you actually believe in, would you?
    “And if a child chooses not to be baptized, so what? …if your daughter never was baptized and passes away, you can just baptize her in proxy anyway.”
    See my response to Jack. I think you’re asking me to view baptism as both monumental and inconsequential.
  25. Concerning the theological difference between remission and forgiveness, from an LDS standpoint, it is my understanding that Mormons view baptism as the gateway to the path that leads to eternal life, and that, by entering the gate, are sins are remitted in the way that cancer can go into remission: the consequences are removed, but they can return all the way up until the time we are forgiven, which, from what I understand, actually happens when we die and are brought before the judgment bar of Christ.
    I am not a theologian, though, so I am sure that those who are more concerned with theology are fully capable of ripping my explanation to bits, but such is life. Most of us are aware that Mormons a) use words and terms in a way that is different from others, 2) tend to not worry too much about theology in the first place, and D) often take the YMMV stance when people try to dissect the nitty-gritty of our beliefs.
  26. For what it’s worth, the LDS Guide to the Scriptures defines “remission of sins” as “forgiveness for wrongdoing upon condition of repentance.”
    While I have some unease with the cancer allegory (it sounds too much to me like the doctrine of original sin), the teaching in Mosiah 4 is clear that to retain the remission of sins it is necessary to be humble, to call upon the Lord and to care for the needy. (And Jesus himself said that to be forgiven we must forgive, so even from the Bible we know there are conditions for forgiveness, despite what Calvinists may say.) So I think the image of baptism being a gateway to the Christian life is an apt one.
    It is through the Holy Spirit and the power of the Atonement, grace if you will, that we can retain that remission. I see forgiveness at least in part as a process, not just something that occurs at the time of judgment.
  27. I think you’re in a tough spot here, though I’d probably agree with you that given the circumstances it’s better to wait.
    And the party was a blast!!! :)
  28. We are justified by God when we are through faith brought into that relationship with Him which Paul designates by the term “in Christ” This faith is our faith in the working of God (Col 2:12), in the strength of His might, which he brought about in Christ Jesus when He raised Him from the dead, it is our belief that as with Jesus He will raise us up, that He will deliver us from the slavery of sin and reconcile us with Him in Christ Jesus. Our faith is therefore the goal of the revelation of the righteousness of God, the Gospel of His grace. The revelation of the righteousness of God moves toward and is accomplished in faith: “unto faith”. When a man has faith, the deliverance of God has reached its goal. (1 Thess 2:13) Saving faith then is the faith which receives into the soul the Gospel which saves. This faith is practical and rests on the action of the will which shows itself in trust and life and is not at all dependent on our intellect. We are brought into that relationship which Paul designates by the term “in Christ” when our faith consciously expresses itself in the act of repentance and obedience that is made when we are baptized into Christ unto the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). Just as Christ identified Him with us in death; He entered into our death on the cross and died for us. His death was our death. We then in faith, identify our self with His death on the cross in baptism were we accept His death as our death and His resurrection as our resurrection to newness of life. Through baptism then we become united with Him in His death (Rom 6:5). To be raised to newness of life in Christ is to be raised from the dead with Him. We are made spiritually alive in Christ, born again, from death to life.
    Baptism is of the utmost importance because it belongs to God and not man. The blessings, or gifts, of baptism are not commands to be obeyed but rather grace that flows from the hand of God. In baptism we are united with Christ in His death. In the waters of baptism we are placed by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:13) into that relationship with Christ which Paul designates by the term “in Christ” (Gal 3:26-27) and it is in Christ Jesus that God reconciles Himself with man (2 Cor 5:17-19) and brings us into fellowship with Him in Christ Jesus. So if you are not in that relationship designated by the term “in Christ“ then it is impossible for you to be reconciled with God. At the time of our baptism we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) by whom we are sealed, given to us as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of Gods own possession, to the praise of His glory (Eph 1:13-14). In Christ Jesus then we are delivered from the slavery of sin and reconciled with the one and only true God.
Categories:

Related Post:



0 коментарі:

Post a Comment

ClobberBlog | Mormonism, Evangelical Christianity