Baptism - Private Or Part Of A Church Service?

Baptism of baby = doesn't matter.

Your baptism in water after being born again...definitely public. Or WHY do it? You are ....already ....spiritually ....'''born again / baptised'''...

It is just like marriage. A public statement of your commitment. What other reason is there? Or is it a private /embarrassing moment to share with people who love and care for you....who won't see your humiliating moment needed to profess your faith.
 
Baptism of baby = doesn't matter.

Your baptism in water after being born again...definitely public. Or WHY do it? You are ....already ....spiritually ....'''born again / baptised'''...

It is just like marriage. A public statement of your commitment. What other reason is there? Or is it a private /embarrassing moment to share with people who love and care for you....who won't see your humiliating moment needed to profess your faith.

I may have missed the whole point of the thread to begin with. Is it asking if baptism's point is to make a public statement?

I think you offered a really interesting perspective, and you put it very nicely too -- though I'm not sure I agree with it...at least, not entirely.

Is baptism, like a wedding, something others should see because of its beauty and meaning? I'd say yes. I think it's ideal to include those in communion with the Body of Christ since each are so important.

However, it's kind of like "if a tree falls in the woods..." -- there is still a sound, even if we weren't there to here it. Likewise, even if a wedding ceremony takes place with only one witness or no witness other than the one marrying the couple, the marriage, under a holy ceremony, is still a brand new union of two entering into a holy vocation.

And just like marriage, a baptism, even if the only ones present is the one baptizing and the individual being baptized, done in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, a new Christian mark has been put on the guy baptized. It's not just a matter of formality, but a very important rite.

This is the belief I hold anyway. I know many of us have a difference of opinion on what baptism literally is.
 
Baptism of baby = doesn't matter.

Your baptism in water after being born again...definitely public. Or WHY do it? You are ....already ....spiritually ....'''born again / baptised'''...

It is just like marriage. A public statement of your commitment. What other reason is there? Or is it a private /embarrassing moment to share with people who love and care for you....who won't see your humiliating moment needed to profess your faith.
Not everyone understand Baptism the way you do, it's as simple as that.
 
I may have missed the whole point of the thread to begin with. Is it asking if baptism's point is to make a public statement?

I think you offered a really interesting perspective, and you put it very nicely too -- though I'm not sure I agree with it...at least, not entirely.

Is baptism, like a wedding, something others should see because of its beauty and meaning? I'd say yes. I think it's ideal to include those in communion with the Body of Christ since each are so important.

However, it's kind of like "if a tree falls in the woods..." -- there is still a sound, even if we weren't there to here it. Likewise, even if a wedding ceremony takes place with only one witness or no witness other than the one marrying the couple, the marriage, under a holy ceremony, is still a brand new union of two entering into a holy vocation.

And just like marriage, a baptism, even if the only ones present is the one baptizing and the individual being baptized, done in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, a new Christian mark has been put on the guy baptized. It's not just a matter of formality, but a very important rite.

This is the belief I hold anyway. I know many of us have a difference of opinion on what baptism literally is.

The water baptism of Jesus marked the beginning of His public ministry.

It makes most sense to me that the water baptism be a public announcement that we have decided to follow Jesus. Being dunked in the water is symbolic of what has already happened in our hearts. We should have already shared that with our family. I am not suggesting we get baptized in a river in front of the whole city, but at least in front of the whole church. Some people only hear the gospel at baptisms and weddings. I can't think of a better time to invite our unsaved friends and family.
 

MMurphy

Inactive
Private or public I do not mind either.

Just don't do it to children. They have no ability to really claim without pressure from peers or parents that they are ready to follow The King.

Let people of age choose as it must be their choice, not just following what everyone else does.
Circumcision, which was done to infants despite the fact that they were not aware of Hebrew Law, has been superseded by baptism. It is the sign of the New Covenant and a symbolic but also literal washing away of one's sins and the Bible is pretty clear that everyone who follows Christ ought to be baptized. Does this mean that people can't be saved without baptism? Of course not, the Holy Spirit is not bound by sacraments, but God has promised to confer grace through the sacrament. However, there is a case even in the Catholic Church that baptism can take place even when not immersed (called the baptism of desire, and the baptism of blood). For the most part I apply to this, but I think it has been a great error by the Protestant traditions to reduce the importance of baptism from a formal introduction into the church into being just a "symbolic event". Baptism and Communion were from the beginning the most important events in the Christian Church and those have largely been reduced from integral parts of Christian life and instead are just "symbols" now.
 
I have photos of my own baptism when I was a baby and it appeared to be a private ceremony, but I know that some churches work a baptism into their weekly Sunday services. Is this a matter of choice on the parents' behalf, or is it more up to the church?

Hello and again I'm probably hours behind. the Christian baptism is three fold as foreshown in the consecration of Levitial priests in the OT with three elements, blood, water and oil. In the OT blood was put on the right ear, hand and foot as a mark of listening to his voice, doing the work of his hands and walking in his ways. The water was symbolic of spiritual cleansing and the oil was symbolic of the Holy Spirit.

So in the NT baptisms there are still three elements, the blood ( not literal ) happening the moment an individual gives their life to Christ. The water, an outward act of something which has already occured within, signifying the death, burial and resurection new life in Jesus and of course the oil, being baptiszed in his spirit.

I hope I'm not boring you but in regards to baptism, those nights where individuals get baptised, whether it be in the assembly, the river or the sea, are by far for me the best events I have ever attended. I've seen God heal and pour out his spirit but those night are really something special. I hope this has contributed to your thoughts.....
 
I have photos of my own baptism when I was a baby and it appeared to be a private ceremony, but I know that some churches work a baptism into their weekly Sunday services. Is this a matter of choice on the parents' behalf, or is it more up to the church?

Just an opinion… not disregarding that the substance of the ceremony….

I think Christianity is a social thing “Do unto others”….

See? We need “others” to that command : )

If the baptism refers to the sacrament in the Catholic Church, one need to follow the next sacrament: Confirmation

It is a societal ceremony.
 

Barnabas

Inactive
Circumcision, which was done to infants despite the fact that they were not aware of Hebrew Law, has been superseded by baptism

Circumcision was done to infants who were raised in the faith. The children of a Christian man and wife are themselves Christian, despite the fact that they're not aware of the person of Christ. It's appropriate to baptise infants, for the same reason babies were circumcised.

There's no rule that circumcisions or baptism has to be public or private. I like he marriage analogy by the other poster. Done in private, it's just as valid. But, it's done in public for the celebration. BTW, if I were an adult convert 3000 years ago, it would be private. :)
 

MMurphy

Inactive
Circumcision was done to infants who were raised in the faith. The children of a Christian man and wife are themselves Christian, despite the fact that they're not aware of the person of Christ. It's appropriate to baptise infants, for the same reason babies were circumcised.

There's no rule that circumcisions or baptism has to be public or private. I like he marriage analogy by the other poster. Done in private, it's just as valid. But, it's done in public for the celebration. BTW, if I were an adult convert 3000 years ago, it would be private. :)
To be sure, I don't either think it is wrong to practice believers baptism as I really do believe all children are saved, however, infant baptism is just as valid.
 
Not according to the Catholics and Lutherans and many others...

Just curious and am reconciling your thoughts on Catholic doctrines...

Is the Baptism you referring to in the OP is a Catholic rite?

My question is, have you been in the rite of Confirmation as well?
 
Infant baptism is not valid, as suggested. Baptism biblically is an act of obedience to God, which infants are incapable of doing. We are baptized, usually before our spiritual family to make our faith in Christ public, in keeping with Romans 10:9, "that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved."

You can be baptized in a church tank, a backyard swimming pool, or a nearby lake or pond, but the public profession of faith is what it is about. It is a kind of Holy Spirit sealing of one's decision to follow Christ.
 

Barnabas

Inactive
Infant baptism is not valid, as suggested. Baptism biblically is an act of obedience to God, which infants are incapable of doing.

After the anti-death penalty people (those who hate the innocent) are done arguing with God about the death penalty, maybe you should argue with God about circumcision of babies. "But God, you may be the all-knowing Creator of the universe, but I know your business better than you do. Circumcision is the act of obedience to you, which infants are incapable of doing."

God commanded those who enter his OT covenant be circumcised. How can a baby be obedient to that command?
 
After the anti-death penalty people (those who hate the innocent) are done arguing with God about the death penalty, maybe you should argue with God about circumcision of babies. "But God, you may be the all-knowing Creator of the universe, but I know your business better than you do. Circumcision is the act of obedience to you, which infants are incapable of doing."

God commanded those who enter his OT covenant be circumcised. How can a baby be obedient to that command?

This is a non-point. Circumcision is a command to the parent to perform or have performed on their sons.
 
The water baptism of Jesus marked the beginning of His public ministry.

It makes most sense to me that the water baptism be a public announcement that we have decided to follow Jesus. Being dunked in the water is symbolic of what has already happened in our hearts. We should have already shared that with our family. I am not suggesting we get baptized in a river in front of the whole city, but at least in front of the whole church. Some people only hear the gospel at baptisms and weddings. I can't think of a better time to invite our unsaved friends and family.

I suspect this is often the divide so many Christians have in regards to baptism -- some believe it is a public symbol of our salvation while others believe it is an spiritual action taken in regards to our tarnished souls.
 
This is a non-point. Circumcision is a command to the parent to perform or have performed on their sons.

This is often the argument people have in favor of infant baptism, in that baptism is what carried on into the New Covenant for what was once circumcision. This is why in one of the early Church councils, they were trying to decide whether infants need to wait until they are at least 3-months-old before they are baptized. They ultimately decided that they shouldn't have to wait three months from their birth since, at that time, the mortality rate of infants was much higher.

Though the argument against this is that 1) there aren't any verses that mention infant baptism (though there are verses of people of age being baptized) and 2) the position many have that baptism isn't even necessary.
 
This is often the argument people have in favor of infant baptism, in that baptism is what carried on into the New Covenant for what was once circumcision. This is why in one of the early Church councils, they were trying to decide whether infants need to wait until they are at least 3-months-old before they are baptized. They ultimately decided that they shouldn't have to wait three months from their birth since, at that time, the mortality rate of infants was much higher.

Though the argument against this is that 1) there aren't any verses that mention infant baptism (though there are verses of people of age being baptized) and 2) the position many have that baptism isn't even necessary.

No council is required to discover what scripture teaches, which is that believers, once they have come to faith in Jesus Christ, realizing their need for a Saviour, must submit to God in baptism. It's a decision that infants are not required to make.
 
No council is required to discover what scripture teaches, which is that believers, once they have come to faith in Jesus Christ, realizing their need for a Saviour, must submit to God in baptism. It's a decision that infants are not required to make.

That's certainly the divide we often find amongst Christians. Which verse condemns infant baptism?
 
Top