Did we have a pre-premortal existence?

[_madeleine]

On the other hand, the Mormon idea of children somehow losing the Kingdom of God because they turned 8 years old, and all of the sudden baptism is necessary, is problematic.

for the sake of brevity...exactly why do you consider it "problematic"?

first of all, i think that your proposal that at the age of 8 the child somehow "loses" the Kingdom of God is categorically wrong and ill-conceived.

I read this http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/580 ... -presence/

secondly, the doctrine of agency, or "choice", is essential, fundamental, and the foundation to all of Heavenly Father's teachings and character.

(that being said...given your crossing the river analogy....would you not "force" any and everyone to cross the river? why just extend that apparent "love" to your own children? what would be your cause to leave anyone behind?...my point being that your analogy may be a bit off target on this point.

You lost me. We bring our children with us. Mormons wait for their children to say, at 8 years old, "bring me across". No babes were left to cross into the promised land.

Do you feed and clothe your children without their permission? Does the Kingdom of God have a lesser importance than food and clothing?

Did the Israelites circumcise their children at eight? Just as circumcision marked a child permanently as belonging to a covenant with God, so does our baptism. Our belief is that baptism places a permanent mark on one's soul. A sign of who we are, and our belonging to the New and Everlasting Covenant, who is Jesus Christ.

I also think there is a difference in how we view how God has saved us. The Catholic view, east and west, is that God saves us as a people. Salvation history showing a broadening of "people" from a couple, Adam and Eve, to a family (Noah), to a tribe (Israel), to a nation(David and Solomon), to Jesus Christ, Who is Salvation for ALL people. Baptism is the beginning of a child's initiation into the Kingdom of God. We don't wait to bring our children with us. They are free to leave when they are adults. Also free to stop eating and wearing clothes if they choose. ;)

[_gdemetz]

"Loses the kingdom of God" is not an appropriate way to state an age of which God begins to hold one accountable.

[Guest]

Did the Israelites circumcise their children at eight? Just as circumcision marked a child permanently as belonging to a covenant with God, so does our baptism. Our belief is that baptism places a permanent mark on one's soul. A sign of who we are, and our belonging to the New and Everlasting Covenant, who is Jesus Christ.

I also think there is a difference in how we view how God has saved us. The Catholic view, east and west, is that God saves us as a people. Salvation history showing a broadening of "people" from a couple, Adam and Eve, to a family (Noah), to a tribe (Israel), to a nation(David and Solomon), to Jesus Christ, Who is Salvation for ALL people. Baptism is the beginning of a child's initiation into the Kingdom of God. We don't wait to bring our children with us. They are free to leave when they are adults. Also free to stop eating and wearing clothes if they choose. ;)

Let's think of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus. Yes, I know --- it is considered to be only a story Jesus told; however, Jesus would not use false possibilities. It would seem that both these men were Jewish. Both were circumcised, both went to the temple, did both make sacrifices (at least the rich man could afford too...). So why was Lazarus in Abraham's bossom and the rich man ended up in hell?

[_Franktalk]

Did the Israelites circumcise their children at eight? Just as circumcision marked a child permanently as belonging to a covenant with God, so does our baptism. Our belief is that baptism places a permanent mark on one's soul. A sign of who we are, and our belonging to the New and Everlasting Covenant, who is Jesus Christ.

The children of Israel were indeed marked. They were in a blood line of the chosen people. This is God's choice as to what souls would be placed into the offspring of the Jews. But of course each individual could choose to believe in the God of Abraham or not. Only then would they be attached to the tree of faith. The same is true of Baptism. It is a matter of faith and choice. With faith and choice the individual can join with others on the tree of faith. To Baptize an infant with no faith and no choice in the matter is taking away from that individual one of the most powerful decisions of a persons life. I was baptized as an infant. I never considered myself baptized until I made the choice to be baptized last year. And then I carefully chose when, where, and by whom. My baptism was viewed by at least forty people I did not know. But each of them wrote me a note about my decision. I still have those papers. I do hope your baptism was as special as mine. But of equal importance was the laying on of hands to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Again the people were hand picked by me. The Holy Ghost was already strong in me before this. But the gift is a promise on top of any personal relationship.

Eze 14:14 Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord GOD.

So tell me again how parents save the souls of their children. Or a priest saves, or any one but yourself.

[_madeleine]

Yes, a person does choose how to live their own life. I said that already. You still haven't addressed the point. A circumciszed child doesn't give their consent, not any more than a baptized child. Both rituals have covenantal purposes. Baptism replacing circumcision. Please read Acts.

At any rate, a child baptized at 8 is doing so because their parents want them to. Because that is how their parents raised them. If you truly believed in free will, you would let them decide when they were adults, perhaps school them in world religions, so they understand all the different forms of belief available to them. Then become baptized if that is their desire.

As a person who came from atheism, and raised a daughter with no religious upbringing whatsoever, you most certainly should be able to see....a child of 8 weeks or 8 years is doing what their parents decide for them. For my daughter, I made the very conscious choice to not have her baptized at eight, which my Mormon family just automatically expected was going to happen. Just as a Catholic family automatically expects an infant will be baptized.

I don't know what the point is in pretending that a child of 8 is making more of a choice than a 8 week old.

[_madeleine]

Did the Israelites circumcise their children at eight? Just as circumcision marked a child permanently as belonging to a covenant with God, so does our baptism. Our belief is that baptism places a permanent mark on one's soul. A sign of who we are, and our belonging to the New and Everlasting Covenant, who is Jesus Christ.

The children of Israel were indeed marked. They were in a blood line of the chosen people. This is God's choice as to what souls would be placed into the offspring of the Jews. But of course each individual could choose to believe in the God of Abraham or not. Only then would they be attached to the tree of faith. The same is true of Baptism. It is a matter of faith and choice. With faith and choice the individual can join with others on the tree of faith. To Baptize an infant with no faith and no choice in the matter is taking away from that individual one of the most powerful decisions of a persons life. I was baptized as an infant. I never considered myself baptized until I made the choice to be baptized last year. And then I carefully chose when, where, and by whom. My baptism was viewed by at least forty people I did not know. But each of them wrote me a note about my decision. I still have those papers. I do hope your baptism was as special as mine. But of equal importance was the laying on of hands to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Again the people were hand picked by me. The Holy Ghost was already strong in me before this. But the gift is a promise on top of any personal relationship.

Eze 14:14 Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord GOD.

So tell me again how parents save the souls of their children. Or a priest saves, or any one but yourself.

Franktalk, I understand what you are saying. My Mormon baptism was done by my father, when I was 8. It was probably the most meaningful thing he gave me. I don't know that I would call it a choice, where I believed and was baptized. If it was belief it was a child's belief. naïve and sheltered, and not knowing anything else. It is a fond memory, and when I was contemplating becoming Catholic, it concerned me that my dad would view that I had rejected what he views as very meaningful.

But, I couldn't say no to where God was leading me. The night I was baptized a Catholic is one of those nights that marks a person's life. Up there with the day I got married, and the night my daughter was born.

It seems the laying on of hands comes up, as though that is unique to Mormonism. I was also confirmed on the night I was baptized. Catholics call the laying on of hands "imposition of hands", which was done of course, and I was anointed with Holy Oil (called chrism). So I was wet, oily and happy. That was followed, the same night, with my first Communion.

My Catholic baptism had similarities to my Mormon baptism, and differences too. The largest difference for me was knowing, after so many decades of not knowing God, I finally was home.

Not too many months later I was at a baptism of a friend's baby. It was no less profound, or special, than my own baptism. All there renewed their own baptismal vows before baby Adam was baptized. He won't remember his baptism, that doesn't make it any less of a baptism. More like, a joy, to know that a child is beginning their life with the gifts that baptism gives to a person. I find that a to be not only good, but wonderful.

As a convert, and knowing many cradle Catholics, I went through a period where I had to ask God why some are born to know this gift nearly immediately, and others have to wait. I don't have the answer, but I trust God, and that He can use all things for His Good.

Adam is growing in Christ, his whole family teaching him, all present at his baptism teaching him. When he is 7 or 8 he will receive formal catcechesis from his parish, and will then be fully received into the Catholic Church. He will make his first confession, be confirmed and receive his first communion.

And last, we don't save ourselves, it is Jesus who saves us.

[_Franktalk]

Franktalk, I understand what you are saying. My Mormon baptism was done by my father, when I was 8. It was probably the most meaningful thing he gave me. I don't know that I would call it a choice, where I believed and was baptized. If it was belief it was a child's belief. naïve and sheltered, and not knowing anything else. It is a fond memory, and when I was contemplating becoming Catholic, it concerned me that my dad would view that I had rejected what he views as very meaningful.

And Jesus said:

Luk 18:17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

Saying a child's belief is naïve speaks volumes to me.

And last, we don't save ourselves, it is Jesus who saves us.

I see. Do you think that our faith and repentance has anything to do with it?

and

Gen 21:4 And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac being eight days old, as God had commanded him.

Not sure why you spoke of eight weeks.

Can you point out where one infant was baptized in the New Testament?

And where in Acts does it state that baptism replaced circumcision? For the Gentiles circumcision was not required and Jesus did not take the birthright away from the Jews.

Gen 17:9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
Gen 17:10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
Gen 17:11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and you.
Gen 17:12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
Gen 17:13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

So who is right? God who said everlasting or you who said it is replaced?

[_LittleNipper]

Yes, a person does choose how to live their own life. I said that already. You still haven't addressed the point. A circumciszed child doesn't give their consent, not any more than a baptized child. Both rituals have covenantal purposes. Baptism replacing circumcision. Please read Acts.

At any rate, a child baptized at 8 is doing so because their parents want them to. Because that is how their parents raised them. If you truly believed in free will, you would let them decide when they were adults, perhaps school them in world religions, so they understand all the different forms of belief available to them. Then become baptized if that is their desire.

As a person who came from atheism, and raised a daughter with no religious upbringing whatsoever, you most certainly should be able to see....a child of 8 weeks or 8 years is doing what their parents decide for them. For my daughter, I made the very conscious choice to not have her baptized at eight, which my Mormon family just automatically expected was going to happen. Just as a Catholic family automatically expects an infant will be baptized.
I don't know what the point is in pretending that a child of 8 is making more of a choice than a 8 week old.

Water baptism is an outward sign of an inward change --- a testimonial. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit is what saves the individual.

[_madeleine]

Franktalk, I understand what you are saying. My Mormon baptism was done by my father, when I was 8. It was probably the most meaningful thing he gave me. I don't know that I would call it a choice, where I believed and was baptized. If it was belief it was a child's belief. naïve and sheltered, and not knowing anything else. It is a fond memory, and when I was contemplating becoming Catholic, it concerned me that my dad would view that I had rejected what he views as very meaningful.

And Jesus said:

Luk 18:17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

Yes, this is a compelling reason for not withholding baptism from infants. Jesus dispels your idea that a child must be fit, in some way, in order to be received into the Kingdom of God. Why do you continue to assert that we should keep our children from Him?

Otherwise, you just made the same argument for the age of 8. So we are in agreement, I think, that there is no difference between 8 weeks and 8 years, in terms of, baptism being needed.

If you believe children are in the kingdom of heaven before the age of eight, then something happens at age 8 where you believe they are no longer in His kingdom....Don't you think this goes against the very thing Jesus is saying here?

Saying a child's belief is naïve speaks volumes to me.

And what does it say?

]


I see. Do you think that our faith and repentance has anything to do with it?

Faith and repentance are gifts of the Holy Spirit, given to us by God. Jesus is God. It is Jesus who saves you. What meaning, to your salvation, would faith and repentance have without the Cross?

Gen 21:4 And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac being eight days old, as God had commanded him.

Not sure why you spoke of eight weeks.

Straining at gnats?

I was comparing the age of baptism. There isn't an exact age an infant should be baptized. I used 8 weeks for comparison purposes. Eight days works just as well.

Can you point out where one infant was baptized in the New Testament?

Acts 16:33

Can you point out where children are excluded from a household?

And where in Acts does it state that baptism replaced circumcision? For the Gentiles circumcision was not required and Jesus did not take the birthright away from the Jews.

Gen 17:9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
Gen 17:10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
Gen 17:11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and you.
Gen 17:12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
Gen 17:13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

So who is right? God who said everlasting or you who said it is replaced?

Circumcision is not replaced for Jews. Yes, their covenant is still intact.

CHRISTIANS are not circumcised. The debate at the time was coming from those who believed a gentile convert to Christianity should be circumcised AND baptized. It is made clear, that our covenant is in, with and through Jesus Christ, and it is clear, this covenant is made via the Cross. The sacrificial nature of circumcision is fulfilled in Christ's sacrifice. We are buried with Him by our baptism.

At the Council of Jerusalem, Acts 15, it begins:

1 Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question.

The meaning of baptism is made clear throughout various parts of the Old Testament, but in regards to circumcision:

Colossians 2

9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. 11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

[_Franktalk]

Yes, this is a compelling reason for not withholding baptism from infants. Jesus dispels your idea that a child must be fit, in some way, in order to be received into the Kingdom of God. Why do you continue to assert that we should keep our children from Him?

A child is innocent of the world but at some age they start to embrace either the world or a spiritual path. It is this choice which allows the Baptism to act on the developing spirit. To Baptize an atheist or an infant is the same thing. The Baptism does not work because there is no faith. And Baptism is not an automatic entry into the Kingdom of God.

Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Act 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Faith and belief are required to receive the things of the Spirit of God. An infant may be innocent but faith and belief require a free will choice.

Faith and repentance are gifts of the Holy Spirit, given to us by God. Jesus is God. It is Jesus who saves you. What meaning, to your salvation, would faith and repentance have without the Cross?

There are many gifts from God. You will have to show me where faith and repentance are a gift from God. The cross is available for those who have faith and repent. If God gives of faith and repentance then God is a puppet master and we do not have free will. It is that simple.