Is Baptism wrong?

[OccamsRazor]

Baptism is one of the methods of giving your child a religion before it has the opportunity to decide for itself.

It is true that Baptism does not have any physical effects and essentially the child may choose to follow another religion (or no religion) once they have the understanding enough to make up their own mind. However the symbolism of the ritual and essentially the promises made by the parents to the church say that they will bring up the child with that faith.

So my question is, is Baptism (or any similar ritual) wrong?

[1John2_26]

Baptism is one of the methods of giving your child a religion before it has the opportunity to decide for itself.

It is true that Baptism does not have any physical effects and essentially the child may choose to follow another religion (or no religion) once they have the understanding enough to make up their own mind. However the symbolism of the ritual and essentially the promises made by the parents to the church say that they will bring up the child with that faith.

So my question is, is Baptism (or any similar ritual) wrong?

As can be seen, baptism of the infant is more a dedication to the Lord and as the child gains the age of reason they can freely throw it away and not choose to follow a Godly life.

Free wiil.

[McCulloch]

Baptism is one of the methods of giving your child a religion before it has the opportunity to decide for itself.

It is true that Baptism does not have any physical effects and essentially the child may choose to follow another religion (or no religion) once they have the understanding enough to make up their own mind. However the symbolism of the ritual and essentially the promises made by the parents to the church say that they will bring up the child with that faith.

So my question is, is Baptism (or any similar ritual) wrong?

Do be careful with your terms here. Baptism, as you have described it, is practiced only by a subset of those who call themselves Christian. Other, more biblically literalist, will baptise only those who make a voluntary confession of faith. Your question makes little sense to Baptists, Pentacostals, S-D Adventists, Restorationists, Mormons, Mennonites and various other groups.

[OccamsRazor]

Do be careful with your terms here. Baptism, as you have described it, is practiced only by a subset of those who call themselves Christian.

You are absolutely correct. I am merely using Baptism as an example of any religious ritual which assigns an infant to a specific doctrine before they can make the choice.
This is also the stem of a larger question asking whether teaching a small child to follow a specific religion is wrong or should you teach them many options?

[OccamsRazor]

I would like to end this thread here. I have moved this discussion to another thread entitled "Is teaching religion to children wrong?" because the topic given here can be taken too specifically regarding baptism and I wished to make the topic into a much broader discussion.

[atheist_infidel0304]

As can be seen, baptism of the infant is more a dedication to the Lord and as the child gains the age of reason they can freely throw it away and not choose to follow a Godly life.

Free wiil.

Very true, however, it's more than just a dedication. According to some, it is a necessity as man is born and sin and thus, the unbaptized are damned should they die without being baptized. If churches wait until a child is of the age of 10 or so before allowing a child to be baptized, then does that children go to hell under the pretense of original sin? If you are between a certain range of say 0-10, then does original sin suddenly just "kick in?" And if that is the case, if you must wait until the age of free-agency or to understanding certain precepts, then isn't that not a rebuttal of original sin and the sinful nature of man?

On the other hand, I fail to see why children need to be baptized. The idea that before the age a child reaches intellectual consent, that they are damned if they die, strikes me as being somewhat unreasonable. It's one thing to commit a crime of commission or omission, but this is akin to punishing a bystander on the road. Once again, if it is doctrinally accepted that unbaptized children do not go to hell until they reach a certain age, then the idea of "everyone paying for Adam's sin" is completely negated.

[Cathar1950]

I think we can solve this problem with two baptisms. One when you born to catch the fallen sin ridden child of all the evil passed on to it from Adam and then when the child is old enough to make some kind of commitment he could be baptized again covering their tracks and making sure.
All of it is magic practiced to become the spiritual body of Christ so the first on is to become the child body and the other the adult body. Christ growing up in a way. Of course there will be some that require "spirit" baptism.