Thanks for your reply. Google translated it as being about not baptizing infants. The difference between baptizing infants and baptizing adults is in the definition of what baptism is. Those who only baptize adults usually consider baptism as a public profession of faith. Obviously an infant can't make a public profession. But those who baptize infants usually consider baptism as entrance into the family of God. Just as an infant has a physical family, so too can an infant have a spiritual church family. In this case it's completely appropriate to baptize an infant.

​@@SycamoreCreekChurchMInada haver

Do you mean the water at Valhalla Park now? We don't actually baptize there anymore. But that's for other reasons than water quality. We gather at Woldumar Nature Center because it's a good middle ground location between all our campuses.

Thanks for your reply. I used Google Translate to try to understand your comment, but am still not totally sure what you're saying. Something about immersion as baptism. We baptize in whatever way the family desires: sprinkling, pouring, or immersing. We're flexible. The water is an outward expression of an inward reality.

Thanks for the comment. Different traditions in Christianity understand baptism differently as you mention. Some understand baptism to be about a public profession of faith as you describe a washing of sin and fresh start. Obviously an infant can't make a public profession of faith. We understand baptism as entrance into the family of God. Obviously an infant can be part of a family and especially the family of God.

Tudo errado 😅😅

Thanks for the comment and question Different traditions in Christianity understand baptism differently. Some understand baptism to be about a public profession of faith as you mention in "understanding" (although we wonder if even adults fully "understand" and if understanding is what is required, can someone who has a mental disability but is an adult ever be baptized?). Obviously an infant can't understand. But we understand baptism as entrance into the family of God. Obviously an infant can be part of a family and especially the family of God. All of us are born into a family. So too can an infant be born into the family of God in baptism. And as the infant grows in understanding, so too should their understanding of faith with time and opportunity. That is the role of the family to help them do so and come to a point where they make a public profession of faith and confirm for themselves the decision that was made for them when they were too young to make it for themselves.

thank you for your comment, baptism is death to your old, sinful life and rebirth to a new sinless life in Christ, can an infant make that commitment? youre not following the bible, but the papacy, in more ways than one, even though i believe you mean well, well meaning will not save you@@SycamoreCreekChurchMI

Great questions, Andrew. This is Pastor Tom from our Eastwood campus responding. I'm not sure that I take these stories in the early parts of Genesis as literal history. They are there, I think, to make us ask these kinds of questions about God and about each other. One interesting point of exploration is how the ancient Hebrew people explained the flood versus the way other ancient people explained the flood (suggesting that there was some kind of massive flood in the region if not a completely world-wide flood). The Epic of Gilgamesh is one such example. It describes multiple Gods getting upset at the noise and racket that humans were making as the cause for them deciding to flood the world. Essentially, the gods are celestial parents sick of their kids noise and decide to kill them off to get some peace and quiet. The ancient Hebrew people saw something different. The people of Earth were treating one another unjustly, particularly with violence. So they saw in the flood a God who didn't like injustice or violence. Of course, this then raises the question which we still debate today: was violence a justified response to violence. Whatever your answer to that question is, I think we can both agree that it's a more compelling question to wrestle with than whether we're making too much noise for the gods. If you'd like to talk more, drop me an email at [email protected].

@@SycamoreCreekChurchMI The Epic of Gilgamesh is fascinating but to keep from deviating subjects, I'll leave it at that. As much as I want to take these stories as suggestions, the former Christian in me remembers the downward spiral that appears when we allow ourselves to interpret God's word rather than obey. Take the tree of knowledge for example. Although God specifically warned not to eat from it, Eave and the serpent did allow themselves to put God's word into context. They're in a garden. It's a tree bearing fruit. It makes sense to eat from the garden and after all, it's God's creation and everything God makes is good. She didn't specifically go out to disobey God, she merely put his word within the context of the world, as she understood it to be. That small decision changed the course of mankind. Observe what a twisted mess Christianity has become by allowing ourselves to interpret God's word to fit the social norms of today. We say times have changed but we forget who created time itself. Christians never set out to disobey him, but we've surely become something unholly by cherry picking his truth. I admit that my thoughts are not his thoughts and for that, I can't allow my subconscious and bias steer me away from his truth.

I'm curious to hear the story behind the phrase "the former Christian in me." If you'd rather, feel free to drop me an email at [email protected].

Thanks! The Justice League continues to do really important work.

Absolutely! Are you looking at launching a new church?

@@SycamoreCreekChurchMI we're praying for it. We already have 3 local churches planted over the past 16 years.

We really appreciate you willing to let us film in such a beautiful place in our neighborhood!