There are many who hold that infant baptism is "unbiblical" because there is no explicit account of it in the New Testament. We could argue on the same principle that the people of the New Testament were very serious about "not defling the temple of the Holy Spirit." Therefore they were very healthy and in fact didn't relieve themselves. There is no record of them relieving themselves, so their bodies must have been running at 100% efficiency, and we need to get back to their practice. This is obviously ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than trying to say that no infants were baptized because the Bible doesn't say so directly. The truth is the Bible really gives no account of a Christian family giving birth, so there is no record of the practices of the early church in the New Testament. The first we really hear about infant baptism in church history is those refuting it. This would tell the literate person that it had been standard practice until it was refuted. So unless you are willing to accept that the Early Christians didn't have excrement, you cannot assert that infant baptism is "unbiblical."
