My problem with the whole issue is that neither side seems to have a chapter and verse that explicity speaks to infants and baptism. Both sides have arguments that are mostly deduced from scripture.
On the "pro" side, there are 2 major arguments I see. There's the baptism-replaces-circumcision-in-the-NT argument I mentioned previously. The other recounts New Testament baptisms and points out that believers were baptized along with "their house". And then assumes that infants must have been a part of at least one of these New Testament household baptisms. I don't want to argue the validity of that assumption, I just want to point out that it's an assumption, because scripture never states if infants lived in these households or not.
On the "con" side, I see mainly one argument. They point to scriptures like "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved", and tie belief and baptism together. To believe something, you must be in possession of certain information, and also understand it. You can't communicate with an infant, they don't have the capability to talk or to understand any verbal language, so we assume they believe nothing. So we wait until they're older and we can converse with them, and then get some sort of idea that they understand what baptism is before we do it.
Anyways... I tend to lean towards the Baptist side simply because I did have a scripture I could quote for the "con" side. However, I was raised by "heathen" parents and wasn't baptized as an infant, so there's the possibility I'm leaning this way simply to justify my own experience. So I'm still trying to understand the Reformed position. Apart from all the charismatic nuts I know, who couldn't care less about "doctrine", the only other Christians I know are Lutherans. And in speaking to them, their salvation equation looks something like this:
Baptism + Confirmation = Saved
The concept of
Grace + 0 = Saved
flies straight over their heads. Show them Ephesians 2:8-9, and they're stumped. I fear they have way too much trust in the ritual of baptism and virtually none in the work of Christ. But I'm digressing!
I have only recently started studying this whole matter of biblical covenants. What exactly did circumcision signify in the old days... Abraham's covenant or Moses' covenant? Please keep in mind I'm a computer programmer, not a theology student, and I'm also new to a lot of this. Please use twenty-five 2-cent words instead of 50-cent words when you can. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
