Like I said, you don’t have a proper understanding of the connection between the Old and New Testament covenants. Circumcision is forward looking, it looks to Christ. Baptism looks to the work of Christ which has already been done.
Your problem is that you view baptism as a meaningless ritual which is why you discount the several occasions when scripture says the entire household or family was baptized. You get so close when you cite 1 Cor. 7:14 because that passage teaches us that even the children of one believer are blessed. Paul is clearly teaching that even in families where only one parent is a believer, those children are entitled to admission into the covenant via baptism. You’re denying children Christ by denying them admission into God’s covenant.
Like I showed, you don’t have a proper understanding of the differences between the Old and New Testament covenant, even incredibly asserting "The old covenant isn’t different from the new covenant, it is only extended beyond Israel"!
Circumcision is forward looking, it looks to Christ. Baptism looks to the work of Christ which has already been done.
Indeed, that is not in contention, but shadows do not have complete correspondence to their fulfillment, and you continue to insist on ignoring them. Again, under the Old circumcision is stipulated for infants, which placed then within an physical nation of lost and saved, and which waged war by physical means, but circumcision was not contingent upon repentance and faith (infants and slaves had no choice), though obedience was required.
Baptism signifies being made by faith part of a spiritual nation only made up of believers, having passed from death to life, being crucified with Christ and raised to walk in newness of life. (Rm. 6) and is never stipulated for infants, but repentance and faith are, with the only baptisms in which the state of the believers are mentioned being those who were morally cognizant and able to fulfill those conditions.
That is the plain teaching of Scripture, in contrast to the eisegesis of paedobaptists, leaving them to extrapolate infant baptisms out of a few simple statements of whole household baptisms, as if the Holy Spirit would not provide a manifest example for infant baptism while providing many examples of believers baptism. Yet which you incredibly must deny is not the plain teaching of scripture, in order to support your tradition.
Your problem is that you view baptism as a meaningless ritual which is why you discount the several occasions when scripture says the entire household or family was baptized.
I do not view baptism as a meaningless ritual any more than the Lord's supper or putting on a ring in a marriage, but as repentance and faith is the stated required condition, and the only examples we have of the morally cognizant condition of the baptized is that they were able to choose Christ, then baptizing infants leaves them wet, and does not signify that they have passed from death to life, being crucified with Christ and raised to walk in newness of life. And instead it can give them a false confidence that they are already children of God.
You get so close when you cite 1 Cor. 7:14 because that passage teaches us that even the children of one believer are blessed. Paul is clearly teaching that even in families where only one parent is a believer, those children are entitled to admission into the covenant via baptism. You’re denying children Christ by denying them admission into God’s covenant.
That is absurd, and is another example of how carelessly or willingly you compel Scripture to support your tradition! For this text neither says or infers baptism, and what it actually shows is that the family is sanctified by God even though they are not believers and baptized! For the unbelieving husband is under that umbrella of sanctification as are the children! Baptism is not here or in their closet.
And are infants are guiltless, which are not be condemned, then they do not need salvation, while as soon as "the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good," (Isaiah 7:16) then he can believe on Christ and be baptized. This needs to be emphasized, while it is those who give souls the false idea that they became part of the family of God via paedobaptism who are fostering their absence from God’s covenant.
Time to move on, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God. (Hebrews 6:1) (Hebrews 6:1-2)