Replies

How Old Is Your Church? #1, there is NO BIBLICAL EVIDENCE for infant Baptism - period. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Saying “and his house” is going beyond what Scripture actually says. Inadmissible because that isn’t evidence, that is eisegesis.

Looking at household baptisms and saying either that, "of course, that didn't include infants", or "that meaons they all got saved" goes beyond what the text says.

#2, Baptism is not a prerequisite for Salvation. It is a picture of what Christ did for you and a testimony of your faith in Him to the world AFTER you are saved. David’s baby immediately went to heaven which is where all babies go. No need for theological nuancing. Just go with what Scripture says and you are fine.

It's a symbolic judgment ordeal. Look at what OT events are referred to by the NT as baptisms.

Looking at household baptisms and saying either that, "of course, that didn't include infants", or "that meaons they all got saved" goes beyond what the text says.
Not the same thing. Paedo-Baptists hold that it affirmatively included infants. There is NO example whatsoever in Scripture of an infant being baptized. Non paedo-baptists hold to the belief that it includes believers only. Acts 8 shows that the Ethiopian could be baptized only if he believed. Belief and baptism ALWAYS go hand in hand - at least in Scripture.

Baptism being symbolic I have no problem with. I do believe it is a symbol, showing the world what Christ did for us and identifying ourselves publically with Him. He was judged for our sins. When we are baptized by immersion, we show the death, burial, and resurrection symbolically to the world. But it is a picture.