From Zucks review of Ferguson's massive work ...
Infant baptism was not practiced "before the latter part of the second century" (p. 856). But, he suggests, it may have arisen as an "emergency baptism of sick children expected to die soon so that they would be assured of entrance into the kingdom of heaven. ... It became the usual practice in the fifth and sixth centuries" (p. 857). "Original sin became the reason for infant baptism in the western church"
LOL! if this is true, when it was first introduced in the “latter part of the second century” where was the controversy from Bible believing Christians??
the answer? there was none, because all the Church practiced it and all acknowledged its Apostolic source.
what proof does this gentleman have for his assertion?
i have the Church Fathers and the Apostolic tradition that say otherwise.