“There is nothing inherently wrong with receiving children into the church in a probationary capacity. If that were so, then it would have also been so during the Old Testament.”
I would disagree...
Your example of circumcision is from a covenant God made with the NATION of Israel. It was done to EVERY male in the nation. It was an outward sign that they were under a covenant. Every time they saw their “member”, they were reminded their nation had a covenant with God.
Baptism is an outward individual sign that an inward change has happened, and the individual has decided to publicly testify that he or she is a follower of Christ. Infants can neither exercise saving faith, nor testify they are following Christ.
“There is nothing inherently wrong with receiving children into the church in a probationary capacity.”
If you want to sprinkle or dunk to show your personal intent as a parent, realize that is totally different than the Biblical teaching of believers baptism. The use of baptism for other purposes distorts its meaning.
Baptism is not for “probation”. It is commanded as part of discipleship. It is demonstrated only for those who heard and believed.
I repeat from upthread:
No where does the Bible command baptism for infants. It commands it for adult believers.
No where does the Bible provide instructions for baptism of infants.
No where does the Bible show an infant being baptized. Ever.
Any argument beyond that is to support an idea that did not originate in Scripture.
Find that quote for me in the bible.