You continue to pile up verses from the Bible that don't address infant baptism - perhaps thinking that their number alone will support your case. So far, you have not produced a single verse that includes a wet baby. Really, not one infant baptism, command, instruction, etc. Nor have you produced a single extra-Biblical writing in the first 100 years of the Church to demonstrate that this was practiced. In total, you've produced nothing to prove your case.
Now, you want to put the onus on me to support your case by asking me to show Scripture prohibits infant baptism. Sorry. I won't do your job. However, I will answer why your request is meaningless... The Bible doesn't deny lots of things. Baptism of aliens, baptism of dogs and cats, baptism of severed limbs, proxy baptism for distant relatives, etc. It does not need to deny every category. It simply demonstrates in every instance, that baptism is for people who hear, believe and repent, and then follow Christ in baptism. Those who do not do these things are NEVER baptized. Ever.
YOU HAVEN'T ANSWERED ANY OF MY QUESTIONS TO YOU. WHY?
Frankly, I only know of one simple reason why you are not answering... there is no support for infant baptism in Scripture at all. I've patiently dealt with every single issue you raised, yet you haven't answered even one of my questions.
Please take any 3-5 of my questions and answer them.
AMPU, you have not provided one verse that denies infant baptism.
I just provided a number of verses that says God knows His from the womb. Paul says God watches out specifically for His children. Jesus says that the infants are to come to Him.
You are arguing from a negative and refuse to admit that all you are providing is circumstantial evidence. You say the bible denies infant baptism but cannot show where it does so.
Not even one single verse. Not even a piece of a verse.
Now, show the verse OR admit your case is merely circumstantial.