Synopsis: Challenges to Infant Baptism

 

Infant Baptism Challenges

 

B. B. Warfield . . . affirmed that infant baptism does not appear in the Scripture.

Regulative principle: If Scripture doesn’t command it, it is forbidden

By the 2nd and 3rd centuries, concern regarding original sin and the eternal destiny of children—began to advocate for infant baptism. (Origen and Cyprian of Carthage) 

Dr. John MacArthur stated "Infant baptism is not in Scripture. And against that statement there is no evidence. There is no refuting of that statement. Scripture nowhere advocates infant baptism; it nowhere mentions infant baptism; it doesn’t exist in the Bible. There is no example of it; there is no comment on it; it’s not there. It is therefore impossible to prove that infant baptism is valid from the New Testament. It’s impossible to support it from the New Testament or, for that matter, from the Old Testament.

German theologian Schleiermacher wrote, “All traces of infant baptism which have been asserted to be found in the New Testament must first be inserted there.”

A Lutheran professor, Kurt Aland, after intensive study of infant baptism, says there is no definite proof of the practice until after the third century. And he says, “This cannot be contested.”

Catholic professor of theology, Haggelbacher, writes, “This controversy has shown that it is not possible to bring in absolute proof of infant baptism by basing one’s argument on the Bible.” 

Tertullian offers four suggestions for baptism of infants:

1.      Should have their baptism delayed.

2.      Why should the sponsors be put into danger by the failure of the little child to fulfill the promises of the sponsors?

3.      Should not be forbidden to come but be permitted to come to Christ “when they have become able to know Christ."

4.      Should not be given baptism until they “know how to ask for salvation”