The Unbiblical Practice of Infant Baptism

I. Introduction

The topic of baptism has always been tied to the issue of salvation and has very serious implications. Various doctrines have developed throughout Church history, many of which are completely unbiblical, most of which ignore what is required for salvation, and others which are grounded in traditions which ignore the plain teachings of Scripture. 

In this article I will discuss the practice of infant baptism (babies) and its implications, and in a subsequent video/article, the broader topic of the baptism of children and young teens of Christian families and believer’s baptism in general. In this video/article we will ask and examine the following:

1. Is there any evidence in the New Testament that infants were baptized? When I use the term ‘infants’ I will be referring to the practice of baptizing young babies. We will examine some of the passages used to defend infant baptism which use the word ‘household’. We will also ask if the notion of infant baptism being tied to a form of the continuance of circumcision has any biblical merit.

2. I will argue that Scripture has very specific commands for both infants and all dependent children of Christians. These commands which are grounded in the spiritual authority within the family, are fundamentally ignored by those who baptize infants. 

3. I will briefly examine the doctrine of original innocence and Jesus’ attitude and statements about infants and children, and argue that baptizing infants is to defame the character of Christ in this area.

4. I will ask why anyone would desire to baptize an infant, and argue that the practice of infant baptism has led millions to a false sense of salvation, and is often based on the erroneous doctrine of inherited sin. 

II. New Testament Evidence for Infant Baptism

Those who argue that the practice of infant baptism is biblical, are forced to use passages which use the term ‘household’ and claim that babies were included in this term. Let’s examine two of these passages.

Acts 10 records Peter being sent to the Gentile centurion Cornelius’ home. In Acts 11, Peter is explaining his actions to Jews who criticized his entering the house of ‘uncircumcised men and eating with them’ (v3). Peter recalls the vision he had from the Lord, and Cornelius’ claim that an angel had told him, 

‘Send to Joppa for Simon who is called Peter. He will bring you a message through which you and all your household will be saved.’ (Acts 11:13-14)

The claim of some is that both babies and small children are included in the term ‘household’.  The word translated ‘household’ is oikos (οἶκός) which may be used of one’s immediate family, wife and children, but also the extended household including servants, relatives and attendants.

In Acts 10:1-8 we have the record of Cornelius having the vision in which he was instructed to send for Peter. Verse 2 tells us that ‘He and all his oikos (household) were devout and God-fearing’. Can an infant be ‘devout and God-fearing’? The answer is an obvious ‘no’ as babies have no cognitive abilities.

In verse 7 we begin to get a better picture of who was included in the term household. Cornelius ‘called two of his servants and a devout soldier who was one of his attendants’ and sent them to find Peter. We are then told of Peter’s vision (v9-23) and in verse 24 are told that, in expectation of Peter’s visit, Cornelius ‘had called together his relatives and close friends’. When Peter went into the house he ‘found a large gathering of people’ (v27).

In verses 36-38 Peter states of his audience:

‘36 You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, announcing the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all. 37 You know what has happened throughout the province of Judah, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached – 38 how God appointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with Him.’ (Acts 10:36-38)

Please note that twice Peter confirms that these people knew the message God sent to the people of Israel (v36) and knew everything that had been happening in the province of Judah beginning with John the Baptist and Jesus’ ministry. Obviously, babies cannot be included in those who knew things. Furthermore, the Lord had already prepared the hearts of these people, they were not ignorant of the message Peter was about to bring. The apostle went on to explain the death and resurrection of Christ and about those who were eyewitnesses, including himself (v39-42).  Then we read:

43 All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name. 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. (Acts 10:44-48)

Please note the following:

1. We have already seen that these people were devout and God-fearing, and here we see that knew everything that had been happening throughout Judea. In this regard, the Lord had prepared their hearts to be regenerated, to be born again. Peter told them in verse 43 that ‘everyone who believes in him (Christ) receives forgiveness of sins through his name’. It was immediately after this that the Holy Spirit came upon them. 

No infant has the cognitive ability to be devout and God-fearing. Both require a knowledge of right and wrong and the ability to choose. Furthermore, no infant in Cornelius’ household knew what was happening throughout Judea in order to be ready to receive Peter’s message. Also, those who believed on Christ would receive forgiveness of sins. A baby cannot believe and nor has it committed any sins to be forgiven of.

2. The Holy Spirit came upon ALL who heard the message and they began to speak in tongues and praise God. If you are going to include infants in this household, then the ALL includes them. Can a baby hear the message and respond in faith? Did infants suddenly begin to speak in tongues and praise God? If not, then neither were they included in Peter’s command to baptize. 

Another account used is from Acts 16, the story of the jailer. Paul and Silas are arrested, beaten and thrown into prison, their feet being fastened in stocks. About midnight while they are praying and singing, there is a violent earthquake. All the prison doors flew open and the prisoner’s chains came loose. The jailer was going to commit suicide as he would be killed for letting prisoners escape, but Paul assured him they were all there.

He asks Paul and Silas, ‘what must I do to be saved’ and they replied, ‘believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved – you and your household’ (16:31). Paul and Silas then ‘spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house’ (v32). We are then told that after dressing Paul and Silas wounds, the jailor and all his household were baptized ‘because he had come to believe in God – he and his whole household’ (v33-34). 

As in the case of Cornelius, and indeed all of the New Testament, the only criteria for baptism is faith in Christ, it is for those who believe. The fact is, if you argue that a baby can believe in Christ, I would argue they can also reject Him. Both positions are absurd. We now move to our second point.

III. Does Scripture have Specific Commands for Children?

In the general discussion about the salvation of infants and children, two areas are often ignored. Firstly, the issue of authority in the household, and secondly, that Scripture has specific commands for children who are under their parent’s authority. In modern Western cultures people wish to view children as little adults who can make decisions concerning salvation quite independently of their parents. This kind of thinking is contrary to Scripture.

The apostle Paul taught that no believer was obliged to keep the Mosaic law, indeed he used the word ‘anathema’ to any who insisted on adding law to grace (Galatians 1). Yet twice he commands that children must obey their parents and quotes the law to support his view (Ephesians 6:1-4. Colossians 3:20) as the status of children remains the same in both old and new covenants. 

Western Christians like to use the phrase ‘age of understanding’ to insist that dependent children can act independently of parents regarding salvation, but Scripture only ever teaches an age of independence from parents. 

The issue in the New Testament is not about what age a child can understand, but about what age the child in independent from parents and can give their life to Christ. As a general biblical principle, as far as males are concerned, that age is 19 years. This is NOT to say that no person can be born again prior to turning 19, but to establish a general age at which God considers a person to be an adult. There are dozens of passages and instructions in the Old Testament which confirm the age of 19. Keep in mind also the instructions of Deuteronomy 21:18-21. 

18 If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his mother and father shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of the town. 20 They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” 21 Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid. (Deuteronomy (21: 18-21)

Please note the following:

1. The son is considered rebellious as he refuses to accept disciple from either his mother or father. He refuses to obey them.

2. He is still young enough that they can ‘take hold of him and bring him to the elders’.

3. That he is old enough to be getting drunk.

4 The men of his town are to stone him to death.

5. All Israel will hear of it. Continual disobedience to parents and rebellious behavior carried a death sentence in Biblical culture. No doubt this was a powerful deterrent.

I am in no way advocating that such laws should apply to Christian parents, however, if we do not understand the Jewish mindset in regards to children, we will be forcing our own cultural views on the Scriptures and miss the point entirely. In the case of females, they were under their father’s authority whilst in their father’s home, and then under their husband’s authority after being given in marriage. 

So what is the condition of the dependent children of believers? 1 Corinthians 7:14 tells us that the child who has one believing parent is ‘not unclean, but holy’. Again, here Paul is using old covenant language. Some will argue that the child is no more ‘saved’ than the unbelieving spouse, however, this is untrue as the unbelieving spouse is independent whilst the child is not. 

The dependent child is commanded to obey their parents in all things, and the obedient child of one believing parent is ‘saved’ in the same way as the Old Testament saints were saved. This is a huge topic in which it is necessary to understand the Bible’s recognition of cognitive development in children, God’s instructions to children, and when the Lord holds children accountable for their actions. Please watch my video entitled ‘Are Your Children Saved’ for an in-depth discussion on this topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1WZnEr_whA

IV. The Biblical View of Original Innocence

Many of those who hold to the Augustinian view of original sin claim that children are conceived in sin and inherit the sin and guilt of their parents and are, therefore, born sinners. In John Calvin’s words:

And the Apostle most distinctly testifies, that "death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned," (Rom 5:12); that is, are involved in original sin, and polluted by its stain. Hence, even infants bringing their condemnation with them from their mother's womb, suffer not for another's, but for their own defect. For although they have not yet produced the fruits of their own unrighteousness, they have the seed implanted in them. Nay, their whole nature is, as it were, a seed-bed of sin, and therefore cannot but be odious and abominable to God.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2. 8

For Calvin, original sin (inherited sin/guilt) renders a child repulsive and an abomination to God. Is it any wonder that Calvin, holding this view, does not quote Jesus' words regarding children, for perhaps in his mind, the Lord would say, 'keep the little children away from me, for they are repulsive and an abomination'. Contrary to Calvin and Augustine, Scripture considers children to be innocent. Consider these passages from the Old Testament where God condemns those who shed ‘innocent blood’.

They sacrificed their sons and daughters to demons. They shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was desecrated by their blood. (Psalm 106:38)

Jeremiah says,

 For they have forsaken me and made this a place of foreign gods; they have burned sacrifices in it to gods that neither they nor their fathers knew, and they have filled this place with the blood of the innocent. They have built high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as offerings to Baal - something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind. (Jeremiah 19:4-5)

And what of Jesus attitude to children? 

He called a little child and had him stand among them. And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me. But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. (Matthew 18:2-6)

Here we have Jesus calling a little child who is old enough to stand. He tells the adults listening that they must become like this child to enter heaven, and if anyone causes such a child to sin, their punishment will be grave indeed.

See that you do not look down on these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven... In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost. (Matthew 18:10, 14)

Here, Jesus speaks of these children having angels and states that God is not willing that any of these little ones be lost. Yet, those who hold to Augustine’s version of an inherited sin nature are basically stating that these children are already lost, having inherited sin through their parents. And no, Psalm 51 does not state that a child is a conceived sinner, but rather was conceived by sinners. Furthermore, Romans 5 does not support the Augustinian view. Paul is contrasting life and death. All human beings have inherited death, the consequences of Adam’s sin, and in this sense we were made sinners, under the condemnation of death, as if we committed the sin itself. 

One cannot use these verses to contradict the clear teaching of the innocent blood of children, or Jesus’ view that children are the fundamental example of what is required to enter the kingdom of heaven?

V. What Motivates Infant Baptism?

Whether or not those who baptize infants admit it, this practice is always tied to the issue of salvation. Roman Catholics do it to cancel original sin and, throughout that church’s history, have claimed unbaptized infants will go to hell. Orthodox traditions do not hold to inherited sin, but believe that infant baptism is a form of ‘holy illumination’ in which the light of Christ enters the child, joining the child to the body of Christ. Calvinists such as Presbyterian, consider the practice to be the ‘sign and seal of the covenant of grace’, however these same people insist that God predetermines individuals to heaven or hell from before creation and nothing can change a person’s eternal destiny.

In Ukraine, where I have ministered since 2003, infants are baptized, fully dipped in water three times and have god-parents. Parents believe that this action secures the salvation of the baby, yet, like Catholics and Presbyterians, the vast majority of adults brought up in this system have no relationship with Jesus Christ and no desire to have Him as Lord of their lives. Lutherans, whose theology is thoroughly Augustinian, openly reject any subjective relationship with Christ, and encourage adherents to have an objective salvation through sacraments. In truth, a relationship with Christ requires two ‘subjects’, not ‘objects’. And to those who claim that infant baptism is a continuance of circumcision, I would ask, why then do you baptize girls?

All of these denominations rely on rituals, traditions and false interpretations of the use of sacraments for salvation, rather than an existential, life-changing relationship with Jesus Christ. In this sense, infant baptism is just one of the doctrines enshrined in their counterfeit versions of Christianity.

VI. In Conclusion

In my opinion, infant baptism is an insult to the character of God and a practice which has deceived millions into a false sense of salvation. It is an insult to God as for many, it assumes that the Lord will send unbaptized children to hell if they die in infancy. To such people, I would ask that they show me a single verse of Scripture directed towards children and infants, that even hints at such a thing. I would also ask if they consider Jesus a liar, considering that He used children as an example of what is required for salvation.

Sadly, there are people who are stupid enough to believe that if they were baptized as an infant, they can reject all of the New Testament requirements for salvation, have no existential relationship with Christ, no intention or desire to live lives which honor God, are thoroughly in love with the world, practice all the acts of the flesh listed in Galatians 5:19-21, and walk into heaven when they die. Such people will hear the words, ‘depart from me I never knew you’ Matthew 7:21-23).

I pray this video has been enlightening for you. If you are a person who does not have an intimate relationship with Christ and are relying on your being baptized as a baby to get you to heaven, understand that you have been deceived. The simple truth is this. There are requirements for eternal life, and if you have no desire to be in a relationship with Christ as your Lord and Savior in this life, He will hold you to that decision in the next.

Please remember to share this video with those who you believe may benefit from its message.

God bless

Steve Copland