A thought or two about Infant Baptism

[ViaCrucis]

No one is denying infants of Jesus Christ, this is not the argument being made.

The point of baptism is to make a decision to live for Christ-

That's not what Scripture teaches. So, no, that's not the point of baptism.

washing away old sins and become a new creature in Christ.

Which happens in baptism, not as a decision we make to live for Christ, but because Christ having suffered once for the sins of the world has made satisfaction, and thus freely justifies us by grace. It is by grace that we are saved. Baptism is grace, it is God's righteousness, not our righteousness and work. Ephesians 2:8-9.

We are not saved by decisions others make for us, we our saved by the decisions we make

We aren't saved by the decisions we make either. We are saved by the grace of God alone on account of what Christ has done alone. We are saved because Christ died and Christ rose, and God gives us saving faith by the Gospel, Romans 10:17.

and the direction in life we choose to follow, Infants cannot make any of these decisions, which is why there are no examples of infant baptism in scripture. We are told to follow the scriptures and there are reasons for it, it keeps us safe and on the narrow path.

And if we believe what Scripture actually says about baptism then there's no reason to withhold it from our children. And what does Scripture actually say about baptism? That it is about making a decision to live for Christ? No, the Bible never says that.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[eleos1954]

Infant baptism is the practice of baptizing infants or young children. There are several biblical and theological arguments that can be made in favor of infant baptism.

First, the Bible teaches that baptism is a sacrament that washes away sin and grants the gift of the Holy Spirit. In the New Testament, it is clear that baptism is for the forgiveness of sins (Mark 1:4, Acts 2:38) and grants the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38, John 3:5). Since infants are born with original sin, they are in need of forgiveness and the gift of the Holy Spirit, just as adults are.

Second, the Bible teaches that baptism is the means by which one enters the covenant community of believers. In the Old Testament, infants were included in the covenant community through circumcision, which was the sign of the covenant (Genesis 17:9-14). In the New Testament, baptism has replaced circumcision as the sign of the covenant (Colossians 2:11-12). Therefore, it makes sense that infants would be included in the covenant community through baptism.

Third, the Bible teaches that the whole household can be baptized (Acts 16:15, 33; 1 Corinthians 1:16). This implies that the infants in the household were included in the baptism.

Fourth, the early Church practice of baptizing infants is attested in the writings of the early Church fathers, such as Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Augustine of Hippo.

In conclusion, infant baptism is biblically and theologically sound, as it is in line with the biblical teaching on the nature of baptism and its relationship to the forgiveness of sins and entrance into the covenant community of believers, and it was also the practice of early Church.

The Bible says nothing about infant baptism ... it's not directly expressed anywhere.

The verses you used does not mention babies at all (to suggest that is adding to scripture) ... baptism don't save anyone .... it is a public display of faith in Christ.

Jesus Himself was not baptized until He was of adult age.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

We aren't saved by the decisions we make either. We are saved by the grace of God alone on account of what Christ has done alone. We are saved because Christ died and Christ rose, and God gives us saving faith by the Gospel, Romans 10:17.

We are not forced to do the will of God- it is a conscious decision to do, or not do. Jesus indicated those who choose not to do the will of God, will not receive grace, which is how we are saved.

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Grace does not give us freedom to sin Romans 6:1-2 when we live in Christ, we make the decision to no longer live in the world, but instead be guided by His Spirit who leads us to repentance and obedience, Acts 3:28, Acts 5:32, John 14:15-18 Infants can't comprehend this or make these decisions, which is why baptism was only practiced in scripture by adults or those who have understanding of what this means.

Anyway, I will leave it as we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[BobRyan]

Catholic teaching on infant baptism is based on several biblical passages, including:

• Acts 2:38-39, which says, "Peter said to them, 'Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ

When I find an infant that can read that and agrees to repent - then I for sure will support that infant being baptized.

I have met a number of adults and children that have done that - but so far... no infants.

• Colossians 2:11-12 which states "In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ; and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead."

I have met a number of adults and children that accept the symbolism of "buried with him in baptism" and agree to it - but so far no infants doing that - that I have found.

• 1 Corinthians 7:14 which says "For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy."

Does not say "They are holy only if they have been baptized".

• Mark 10:13-16, where Jesus blessed the children and said, "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God."

No doubt parents can carry children to have them blessed.

But we are talking about baptism. IN Mark 10 Jesus is not baptizing anyone.

These passages are understood by Catholics to support the idea that baptism is not only for adults but also for children

Also a lot of non-Catholics agree that our 10,11,12 year old children are available for baptism if they so choose.

That is not the part that is being questioned.

We are specifically talking about a group that Catholics agree can not repent and be baptized and have no understanding at all about "being buried with Christ in baptism".

I notice you are leaving Peter out of this. Let's allow him to tell us what he thinks of baptism - he may not have been Catholic but at least a lot of Catholics hold him in high regard.

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also suffered for sins once for all time, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which He also went and made proclamation to the spirits in prison, 20 who once were disobedient when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Peter points to the very thing that infants can't do -- Infants don't make "an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,"

 

[BobRyan]

I can find no biblical justification for denying our children Jesus Christ.

good thing we are not equivocating between that -- and the Bible statements about "appealing to God for a clean conscience" in 1 Peter 3 and "repent and be baptized" in Acts 2. Because those last two are actually specific to baptism that first one is not.

As though we should raise our children as atheists or pagans rather than as Christians.

Good thing we are not stuck with the false dichotomy of "either baptize infants or raise them as pagans"

That we should deny them God's means and works and word.

none of which call for infant baptism as we have seen in the actual texts that do speak about baptism in scripture.

That we should stand in the way between Christ and our children

good thing the Bible does not tell us we need to baptize infants or else stand in between Christ and infants.

For Christ Himself says concerning these little children, "The kingdom belongs to such as these"

But does not say "only if they are baptized" in that context Jesus was baptizing no infants.

We can baptize pagan idolators who repent

Because that is how "repent and be baptized" works according to the Bible.

It does not mean that infants can do it though.

Unless it can be proved by Holy Scripture that God forbids little children to come to Him

If you have a little infant that has chosen to repent and accept Christ as his/her savior - seeking to come to Christ for salvation - I say go ahead and do that ... I have never met such an infant.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Have you studied the alternatives?

There are various alternative interpretations of the concept of original sin in Christianity, but the traditional doctrine is based on the belief that all humans are born with a state of sin inherited from Adam and Eve, as described in the Bible in the book of Genesis.

One scripture that is often cited in support of the doctrine of original sin is Romans 5:12, which states: "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned." This passage is understood to refer to the first man, Adam, and his disobedience in the Garden of Eden, which brought sin and death into the world for all mankind.

Another passage often used to support the doctrine of original sin is Psalm 51:5, which says: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." This verse is understood to indicate that all people are born in a state of sin and in need of salvation.

Additionally, the Bible teaches that all have sinned, Romans 3:23 "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

It's important to note that the concept of original sin is central to the Christian belief in the need for salvation through Jesus Christ, and the understanding of the doctrine may vary among different Christian denominations.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

baptism don't save anyone

The doctrine of baptismal regeneration teaches that baptism is necessary for salvation and that it washes away original sin. This belief is supported by several passages in the New Testament.

One of the most commonly cited passages is Mark 16:16, which states: "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." This verse suggests that belief and baptism are both necessary for salvation.

Another passage that is often used to support the doctrine of baptismal regeneration is 1 Peter 3:21, which says: "And this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." This verse indicates that baptism is not just a physical ritual, but a pledge of a good conscience towards God and it saves by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Additionally, Acts 22:16, Paul recounts his conversion experience, and he says: "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name." This verse also suggests that baptism washes away sins.

It's important to note that the understanding of the role of baptism in salvation may vary among different Christian denominations. Some believe that baptism is necessary for salvation, while others believe that faith in Jesus Christ is the sole requirement for salvation, and baptism is a symbol of that faith or a sacrament that gives access to grace.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

We are specifically talking about a group that Catholics agree can not repent and be baptized and have no understanding at all about "being buried with Christ in baptism".

The Bible does not provide explicit teaching on infant repentance, as the concept of repentance is generally understood to involve a conscious decision to turn away from sin and turn towards God. However, the Bible does speak about the concept of original sin and the need for salvation from a young age, which is related to infant repentance.

One passage that is often cited in relation to infant repentance is Psalm 51:5, which states: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." This verse suggests that all people are born in a state of sin and in need of salvation, including infants.

Another passage that may be relevant to the concept of infant repentance is Isaiah 7:16, which says: "For before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste." This verse suggests that even young children have the ability to choose between right and wrong, and therefore the ability to repent.

Additionally, Jesus himself speaks of the need for repentance from a young age in Luke 18:15-17, where he tells a parable about a child who will not be able to enter the kingdom of God unless they become like children.

It's important to note that while the Bible doesn't provide explicit teaching on the concept of infant repentance, it does make clear the universality of sin and the need for salvation, and the importance of faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Some Christian denominations practice infant baptism as a sign of the child's incorporation into the Church and initiates them into the grace of God.

 

[BobRyan]

The Bible does not provide explicit teaching on infant repentance,

It does provide explicit teaching on Baptism and the "repent and be baptized" command.

The fact that infants don't have that capacity is not a fault with the Bible or with people that "notice".

as the concept of repentance is generally understood to involve a conscious decision to turn away from sin and turn towards God.

Now see - we all agree on that point.

One passage that is often cited in relation to infant repentance is Psalm 51:5, which states: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

A good example of the psalmist NOT claiming that as an infant he was confessing repenting of sin.
The text of Ps 51 is about the actions of the mother - it is not about giving birth to an infant who is in the middle of committing sin.

Ps 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.

The infant is not the "Actor" in the shaping or the conceiving. It is passive -- particularly morally passive in those activities

This verse suggests that all people are born in a state of sin and in need of salvation

I agree that all have a sinful nature and need the gospel but infants are not sinning and have no capacity to claim the blood of Christ or claim any promise of God or understand any abstract concept such as sin. As we all know.

They need the gospel - but they do not need to repent of something as Christ stated in John 9:41
41 Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin;

, including infants.

Another passage that may be relevant to the concept of infant repentance is Isaiah 7:16, which says: "For before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste." This verse suggests that even young children have the ability to choose between right and wrong

Certainly true of 11 year olds but not the case with infants. -- as we all know.

Additionally, Jesus himself speaks of the need for repentance from a young age in Luke 18:15-17, where he tells a parable about a child who will not be able to enter the kingdom of God unless they become like children.

Luke 18 is not about children who are unnable to enter heaven because they are not baptized
Luke 18 is not about children who are unnable to enter heaven because they have not become like children.

It's important to note that while the Bible doesn't provide explicit teaching on the concept of infant repentance, it does make clear the universality of sin

It does not claim infants sin not even by being conceived or being born.
It does not claim infants need to be baptized or that they can confess something.

 

[Jonaitis]

Second, the Bible teaches that baptism is the means by which one enters the covenant community of believers. In the Old Testament, infants were included in the covenant community through circumcision, which was the sign of the covenant (Genesis 17:9-14). In the New Testament, baptism has replaced circumcision as the sign of the covenant (Colossians 2:11-12). Therefore, it makes sense that infants would be included in the covenant community through baptism.

The Old Covenant is distinct and operates differently than the New Covenant. You do not enter it by any other means but faith, and without faith, there is no participation in the covenant community of believers. The sign of baptism is only for believers. It would be a desecration of the sign and what it signifies to baptize an infant based on their parents' faith.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The Old Covenant is distinct and operates differently than the New Covenant. You do not enter it by any other means but faith, and without faith, there is no participation in the covenant community of believers. The sign of baptism is only for believers. It would be a desecration of the sign and what it signifies to baptize an infant based on their parents' faith.

Baptism is seen as the sign of entry into the new covenant in several verses in the New Testament. For example, in Matthew 28:19-20, Jesus tells his disciples to baptize people in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and states that "therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Similarly, in Mark 16:16, Jesus states that "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

Additionally, in Acts 2:38, Peter tells the crowd that they must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of their sins, and in Galatians 3:27, Paul states that "all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ."

In Colossians 2:12 it is stated that "having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead."

These verses indicate that baptism is a necessary step for one to enter into the new covenant and receive the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, and that it is an outward expression of one's faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[Jonaitis]

Baptism is seen as the sign of entry into the new covenant in several verses in the New Testament. For example, in Matthew 28:19-20, Jesus tells his disciples to baptize people in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and states that "therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Similarly, in Mark 16:16, Jesus states that "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

Some of the earliest manuscripts do not include Mark 16:9-20. However, even if it was present in the original autographs, this does not indicate that baptism saves an individual. Yes, baptism is a covenant sign, but that does not give anyone entrance into the covenant community. In Acts 2:38, a similar looking passage that you also quote, refers to the gospel command (repent) and its public response (baptism). In other words, baptism was one's public confession of their repentance, which was a significant act of displaying one's faith.

Baptism wasn't novel to Judaism. John's baptism (and later the 'Christian baptism') was already familiar to the Jewish audience. It was required for converts to undergo a sort of ritual washing (tevilah) to represent one's cleansing from their former life. When John was baptizing people in the Jordan for the "repentance of sins," he was signifying by utilizing this same ritual practice that all people, including Jews, need to be cleansed of their sins. "And do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." (Matthew 3:9-10).

This is relevant to the context of Acts 2:38, for to publicly undergo this baptism as ordained by Christ was a public confession and act of one's faith for the Jewish audience present before Peter. If they repented and accepted baptism, they would be taking the first steps of obedience toward salvation. This is what Peter is talking about. Baptism was an act of obedience in response to repentance - which saves. Repent and be baptized (as the first step in that direction) for the forgiveness of your sins. It is a gross interpretation to see baptism as some included condition.

Additionally, in Acts 2:38, Peter tells the crowd that they must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of their sins, and in Galatians 3:27, Paul states that "all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ."

I would not divorce Galatians 3:27 with 23-26. Clearly, Paul is stating our spiritual immersion by faith in Christ, an illustration he has employed in other places (1 Corinthians 10:1-4).

In Colossians 2:12 it is stated that "having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead."

Simply being dunked or sprinkled with water doesn't unite us to a death like his and a resurrection like his. Paul actually explains the meaning of this in Romans 6:3-11.

These verses indicate that baptism is a necessary step for one to enter into the new covenant and receive the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, and that it is an outward expression of one's faith in Jesus Christ.

It is absurd to think that being touched by the element allows one to enter the kingdom of God.

Let's look at Jeremiah 31:31-34:

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

If baptized infants participate in the New Covenant, then they already:

1. Have the law written on their heart.
2. Have the saving knowledge of God.
3. Have their iniquities forgiven and forgotten.

In other words, they do not need faith to have their sins forgiven, nor do they need the gospel to know God, nor do they need to be taught what is right, for their entrance into the New Covenant, as stated in Jeremiah 31, endows them with these blessings automatically, being members and participants already through baptism. There is a huge error in this.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Some of the earliest manuscripts do not include Mark 16:9-20. However, even if it was present in the original autographs, this does not indicate that baptism saves an individual. Yes, baptism is a covenant sign, but that does not give anyone entrance into the covenant community. In Acts 2:38, a similar looking passage that you also quote, refers to the gospel command (repent) and its public response (baptism). In other words, baptism was one's public confession of their repentance, which was a significant act of displaying one's faith.

Baptism wasn't novel to Judaism. John's baptism (and later the 'Christian baptism') was already familiar to the Jewish audience. It was required for converts to undergo a sort of ritual washing (tevilah) to represent one's cleansing from their former life. When John was baptizing people in the Jordan for the "repentance of sins," he was signifying by utilizing this same ritual practice that all people, including Jews, need to be cleansed of their sins. "And do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." (Matthew 3:9-10).

This is relevant to the context of Acts 2:38, for to publicly undergo this baptism as ordained by Christ was a public confession and act of one's faith for the Jewish audience present before Peter. If they repented and accepted baptism, they would be taking the first steps of obedience toward salvation. This is what Peter is talking about. Baptism was an act of obedience in response to repentance - which saves. Repent and be baptized (as the first step in that direction) for the forgiveness of your sins. It is a gross interpretation to see baptism as some included condition.

I would not divorce Galatians 3:27 with 23-26. Clearly, Paul is stating our spiritual immersion by faith in Christ, an illustration he has employed in other places (1 Corinthians 10:1-4).

Simply being dunked or sprinkled with water doesn't unite us to a death like his and a resurrection like his. Paul actually explains the meaning of this in Romans 6:3-11.

It is absurd to think that being touched by the element allows one to enter the kingdom of God.

Let's look at Jeremiah 31:31-34:

If baptized infants participate in the New Covenant, then they already:

1. Have the law written on their heart.
2. Have the saving knowledge of God.
3. Have their iniquities forgiven and forgotten.

In other words, they do not need faith to have their sins forgiven, nor do they need the gospel to know God, nor do they need to be taught what is right, for their entrance into the New Covenant, as stated in Jeremiah 31, endows them with these blessings automatically, being members and participants already through baptism. There is a huge error in this.

It's absurd to say that verses discussing baptism are not about baptism. The reply is obscurantism at its worst.

The Bible teaches that baptism cleanses sins and regenerates the soul. In the New Testament, the apostle Peter wrote in 1 Peter 3:21 that "baptism now saves you." Paul wrote in Romans 6:3-4 that through baptism, believers are united with Christ in his death and resurrection, and that "just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life."

Additionally, in Mark 16:16 Jesus says "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

It is important to note that the Bible teaches that salvation is ultimately the work of Jesus Christ, and is not accomplished through any human work, including baptism.

 

[Jonaitis]

It's absurd to say that verses discussing baptism are not about baptism. The reply is obscurantism at its worst.

The Bible teaches that baptism cleanses sins and regenerates the soul. In the New Testament, the apostle Paul wrote in 1 Peter 3:21 that "baptism now saves you." He also wrote in Romans 6:3-4 that through baptism, believers are united with Christ in his death and resurrection, and that "just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life."

Additionally, in Mark 16:16 Jesus says "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

It is important to note that the Bible teaches that salvation is ultimately the work of Jesus Christ, and is not accomplished through any human work, including baptism.

If the token of baptism granted access into the covenant community, then any member therein participates in ALL of the blessings of the covenant equally. This is erroneous when we insert infants into the promises of God who neither have the understanding, let alone volition, to repent and believe. This is contrary to what the gospel teaches.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

This is erroneous when we insert infants into the promises of God who neither have the understanding, let alone volition, to repent and believe.

You elevate understanding, volition, and ability to repent far above their stations in scripture.

According to the Bible, understanding, volition, and the ability to repent are not explicitly required for baptism. In the case of infants, they are not able to understand or willingly make a decision to be baptized, yet they can still be baptized according to many Christian denominations. In Acts 2:38-39, Peter preaches that repentance and baptism are necessary for the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, but this passage does not mention understanding or the ability to repent as requirements for baptism. Additionally, in 1 Corinthians 1:14-17, Paul baptizes those who do not fully understand the significance of the rite.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Jesus as our example, did not get baptized until the beginning of His ministry, not at birth.

John the Baptist hadn't started baptizing people yet either when Jesus was an infant. So I'm not sure what the point is.

Did infants cross through the Red Sea (or through the Jordan with Joshua), or just the adults?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

John the Baptist hadn't started baptizing people yet either when Jesus was an infant. So I'm not sure what the point is.

Did infants cross through the Red Sea (or through the Jordan with Joshua), or just the adults?

If infants were supposed to be baptized, we would see an example of it in scripture. Jesus was baptized as an adult and if infant baptism were as important as you guys make it seem, Jesus would have been baptized as an infant regardless of who baptized Him. It's best not to make a doctrine out of something that is not in God's Word.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

If infants were supposed to be baptized, we would see an example of it in scripture.

Let's apply that to another subject.

If church buildings were supposed to be built, we would see an example of it in scripture.
If wedding rings were supposed to be worn, we would see an example of it in scripture.
If mobile phones were supposed to be used, we would see an example of it in scripture.
If infants were supposed to be dedicated, we would see an example of it in scripture.

many more such examples can be invented, just like the invention in the quote.

The quoted statement is not necessarily true. The Bible is not a comprehensive manual that covers every aspect of life, and it does not provide examples of every possible situation or practice. Additionally, the Bible was written in a specific cultural and historical context, and certain practices that were common or accepted at the time may not be specifically mentioned. Therefore, the absence of an explicit example of infant baptism in the Bible does not necessarily mean that it is not a valid practice. Additionally, Early Christian writings and practices indicate that Infant baptism was practiced by the early Christian communities.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Let's apply that to another subject.

If church buildings were supposed to be built, we would see an example of it in scripture.
If wedding rings were supposed to be worn, we would see an example of it in scripture.
If mobile phones were supposed to be used, we would see an example of it in scripture.
If infants were supposed to be dedicated, we would see an example of it in scripture.

many more such examples can be invented, just like the invention in the quote.

You are comparing apples to oranges these are not doctrines, but for the record a lot of people in my church do not wear wedding rings for this exact reasoning.

If we started going by what is not in scripture versus what is, we could really do anything we wanted, but I don't think that is the purpose of God's Word.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

these are not doctrines

Baptising infants is not a doctrine.