5-1-05One of my commenters, Milly said, "I personally don’t believe in it nor does my husband, however, both my children were for my in-laws. I just can’t find it in the Bible. Being COC if it isn’t in don’t add it. I also think that when John was Baptizing he might have Baptized children. It just doesn’t say it."

The more I read and study, the more I'm coming to realize that if we read the New Testament in isolation, we miss the roots that New Testament theology is grounded in.

If you consider the convenant relationship that God has with His people and how God has commanded that the covenant sign be applied to His people, then you may be asking the wrong question.

You ask, "where does the Bible say that we should baptize infants?"
I ask, "where does the Bible say to stop applying the sign and seal of the covenant to infants?"

How do we arrive at that question? Here are more questions:

In the Old Testament, who was the covenant (promise) for? (Gen 17:10)

In the New Testament, who was the covenant (promise) for? (Acts 2:39)

In the Old Testament, who was responsible for applying the sign and who was it applied to? (Gen 17:13 tells us that Abraham -head of household- was and that every male in the household was to have the sign applied)

In the New Testament, who was responsible for applying the sign and who was it applied to? (Acts 16:140-15 tells us that Lydia believed and her household was baptized)

Who are we seeds of? (Gal 3:29)

Many of the early Christians were Jews. They had a rich history of a covenant with God, that included applying the sign and seal of the covenant to their children. How would a believing Jew head of household have felt - seeing Lydia's household baptised, while his own children were being excluded from having the sing applied to them, as the sign and the seal of the covenant of Abraham had been applied to him when he was eight days old?

Where would he have found the command in Scripture to stop applying the sign and seal to his children - as Jews had done for 2,000 years?