Is Infant Baptism in the New Testament?

By | 13:24:00 6 comments

Recently i read an argument for infant baptism which related Collossians 2:11&12 as being the New Testament connection between circumcision and infant baptism:
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, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.
(Colossians 2:11-12 ESV)
Yes i know both are mentioned but i just don't see it as saying circumcision is now changed to sprinkling your babies...
... in fact i see it plainly as being a passage to the redeemed - those who have been "raised with Him through faith in the powerful working of God" and not as a covenant that by baptism we receive some promise of children being saved.

Or maybe that's my baptist goggles speaking.
What's your take?

6 comments:

Brian Murphy said...

I wear "Baptist goggles" as well - I agree with you. I find this argument to be extremely weak.

Gary Boal said...

It's a stretch to see it i think.
Also heard the argument about Paul baptizing the philippian Jailer's 'whole household' as being one for infant baptism as the guy was deducing that the jailer had infants?
talk about adding into the text...

Brian Murphy said...

I've heard that one, too. I don't buy it either.

Joel said...

There are a number of other references to whole households being baptized, as I recall. It seems to me a bigger stretch to assume that none of them had infants.

Joel said...

But then, my Baptist goggles are a bit rusty from lack of recent use. :)

Gary Boal said...

i laugh at that! Classic!
Yeh i get what you're saying, but i guess it's one of those areas we just have to hold our hands up and say we just dont know!
Though i think that means looking elsewhere in scripture to understand baptism and for me that seems believers...