The Question Must Be Answered From the Pattern of Scripture

Infant baptism was not practiced by first-century Christians because the baptism commanded by Jesus and carried out by the apostles required discipleship, hearing, repentance, faith, and willing identification with Christ. The order given by Jesus is decisive. Matthew 28:19-20 says, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I commanded you.” The command does not begin with baptizing infants and later making them disciples. It begins with making disciples and then baptizing those disciples. The following participle, “teaching them,” also shows that the baptized ones are capable of receiving instruction, understanding Christ’s commands, and entering the Christian path with personal responsibility. This is why Matthew 28:19-20 stands as one of the central passages against infant baptism. The text places baptism in the setting of evangelism, conscious discipleship, and obedience to the teachings of Jesus Christ.

The same pattern appears in the book of Acts. Acts 2:41 says, “Those who received his word were baptized.” The persons baptized at Pentecost did not receive water apart from understanding Peter’s message. They first heard that Jesus had been made both Master and Christ, were pierced in heart, repented, and accepted the apostolic word. Acts 8:12 says, “But when they believed Philip preaching good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” Luke does not say “men, women, and infants.” He states that those baptized were those who believed. The phrase “both men and women” is not accidental. It identifies accountable hearers who responded to the message. The Ethiopian official in Acts 8:36-38 saw water and requested baptism after Philip had explained the good news about Jesus from Isaiah. Cornelius and those gathered with him heard Peter’s message before baptism, and Acts 10:43 says, “Everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” The consistent first-century pattern is clear: the word is preached, hearers respond in faith, repentance is required, and baptism follows as a public act of obedience.

Baptism Requires Personal Repentance and Faith

Baptism in the Christian Greek Scriptures is never presented as a rite performed on one who has no capacity to believe, repent, or confess Christ. Mark 16:16 says, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” Whether one discusses the textual question surrounding the longer ending of Mark or simply observes the theology of the sentence, the order reflects the same apostolic reality found elsewhere: believing precedes baptism. Acts 2:38 says, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.” Repentance is not a biological condition inherited from Christian parents. It is a conscious turning away from sin and toward God through Christ. Acts 3:19 says, “Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be wiped away.” The infant has not heard the gospel, has not turned from a former course of wrongdoing, has not confessed Christ, and has not accepted the responsibilities of discipleship.

Romans 6:3-4 also shows that baptism is meaningful only for one who understands union with Christ in His death and resurrection. Paul says, “Or do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so also we might walk in newness of life.” Baptism symbolizes burial and resurrection. It marks a person’s break with the old life and entrance into a life of obedience. That symbolism is emptied of its biblical meaning when applied to an infant who has no former life of conscious sin from which he is turning, no personal confession of Christ, and no comprehension of the public meaning of immersion. This is why the New Testament pattern supports infant baptism only by later theological development, not by apostolic instruction.

Household Baptisms Do Not Establish Infant Baptism

Those who defend infant baptism often appeal to household baptisms. The cases usually mentioned are Lydia in Acts 16:14-15, the jailer in Acts 16:30-34, Crispus in Acts 18:8, and the household of Stephanas in First Corinthians 1:16. These passages do not say infants were present. They do not say infants were baptized. They do not teach that a parent’s faith substitutes for a child’s repentance and faith. The household passages must be read in light of the explicit teaching of the same narratives. Acts 16:32 says that Paul and Silas “spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house.” Acts 16:34 adds that the jailer “rejoiced greatly with his whole household, having believed in God.” The household shared in hearing and rejoicing. The emphasis falls on a household response to the word, not on unconscious infants receiving a rite.

The same is true of Crispus. Acts 18:8 says, “Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household. And many of the Corinthians hearing believed and were baptized.” Hearing, believing, and baptism remain connected. First Corinthians 16:15 says the household of Stephanas devoted themselves to ministering to the holy ones. That is not a description of infants. It is a description of active Christian service. The household passages are fully consistent with believer baptism. They do not create an exception to the clear pattern established by Matthew 28:19-20, Acts 2:41, Acts 8:12, Acts 10:43-48, and Acts 18:8. The silence of these texts regarding infants is not a minor omission. The inspired record repeatedly tells us who was baptized: those who received the word, those who believed, those who repented, and those who could identify publicly with Christ.

The Meaning of the Greek Terms Supports Immersion of Believers

The Greek verb baptizō means to immerse, dip, or plunge. Christian baptism is not sprinkling but immersion in water. This agrees with the descriptions in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Matthew 3:16 says that after Jesus was baptized, He came up from the water. John 3:23 says John was baptizing in Aenon near Salim “because there was much water there.” Acts 8:38 says that both Philip and the Ethiopian official went down into the water, and Philip baptized him. These descriptions fit immersion. They do not fit the later practice of applying a small amount of water to an infant’s head. The symbol of burial and resurrection in Romans 6:3-4 also fits immersion. A person is lowered beneath the water and raised up, picturing death to the old way and entrance into a life directed by Christ.

The symbolic meaning matters because baptism is not a detached ritual. It is a confession. It says publicly that the person has accepted Jesus as the Christ, has turned from sin, and is entering the Christian path. Galatians 3:27 says, “For all of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” This “putting on” of Christ is not passive religious labeling performed by adults upon a child. It is the believer’s identification with Christ. First Peter 3:21 says baptism is “not a removal of dirt from the body, but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” An infant cannot make such an appeal. The appeal belongs to a person whose conscience is involved, whose faith is active, and whose obedience is voluntary. That is why Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21 must be interpreted as texts about believing response, not ritual regeneration.

John’s Baptism and Christian Baptism Were Never Infant Rites

John the Baptist did not baptize infants as covenant members. Matthew 3:1-2 says, “In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, saying, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near.’” Matthew 3:6 says people were baptized by him in the Jordan River, “confessing their sins.” Confession of sins is not infant activity. Luke 3:7-14 records John commanding moral fruit: tax collectors were to collect no more than authorized, soldiers were to stop extortion, and the people were to share with those in need. John’s baptism called Israel to repentance in preparation for the Messiah. It was directed to accountable Jews under the Law covenant who needed to repent before Christ appeared.

Christian baptism, instituted under the authority of the risen Christ, also required personal response. Acts 19:4 says, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” Paul then baptized those disciples in the name of the Lord Jesus after correcting their understanding. Again, instruction and faith were involved. No apostle ever argues that Christian baptism replaces circumcision as an infant rite. Colossians 2:11-12 is sometimes used that way, but Paul is speaking of spiritual circumcision in Christ, not a command to baptize infants. The physical circumcision of Jewish male infants under the Law covenant cannot be imported into Christian baptism. Baptism belongs to the new life of faith and repentance, not to natural birth into a household.

Later Historical Development Confirms the Absence of First-Century Practice

The earliest biblical evidence points to believer baptism only. Later historical references show the rise of infant baptism after the apostolic era, especially as post-apostolic theology began attaching saving power to the rite itself. Origen, writing in the third century, referred to infant baptism as a custom of the church. A council at Carthage around 252 C.E. confirmed the practice. This is significant because the practice becomes clearly visible only after the first century. If infant baptism had been instituted by Christ and practiced openly by the apostles, one would expect clear instruction in the Christian Greek Scriptures. One would expect apostolic commands about how and when to baptize infants, explanations about parental faith, and instructions for Christian families. Instead, the record repeatedly connects baptism with faith, repentance, hearing the word, and personal confession.

The historical observation often associated with Augustus Neander is useful because it recognizes the connection between faith and baptism in earliest Christianity. His point was that faith and baptism were always connected, making it highly probable that infant baptism was unknown in the first century. The later claim that infant baptism was apostolic tradition arose in the third century, which counts against its apostolic origin rather than for it. Scripture carries the decisive authority, but the historical record harmonizes with the biblical pattern. The first-century congregations baptized believers. Later congregations, influenced by developing sacramental ideas and fears about infants dying unbaptized, began practicing something for which the apostolic writings give no command.

Infant Baptism Confuses the Path of Salvation

Infant baptism confuses the biblical path of salvation by placing a religious act before the response God requires. Salvation is not a condition automatically transferred by family identity or ritual action. Eternal life is the gift of God through the sacrifice of Christ, and the path of salvation involves hearing the word, exercising faith, repenting, confessing Christ, being baptized as a disciple, and continuing in obedience. Romans 10:17 says, “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” An infant cannot exercise faith through hearing the word of Christ. Hebrews 11:6 says, “Without faith it is impossible to please him.” The issue is not whether children are precious to Jehovah. They are. Jesus showed tenderness toward children in Matthew 19:13-15. But blessing children is not the same as baptizing them.

The Christian congregation should teach children diligently, pray for them, guide them, protect them, and train them in the Word. Ephesians 6:4 says fathers are to bring children up “in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” Second Timothy 3:15 says Timothy had known the sacred writings from infancy, and those writings were able to make him wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. Timothy was not saved by an infant rite. He was taught the Scriptures, and salvation was through faith in Christ. The proper Christian concern is not to invent an infant ritual but to raise children under the authority of the Spirit-inspired Word so that, when they are able to understand, repent, and believe, they may publicly confess Christ through baptism by immersion.

The Apostolic Practice Remains Binding

First-century Christian baptism was the immersion of believers who had heard the good news, accepted Jesus as the Christ, repented of sin, and entered the Christian path. It was not a family ceremony performed on infants, not a substitute for circumcision, and not a mechanical act that produced salvation apart from faith. Every major passage points in the same direction. Matthew 28:19-20 ties baptism to discipleship and teaching. Acts 2:41 ties baptism to receiving the word. Acts 8:12 ties baptism to believing the good news. Acts 10:43-48 ties baptism to faith in Christ and the reception of the apostolic message. Romans 6:3-4 ties baptism to conscious identification with Christ’s death and resurrection. First Peter 3:21 ties baptism to the appeal of a good conscience toward God.

The church has no authority to change the object, subject, or meaning of baptism. Where Scripture speaks, tradition must yield. Where Scripture gives a pattern, later custom cannot override it. The question is not whether infant baptism became common in later centuries. It did. The question is whether it was practiced by first-century Christians under apostolic authority. The biblical answer is no. First-century Christians practiced the baptism of repentant believers by immersion, and that remains the only baptism authorized by the teaching of Christ and His apostles.

You May Also Enjoy

What Does It Mean That God Is Not Willing for Any to Perish but That All Should Come to Repentance?

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS