Have you ever wondered what the Bible says about infant baptism? The truth is: the Bible is silent on this subject. This might seem strange, considering the practice is so prevalent today. Nevertheless, the practice cannot be proven as apostolic, nor can it be proven as originating in the first century. As a matter of fact, all scriptural and historical evidence leads us to believe the practice of infant baptism was merely an innovation of men, which began toward the end of the second century. As Jesus would say, “But from the beginning, it was not so.”

In the first century, Jesus sent His disciples out with the commission to baptize penitent believers (Matthew 28:19-20; Mark 16:15-16; Luke 24:46-47). It was through this commission, known as the Great Commission, that the disciples spread the gospel of Jesus Christ (as recorded in the book of Acts).

Regarding infant baptism, we note from the Great Commission, that for one to be baptized, they must first 1) hear the gospel, 2) believe, and 3) repent. What infant is capable of accomplishing these things? Thus, by whose authority do we baptize infants? Certainly not by the Lord’s authority! The practice of any baptism without regard to the Lord’s clearly established precepts must be inherently false and vain.

Even so you might wonder, what about original sin—does not a baby need to be cleansed from the sin of Adam (cf. Romans 5:12)? Is not a baby born depraved and in sin, thus requiring God’s forgiveness (cf. Ephesians 2:3)? I propose, and scripture and history support, that this false doctrine is merely the progenitor of the other false doctrines (e.g., infant baptism, and other doctrines that cover the infant who dies before baptism).

Indeed, the only thing original about sin is that it originates in the heart of a man (James 1:14-16) and that its consequences originate from God (Romans 6:23). Among other things, those who say an infant is born a sinner must explain why the gospel of our Lord teaches us that we are redeemed (Revevlation 5:9), reconciled (2 Corinthians 5:18), and have returned to the Lord (1 Peter 2:25). The prefix “re-” means “again” and infers that each of us, at one time, enjoyed such a relationship with God. If each of us is born depraved, at what point did we enjoy this relationship with God?

Furthermore, if children are depraved from birth, why did Jesus suggest that we become like little children (Matthew 18:3)? Did our Lord suggest we become like little “sinners?” I should think not! As we have already indicated, sin is born in man; man is not born in sin! Similarly, the doctrine of original sin was begotten of man!

You might also wonder, what about household baptism—were not whole households baptized in the first century (Acts 10:1-11:18; Acts 16:15; Acts 16:33; 1 Corinthians 1:16)? This argument assumes, with no evidence, that infants were members of each household baptized. To say the apostles baptized infants in each of these cases renders their obedience to the Great Commission null and void, as we have already proven. A candidate for baptism must first hear the word, believe, and repent (Acts 2:38; Acts 16:14; Acts 17:30; etc.). Since infants are incapable of such, they were not baptized.

We might also ask, if infants were baptized in the first century, why did Luke record not one such instance? Indeed, Luke tells of thousands being baptized, even specifying men and women at one point (Acts 8:12); yet, not one hint of infants. Why is this? Perhaps it is because infant baptism is not an authorized practice.

Another problem is that many commonly practice infant baptism by pouring or sprinkling water on the infant’s head. Our English word baptism is borrowed from the Greek word baptizo meaning immersion. First Century Christians practiced baptism by complete immersion in water, not by pouring or sprinkling (which, by the way, have their own Greek words).

To briefly illustrate this, Luke tells us that Phillip and the eunuch “went down into” and “came up out of” the water, suggesting immersion (Acts 8:38-39). John tells us that John the Baptist baptized where there was “much water” (John 3:23). Paul likens baptism unto a “burial” (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12). Clearly, baptism by sprinkling and pouring is another innovation of men, further proving infant baptism devoid of any spiritual value.

Overall, the greatest danger of infant baptism is that many have been deceived into believing, based on their baptism as an infant, that they have obeyed the command of Jesus Christ to be baptized (Mark 16:16). Catholics, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, and many more denominations teach this pernicious doctrine.

The truth is: if you were baptized as an infant you obeyed nothing. Your parents obeyed for you. Furthermore, you were not even a proper candidate for baptism. Did you hear the message of the gospel before you were baptized? Did you believe (Mark 16:16)? Did you obey from the heart that form of doctrine (Romans 6:17)? Even if you could answer “yes” to these, were you immersed? What consciousness did you have of sin (1 Peter 3:21)? What sins did you commit as an infant that required repentance (Acts 2:38; cf. Ezekiel 18)? These, and many other questions could be asked—for none of which willyou find a satisfactory answer.

Clearly, the practice of infant baptism is a prime example of “teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matthew 15:9). Such worship, as the Lord tells us, is vain.