Infant Baptism: The Practice of the First Century Church Part One

September 03, 2022

Introduction:

Of all the issues that have separated Christians down through the ages, Baptism has been one of the most controversial. Who has the right to Baptize? Is baptism necessary for salvation? What mode of Baptism should be used? Who should be baptized? Is there a Baptism of fire? All of these questions have provoked rigorous debate, often, along denominational lines. While each of these topics deserves individual focus and study, one of them I hope to address today.

Concerning the question of whether or not infants should be baptized, Christians have disagreed on this question from the earliest of times. It is a common myth that the early church only began to baptize infants be the fourth century (which I shall prove otherwise.) However, it is also a historical fallacy to say that believer's baptism was never practiced until the Protestant Reformation. I hope to bring more clarity to this debate, to intrigue both sides to reevaluate their arguments in light of this subject, and for all Christians to be fair to the facts of history.

Many books have been written concerning the debate on whether or not infants should be baptized. My attempt here is to support this practice in as few words as possible. I shall engage my readers with evidence for the baptism of young children by proof from the Old Testament, the New Testament, and other documents of early Christianity.

One of the most common arguments made against infant baptism by Baptists and other Credobaptists, is not simply the lack of explicit infant baptism in the New Testament, but also, that repentance is so often associated with baptism throughout the New Testament. Thus, many Baptists conclude, that without Baptism there can be no true repentance. That topic and debate, however, shall be addressed in later posts. For now, I wish to simply demonstrate that there was the Baptism of infants in Old Testament Israel. As this post is the first of many on this topic, I will be drawing several arguments including covenantal theology, and baptismal efficacy to justify infant baptism. As I already mentioned, though, this first post simply reflects on infant baptism in Old Testament Israel. The primary purpose of this post is to lead us to the teachings of the New Testament and Early Christian on infant baptism.

The Roots of Infant Baptism in Ancient Israel:

Circumcision was a notable practice in the Old Testament to distinguish Jews from their Gentile neighbors. In Genesis 17, God instructed to Abraham that all the men be circumcised (10-11). Indeed, Abraham was also commanded that all males brought into his house should be circumcised (12). Demonstrating loyalty to his Creator, he was also circumcised (23-26). Later, in Genesis 17: 25 and 21: 4, both Ishmael and Isaac were circumcised.

Circumcision, however, did not end with Abraham and his immediate offspring. Being a universal practice among the Israelites, Moses's son was circumcised (Exodus 4: 24-26). Additionally, Joshua 5: 4-5 bears historical witness to the continuity of circumcision among God's people. Newborn males had consistently been circumcised in ancient Isreal (Leviticus 12: 3). Certainly, the Israelites entered the Promised land as a circumcised people (Joshua 5: 7). Exodus 12: 38 informs us that there were Gentiles with the Israelites as they came out of Egypt. This brings me to my first point in support of infant baptism.

Gentiles who joined Israel had to conform to the practices. Adult Gentiles and infant Israelites alike received circumcision as a mark of them being part of God's people. Never did the Old Testament explain that circumcision had to be just for one or the other. Indeed, it was naturally expected that young children raised among the Israelites should be circumcised while gentile adults had to receive this in later years due to their conversion to the Hebrew faith. The future kingdom of Israel was never exclusively Jewish, it was made up of both those who converted to Judaism as adults and those who were brought into the faith by the faith of their parents. While Ishmael was not Jewish by race, he was given circumcision based on the faith of his parent and the former's acceptance into the covenantal community. Additionally, Exodus 12: 48-49 lists an instruction that all the sojourners (non-Hebrews) have their males circumcised.

It was not uncommon that some Gentiles should join the Hebrew community. This was the case for Rahab and her family (Joshua 5: 25). God was never short of his grace to the Gentiles (Zechariah 14: 16).

The Jews continued their practice of circumcision through the first century. In my upcoming post, I will discuss not only how Baptism was the new circumcision for the early church, but also, how Baptism of whole families was a mark of the new covenant found in Christ.