EcclesiaOn the Serious Consequences of Withholding Baptism from the Infants of Christians
On the Serious Consequences of Withholding Baptism from the Infants of Christians
by Rev Professor Dr Francis Nigel Lee
Queensland Presbyterian Theological College
Emmanuel College, Upland Road, St Lucia
Queensland 4067, Australia
Published by THE PRESBYTERIAN Magazine
9 Church Road, Thornbury,
Bristol BS12 1EJ, UK
First Published in 1981 by
Jesus Lives Series
Copyright F N Lee
National Library of Australia Card Number
and ISBN 0 949762 02 4Page 1
Have You Been Neglecting Your Baby?
Is your baby really a sinner? Does he right now need cleansing with the blood of
Jesus? Where will your child spend eternity if he dies today? Is it required even for
your infants to receive Christian baptism?
When man fell into sin, guilt and death came upon Adam and all his descendents.1
Consequently, until a person has been born again and justified by grace through faith
in Christ, he cannot even see, and still less enter into, the Kingdom of God.2
This means that all people on earth (even from their very conception onward) are
sinners in the sight of God. Men and women and even children and babies all need to
be washed in the blood of Jesus Christ for there is no other way by which they can
Of course, Christ redeems His people and He does so without baptism.4 But
baptism points to and seals their redemption through the sprinkling of the blood of the
Consequently, baptism should always be regarded as a matter of considerable
importance.6 Indeed, “whoever believes and is baptized, will be saved; but whoever
does not believe, will be condemned!”
Right after the fall, God clothed the nakedness of our first parents when He put
coats of skins upon them.8 These garments pointed to the sin-covering work of the
Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, Who would take away the sin of the world.9 Doubtless,
Adam and Eve also put clothes on their own babies shortly after they were born, to
protect them from their hostile environment.10 Similarly, the Bible tells us that
Christians are to be “clothed” with baptism, or to have it put on like a garment.11 And
the Bible further tells us that we are to have these baptismal “clothes” put on our own
infant children too.12
How irresponsible Adam and Eve would have been, if they had let their babies
grow up unclothed — and if they as parents had waited many years until their offspring
finally decided for them-selves whether they wanted to wear clothes or not! Is it then
not also irresponsible today, when some Christian parents refuse to clothe their own
infants with the garment and badge of baptism (as the sign and seal of cleansing with
the blood of Jesus)? Is such neglect not a serious exposure of their prone-to-sin and
naked babies to all the attacks of Satan?
The Protestant Reformer John Calvin was probably the greatest Bible commentator
of all time even according to most of those of his opponents who have taken the
trouble to read his writings. In his commentary on Galatians, he discussed the
Apostles statement (that as many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put
on Christ). He remarked that Paul “employs the metaphor of a ‘garment’ when he says
that the Galatians have put on Christ. And by this metaphor, Paul means that they arePage 2
united to Christ in such a way that, in the sight of God, they bear the Name and Person
of Christ and are viewed in Him rather than in themselves.1 3 Dear Christian reader,
while desiring this for yourself, is this not exactly what you desire for your own little
At the time of the flood, only one thing would save both adults and even little
children from drowning to death. They had to be located inside the ark of the
covenant! They themselves had to come into the ark, or otherwise they had to be
brought into the ark by others! But they all needed to be inside the ark of Christs
covenant, which alone provided salvation and escape from punishment.14
The unbelievers did not go into the ark neither did they put their children there.
The faithless adults and their little children were not baptized but only immersed in
the flood when they all perished outside the ark.15 However, both the believing Noah
and all of his children were saved. They were not immersed in the flood. To the
contrary, they were alI baptized inside the ark while it was being sprinkled from above
by the rain from heaven.16
In a similar way, the waters of baptism from above are today to be sprinkled on
believers and on their children. This action urges them all to trust and to keep on
trusting in Christ, Who alone saves even them from destruction. For baptism (by
sprinkling) corresponds to the rain which fell from above when Noah and his family
were all safely inside the ark of the covenant. It reminded them of their salvation from
the floodwaters of Gods righteous judgment. Similarly, our own baptism today is a
picture of our own redemption. For by grace and through faith, the sprinkling of
baptism points us to the sprinkled blood of Jesus which it depicts.17
How catastrophic it would have been for Noah to have gone into the ark all alone
and to have been sprinkled there all by himself, while leaving his family outside! For
that would have meant the end of the human race. And how serious it is today for
adult Christians to receive holy baptism only for themselves while withholding it
from their own little children!18
Now the Bible clearly teaches us that unbloody baptism replaced bloody
circumcision after Christs finished bloodshed on Calvary, so that infant circumcision
too was then replaced by infant baptism.
It is true that circumcision was only for males and not for females.20 For
circumcision was a sign of purification from sin,
21 and sin first confronted the human
race through the transgression of the first woman.22 For this reason, even though saved
through faith, godly females in Old Testament times could not receive the sacrament
(of circumcision) until Jesus Christ, “The Seed of the woman” (promised in Eden
right after the fall),23 Himself came as the Son of (wo)man and crushed the head of the
serpent on Calvary.24 After that, when baptism replaced circumcision,25 the female sex
too was fully acknowledged in this regard.26 For from that time onward, as people
believed in “the name of Jesus, they were baptized, both men and women,”27 And inPage 3
respect of all those “who were baptized into Christ…there is neither…male nor
female.”28 Accordingly, not only male but also female babies need to be baptized.29
When a Christian parent neglects to have his infant baptized, serious consequences
ensue! Indeed, it is clear that every male baby of believing parents needed to be
circumcised even when only “eight days old.”30 For the Lord Himself declared that
“any un-circumcised male (or ‘male child) who has not been circumcised in the flesh,
will be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.”31
Note how the believing parents neglect to have the sign of Gods covenant
applied to own infant, was seriously detrimental to the child himself. For by that
parents neglect, the baby himself was “cut off from his people”31 cut off by his own
parents neglect, and even cut off from his own circumcised father as one of the
Lords people. Hence, God decreed that the covenantal infant “must be
Because baptism now replaces circumcision,19 it follows that every Christian who
neglects to have his own children baptized in infancy, cuts them off from himself and
from the people of God.32 What an awesome sin of omission, then, is committed by
some of our dear Christian brethren who refuse baptism to their own little infants and
thus despise the sacrament of the saving grace of God!
Of course, this does not mean that the baptism of an infant in any way saves the
baby. For, as Calvin remarked, “since God threatens punishment only to despisers (of
infant baptism, and formerly of infant circumcision), we infer that the circumcision of
children would do them no harm, if they died before the eighth day. To consign to
destruction those infants whom a sudden death has not allowed to be presented for
baptism, before any neglect of parents could intervene, is a cruelty originating in
[Romanistic] superstition…. [But] whoever neglects baptism [for his own babies],
suggesting that the parent is content with the bare promise [of salvation for his
children], for his part tramples upon the blood of Christ or at least does not believe
that it flows for the washing of his own children…. Such contempt shall not pass
unpunished…. As God adopts the infant son in the person of his father so, when the
father repudiates such benefit, the infant is said to be cut off from the church.”33
However, not only is it seriously detrimental to the baby for him or her to be left
unbaptized. It is also seriously detrimental even to the babys parents. For, as Calvin
pointed out: “God will take vengeance on every one who despises to impress the
symbol of the covenant on his child (Genesis 17:14) such contempt being a
rejection… of the offered grace.”34 No one, no matter how godly in other respects, is
excepted from this vengeance. For even the great Moses himself had to learn this
the hard way.
Although born in a time of great tribulation and general backsliddenness, Moses
himself was apparently circumcised in in-fancy,35 just as Paedobaptists (or those who
believe that baptism should be given even to the infants of Christians) rightly have
their babies baptized in infancy today)36 However, Moses later married a woman whoPage 4
was opposed to infant circumcision Zipporah, the daughter of Jethro, the Godfearing priest of Midian.37 Also today, this kind of “interdenominational marriage”38 is
sometimes entered into between Christians for instance, whenever a
(paedobaptistic) Lutheran or Presbyterian or Methodist marries an (antipaedobaptistic)
Baptist or Pentecostalist (or Campbellite “Disciple” or “Christian Church” or “Church
of Christ” member). Fortunately, however, even today there are also those numerous
happy cases where the less consistent spouse (like Ruth who married Boaz) genuinely
changes his or her views about the need to give the sacramental sign of the covenant
even to their infants.
If only Zipporah had embraced Moses Godgiven views regarding the need to
circumcise infants, all would have been well. And if only modern Baptists or
Pentecostalists who marry Presbyterians or Methodists would embrace the latters
Biblical views about the need to baptize infants, more would be well in these
“interdenominational” marriages today. Unfortunately, Zipporah was not willing to
learn until God threatened the very life of her husband Moses. May we, however, be
willing to learnfrom her mistakes!
Apparently, Zipporah had at least outwardly (if reluctantly) agreed to allow her
husband Moses to have his firstborn son, Gershom, circumcised shortly after birth.39
Yet the inward reluc-tance of Zipporah to promote infant circumcision seems to have
led to much friction between her and her husband both then and later. For when
their second son, Eliezer, was born, it is clear that Moses tried to avoid any further
arguments with his wife about the necessity of circumcising infants. He simply
decided to ignore the need of circumcising Eliezer in his infancy. For Moses resolved
to withhold the sacrament from his own baby child. No doubt in the interests of
domestic peace with his wife, he deliberately decided to compromise his own Godgiven beliefs about this vital matter.
Apparently leaving Midian with his family just a few days after Eliezers birth,
Moses set out for Egypt in obedience to the call of the Lord to go and lead the
covenant people out of that land.39 The eighth day30 after Eliezers birth arrived and
passed probably while the family was staying at an inn on their journey. But Moses
deliberately resolved to leave the baby umircumcised as we have already said, no
doubt for the sake of avoiding another clash with the unbiblical views which his
beloved wife held on this particular subject.
God, however, detests unprincipled compromise especially at the hands of
religious leaders like Moses, the famous deliverer of Gods ancient people. For God
had chosen precisely Moses to lead the true children of God out of compromise and
backsliddenness and to revive them by restoring the covenant of grace between the
Lord and His people the covenant which they and their children had so repeatedly
transgressed. Accordingly, “at the lodging place on the way, the Lord met Moses and
was about to kill him” for neglecting to have his own baby circumcised in infancy.40
Moses guiltily sensed that the Lord was about to kill him. Knowing the reason
why, the patriarch immediately repented of his evil neglect and gave hasty instructionsPage 5
that little Eliezer be circumcised. When this had been accomplished, the wrath of God
abruptly turned away from Moses and the Lord “let him alone.”41
As Calvin commented, Moses “was terrified by the approach of certain destruction.
At the same time, the cause of his affliction was shown him, so that he hastened to
seek for a remedy. For…it would never otherwise have occurred to himself and his
wife to circumcise the child to appease Gods wrath; and it will appear a little further
on, that God was, as it were, propitiated by this offering — since He withdrew His
hand, and took away the tokens of His wrath.
“I therefore unhesitatingly conclude, that vengeance was declared against Moses
for his negligence, which was connected with still heavier sins; for he had not omitted
his sons circumcision from forgetfulness or ignorance, or carelessness only, but
because he was aware that it was disagreeable either to his wife or to his father-in-law
[Jethro the godly but Non-Israelitic religious leader and priest of Midian]. Therefore,
lest his wife should quarrel with him, or his father-in-law trouble him, he preferred to
gratify them, [rather] than to give occasion for divisions, or enmity, or disturbance.
“In the meantime, how-ever, for the sake of the favour of men, he neglected to
obey God…. Let us learn from hence to use reverently the sacraments, which are the
seals of Gods grace, lest He should severely avenge our despisal of them; and at the
same time, we should remember that the external profession of piety and the worship
of God is a sacrifice so pleasant to God that He will not allow us to omit the care of
diligently testifying (about) it, as if it were a matter of small importance.”42
lncidently, it should not for a moment be thought that Calvin made the above
comment on this Biblical passage as if he himself were personally unacquainted with
Moses situation. Indeed, the cases of the various baptisms in Calvins own family
circle, are themselves most instructive.
Calvin himself was baptized but once in infancy in the Roman Catholic Church
in Noyon in France. Of course, he was never rebaptized subsequently for he was
strongly opposed to rebaptism, on Biblical grounds (Romans 6:1-11 & Hebrews 6:1-8;
cf. Calvins Institutes IV:15:16-17 & lV:2:11-12).
His wife, Idelette, was baptized as an adult by a Baptist group in Holland, before
meeting Calvin. After being genuinely won by Calvin to the Reformed faith in later
life, she then joined the Presbyterian Church of Switzerland, married the Reformer,
and was, of course, like Calvin himself, never rebaptized.
Calvin himself baptized their eldest child by sprinkling, in the Presbyterian and
Reformed Church in Geneva. Thereafter, the baby died in early infancy. Their
subsequent children died practically at birth, unbaptized but, of course, already
sanctified by the precious blood of Jesus even from their godly fathers loins and their
faithful mothers womb.Page 6
Before leaving the inn, then, Moses had been reconverted41 from doctrinal
compromise back to the true covenantal views of his fathers.30 Now he was ready to
lead Gods backslidden children and their little infants, and to show them too how to
serve the Lord as they ought. By instructing them to sprinkle the blood of the Passover
lamb over the entrance to the homes of their whole households, Moses got the
Israelites to prevent the angel of death from slaying their firstborn children when that
angel slew the “unsprinkled” Egyptian children.43
Now in leading the people of God out of Egypt, Moses had all of them sprinkled
under the cloud and on dry ground at the Red Sea.44 For as Paul later remarked, “our
forefathers were all under the cloud, and … they all passedthrough the sea. They were
all baptized into Moses…and drank the spiritual drink; for they drank from the
spiritual Rock That accompanied them, and that Rock was Christ.”45 Egyptian soldiers
were not baptized but only immersed and they were all drowned to death in the Red
Sea. Yet the children of Israel both the adults and their babies were saved. They
all passed through the Red Sea on dry land, and they all received not immersion but
baptism; for they and their infants were all sprinkled from on high when “the clouds
poured down water.”45
However, after forty years of wandering in the wilderness, a new generation of
Gods people again backslid and neglected their children by allowing their babies to
lapse into uncircumcision or “unbaptism” just as Moses had previously neglected to
have his own baby Eliezer circumcised in infancy. To remedy this, the uncircumcised
people of God and their uncircumcised babies first had to receive circumcision as the
sign of Gods covenant with them.46 So too, before they went into the promised land,
all of Gods people probably carrying their infants in their arms went down into
the Jordan and passed through it on dry land and then came up again unimmersed out
of the Jordan.47
Now this Jordan experience of all of the families of Israel47 (just like their previous
baptism45 at the Red Sea)44 was a fore-shadowing of the mode and subjects of New
Testament baptism.48 For even in the New Testament itself we detect a similar kind of
sprinkling of believers and their infants in the teachings of John the Baptist, of Jesus
Christ, and of the apostles Peter and Paul and John.
JOHN THE BAPTIST, for instance, baptized all the people of God49 (which, of
course, includes even their little babies).50 But he did not baptize the Pharisees and
their brood for they were not Gods people.51
JESUS CHRIST, moreover, gave instructions in His Great Commission that all
“nations” were to be baptized 52 in fulfillment of Isaiahs prophecy that the Saviour
would “sprinkle many nations.”53 Never in the history of the world has there been one
single nation whose infants were not regarded as its citizens from their very birth.
Indeed, Jesus Himself specifically taught that the little children of believers were
themselves to be regarded as Christian citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven
PETER, on the day of Pentecost, declared how the apostles had just been baptized
with the Spirit when the Holy Ghost had been “poured out” on them like abundant
showers and rains from heaven.55 Then he told his listeners too that they needed toPage 7
“repent and be baptized,” for the promise is for you and your children.56 As Noahs
family had been baptized inside the ark by the abundant showers and rains during the
flood, so also, held Peter, should Christian families now receive the sprinkling of the
waters of baptism. For this points to the need of our being sprinkled with the blood
of Jesus.57 No wonder, then, that Peter did not baptize the first Gentile convert,
Cornelius, all by himself, but insisted on having baptism administered to Corneliuss
entire household, inclduding his chidren.58
As Calvin remarked: “Peter says that he could not have denied baptism and the
fellowship of the brethren to the Gentiles (in Cornelius household), without being an
enemy to God…. Similarly, we say today that those who are opposing infant baptism,
are waging war on God, because those men are cruelly rejecting from the Church
those whom God adopts into the Church; and they deprive of the external symbol (of
baptism) those whom God honours with the name of sons.”59
PAUL, in particular, insisted on baptism for the infants of believers. Not only did
he always baptize the entire family, whenever the head of a household came to faith in
Christ.60 In addition, he also insisted that the children of believers were holy from their
very conception even before their birth and not unclean, like the children of
unbelievers!61 Hence, even the infant children of Christians were to be baptized as
members of Christs Church.62
JOHN too taught the requirement of baptism for infants of believers. He recorded
how “all the people of Israel came to be baptized in the Jordan.63 He loved Christs
64 And he concluded that the Name of Christ and of the Triune God
shall be worn by or written on the foreheads of all who get to glory.65
Dear Christian parent! Have you been neglecting to have your baby baptized? It is
indeed “a great sin to condemn or neglect this ordinance!”66 Oh, do not jeopardize
your childs welfare or your own physical or spiritual life or health any longer! Present
your child to the Lord in holy baptism as soon as possible!67 Make peace with God,
and do not further invite His reproach68 or perhaps even His sore displeasure or
anger!69 Be reconciled to God; “kiss the Son lest He be angry, and you be destroyed in
your way, for His wrath can flare up in a moment!”70
“Blessed are all who take refuge in Him!”71 Have you done so yet, in respect of the
salvation of your own infants? Oh, heed the warning of the Saviour! “Unless you
change and become like little children, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven….
And whoever welcomes a little child like this in My Name,” said Jesus, “welcomes
Me. But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be
better for him to have a large millstone hung round his neck and to be drowned in the
depths of the sea.”72
So “repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the Name of Jesus Christ, so that
your sins may be forgiven! And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The
promise is for you and your children.”73
Oh, repent! For then your children “will be like olive shoots around your table.”74
And then you will “live to see your childrens children,” and “peace” will be upon
1. Genesis 2:17; 3:17-19; 5:1 5 6 5 13 Job 4:9-19; 14:4; 15:14-16; 25:46; Psalm
14:2b-3; 51:5; 53:lb-3; Romans 3:9-19; 5:12-21; 6:23; I Corinthians 15:22,42,47-49;
2. John 3:3-8; Ephesians 2:1-6; Titus 3:3-7.
3. Acts 4:10-12; 16:31-34; Hebrews 9:9-24; 10:10-26; Romans 11:16; I Corinthians
4. 1 Corinthians 1:14-17 cf. Mark 16:16.
5. Romans 4:11; Ephesians 1:1,13; 4:4-6,30; 6:1-4 cf. notes 6, 19 and 54.
6. Matthew 28:19; Romans 6:1-4; Acts 22:16 — cf. Hebrews 11:28-29; 12:24; 1 Peter
1:1; 3:20-21 and note 3 above.
7. Mark 16:16 (NIV). 8. Genesis 3:21. 9.John 1:19,36.
10. Genesis 3:15-24; Romans 8:19-22. 11. Galatians 3:27 (NIV and KJV).
12. Acts 2:38-39 — cf. note 5 above. 13. Calvin: Commentary on Galatians 3:27.
14. I Peter 2:24 with 3:18-21 and Genesis 7:7-16.
15. 2 Peter 2:5 and Genesis 7:17-24.
16. Genesis 7:4,11-12 — cf. Exodus 24:8; Joel 2:16,23,28; cf Acts 1:5-8; 2:1-4,16-
17. I Peter 1:1; 3:2021; Hebrews chapters 9 and 10.
18. I Corinthians 7:14; Ephesians 1:1; 4:4-6,30: 6:1-4.
19. Colossians 1:1-2; 2:8-14; 3:20f; Romans 4:9-13,23-25 — cf. 6:1-4; Galatians 3:6-
3:16-18,26-29; Genesis 17:7-14; Acts 2:38-39; 16:31-33; Ephesians 1:1; 4:4-6,30;
20. Genesis 17:12 cf. Leviticus 12:1-5.
21. Deuteronomy 10:12-16 cf. Jeremiah 4:4 and Colossians 2:11-13.
22. Genesis 3 — cf. 2 Corinthians 11:3 and 1 Timothy 2:14.
23. Genesis 3:15 and Galatians 4:4-6.
24. Genesis 3:15; Exodus 4:18-31; Romans 15:8; 16:20,25.
25.Cf .Matthew 28:19 with note 19 above.
26. Acts 2:17-18,38-39; 8:12; 16:15,33 and note 28 below. 27. Acts 8:12.
28. Galatians 3:27-29 cf. 4:4-6.
29. Acts 2:17-18,38-39 cf. Galatians 3:27-29 (and especially verse 29 with verses 6-
8) and Matthew 29:19 with Genesis 17:5-14.
30. Genesis 17:12 cf. verse 10. 31. Genesis 17:14 cf. verse 13 (NIV cf.
32. Cf. Exodus 12:4-13,21-22 and I Corinthians 10:1-4.
33. Calvin: Commentary on Genesis 17:14.
34. Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion IV:16:9.
35. Exodus 2:1-2; 4:25; Leviticus 12:1-3 cf. Genesis 17:7-14; Acts 7:8-20.
36. Mark 16:15-16; Acts 8:27-28; Genesis 17:7,9,14; Colossians 2:11-12; Acts 2:38-
39; Romans 4:11-12; I Corinthians 7:14; Matthew 28:19; Acts 2:28-39; Romans 4:11-
12; I Corinthians 7:14; Matthew 28:19; Mark 10:13-16; Luke 7:30; 18:15-16; Exodus
4:24-26; Acts 10:2,4,22,31,45,47; 8:13,23,36-38; Galatians 3:9,14; Romans 11:16 —
all quoted in the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Westminster Larger
Catechism Q 166.Page 9
37. Exodus 2:16-21; 3:1; 18;1-27. 38. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 cf. Nehemiah
39. Exodus 2:22f; ch 3; 4:24-25. The fact that Zipporah knew that her second son,
Eliezer (Exodus 18:1-5) needed to be circumcised (Exodus 4:25), evidences that she
had previously witnessed the prior circumcision of her firstborn, Gershom (cf. Acts
40. Exodus 4:24 — cf. note 42 below. 41. Exodus 4:24-26.
42.Calvins Commentary on Exodus 4:24.
43. Exodus 12:3-7,12-14,21-24,27-30,43-48 — cf. Hebrews 11:28.
44. Exodus 14:15-29; Psalm 77:15-20 and esp v 17; Hebrews 11:29.
45. I Corinthians 10:1-4 cf. Psalm 77:15-20 and esp. v 17 (NIV).
46. Joshua 5:1-9 — cf. Romans ch. 4 and esp. v. 11).
47. Joshua 3:8,11,17; 4:17,19,22. 48. Matthew 3:5-6; Mark 1:5f; Luke 3:3f; John
49. Matthew 3:5f; Mark 1:8f; Luke 3:21f; 7:29. 50. Cf. notes 31, 43, 44, 46-48
51. Matthew 3:7f — cf. Luke 7:30. 52. Matthew 28:18-20 and Luke 24:47.
53. Isaiah 52:15 and ch. 53 — cf. Acts 8:27-36. 54. Matthew 19:13-14 — cf. 21:43.
55. Acts 1:5,8; 2:4,14-17,33 cf. Joel 2:16,23,28-32.
56. Acts 2:38-39 cf. Joel 2:16,23,28-32. 57. I Peter 1:1-2; 3:3,6,20 21; 5:5f.
58. Acts 10:2,44-48; 11:15-16 — cf. 2:38-39. 59. Calvin: Commentary on Acts
60. Acts 16:14-15; 16:30-33; 18:8; I Corinthians 1:16; 16:15.
61. I Corinthians 7:14 — cf. Romans 11:16. 62. I Corinthians 10:1-4 — cf. note 19
63. John 1:25-31 esp v 31; 3:22-26 — cf. Mark 1:4-8.
64. I John 2:1,12-13,18,20,28 — cf. 3:9-10,18.
65. Revelation 22:4; 21:27; 2:14,17,23; 3:12; 7:3-4; 14:1 cf. Matthew 28:19 and
66. Note that baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprink-ling water upon the
person (Hebrews 9:13,19-22; Acts 2:41; 16:33; Mark 7:4). Not only those that do
actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 8:37-38) but
also the infants of one or both parents are to be baptized (Genesis 17:7,9; Galatians
3:9,14: Colossians 2:11-12; Acts 2:38-39; Romans 4:11-12; I Corinthians 7:14;
Matthew 28:19; Mark 10:13-16; Luke 18:15), and “it be a great sin to contemn or
neglect this ordinance (Luke 7:30; Exodus 4:24-26).” Thus the Westminster
Confession 28:3-5 — cf. too the Westminster Larger Catechism Q. 166 and see further
note 36 above.
67. Acts 9:18; 22:16; 1 Corinthians 7:14. 68. Joshua 5:8-9 — cf. notes 19 and 46-
69. Psalm 2:5 (KJV cf NIV).
70. Psalm 2:12 — cf. 2 Corinthians 5:20 (NIV) with notes 30-34 and 40-41.
71. Psalm 2:12 (NIV); 2:5 (KJV cf. NIV). 72. Matthew 18:2-6 — cf. vv 10,11,14
73. Acts 2:38-39 (NIV). 74. Psalm 128:3 (NIV). 75. Psalm 128:6 (NIV)