Infant Baptism Biblical or Unbiblical?

This author very adamantly refutes infant baptism and will exposit why infant baptism is indeed unbiblical.  An interesting point that I would like to address is the use of the term “baptism” relating to infants.  Biblical baptism is total or complete immersion and those who practice infant “baptism” do not totally or completely immerse an infant and therefore “baptism” does not biblically nor correctly apply though the term is widely used.  Therefore, attaching the term “baptism” to the practice of sprinkling whether an infant or an older individual is a misnomer and it is unbiblical.

Since I am stating that what is known as “infant baptism” is unbiblical I should give clear, concise, and confessing evidence from the written Word of God as proof to my statement.  For what truly matters is what saith the Lord regardless of what any man has to say.  Our authoritative and perfect rule for life and practice is God’s inerrant, infallible, and inspired Word to mankind.  The practice of “infant baptism” lacks any divine authority and causes serious errors within the body of Christ.  For example:  many who practice infant baptism declare the infant to be a born again child of God because of their (supposed) baptism, and many parents believe their children to be “saved” as a result.

Some will arguably make the claim that infant baptism is biblical and to this statement I must say, show me in the divine record the practice of infant baptism!  Within the 66 canonical books of the Bible we are not commanded nor are we authorized to practice infant baptism.  For anyone who begs to differ let us examine the Holy Scriptures and adduce these supporting portions of Holy Writ regarding the practice of infant baptism to which there are none.  Those who are given to the practice of infant baptism believe that this “baptism” gives to the infant the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, and it becomes vitally important to administer this “baptism” for the sake of the infants spiritual well-being both here on earth and in eternity as well.


Because the Word of God is indeed our supreme rule of faith and practice and infant baptism is clearly nowhere to be found within God’s Word we must reject this practice and we should not give it any credence whatsoever.  That which is unbiblical is also anti-biblical and the belief in and practice of something that is unbiblical/anti-biblical is a doctrine of devils (1st Tim. 4:1) which is blatantly hostile to God, His Word, and Christianity itself.  “Infant baptism” is a lie straight from none other than Satan himself the father of (all) lies (Jn. 8:44).  This demonic deception has permeated Christianity and has been a long-standing tradition as a rule of faith and practice in direct opposition to God’s authoritative Word which is our rule of faith and practice.

Since infant baptism is nowhere in the Scriptures some will say that infant baptism is not forbidden and they see no evil in its practice.  However, if we truly hold to the Scriptures as our (sole) rule of faith and practice based upon this foundation alone is sufficient to declare infant baptism as unbiblical.  What God has revealed to us in His written Word we are obligated to cherish, obey (reverently), and faithfully live out and practice what God commands without any addition, dimunitin, or change.  Whenever a minister performs the (so-called) infant baptism and claims to do so by the authority of Jesus Christ is lying because Christ has never authorized infant baptism.

If one who professes Christ Jesus and (strict) adherence to His Word as a rule of faith and practice this believer is a (true) biblicist.  If one who professes Christ Jesus and makes tradition a rule of faith and practice this believer is a (true) traditionalist.  Dear reader, are you a biblicist or a traditionalist?  As for me I am a biblicist.  My next segment of this treatise will be dealing with the perversions of God’s Word regarding infant baptism.

Jim Kelley