Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, move, protect
30,891
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 42:
Line 42: − +
→Historical argument against infant baptism given by some Protestants: boldface emphasis added to words of Zondervan Academic statement: "parents or someone else in the family would speak on their behalf."
The Apostolic Tradition’s description of the ceremony of baptism shows that it was designed for those who were old enough to take an active part.
The Apostolic Tradition’s description of the ceremony of baptism shows that it was designed for those who were old enough to take an active part.
In fact, the confession of faith was so integral to baptism that, if a person could not confess the faith themselves, parents or someone else in the family would speak on their behalf.
In fact, the confession of faith was so integral to baptism that, if a person could not confess the faith themselves, '''parents or someone else in the family would speak on their behalf.''' (''<small>boldface emphasis added</small>'')
A century after Tertullian, Cyprian advocated for infant baptism, although for many years this remained the exception to the rule of full immersion. Infant baptism did not become routine until the fifth and sixth centuries.<ref>[https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/early-church-infant-baptism-or-full-immersion Did the Early Church Practice Infant Baptism or Full Immersion?], Zondervan Academic</ref>}}
A century after Tertullian, Cyprian advocated for infant baptism, although for many years this remained the exception to the rule of full immersion. Infant baptism did not become routine until the fifth and sixth centuries.<ref>[https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/early-church-infant-baptism-or-full-immersion Did the Early Church Practice Infant Baptism or Full Immersion?], Zondervan Academic</ref>}}