The Christian religion is one with many questions. How much should you tithe? Is abortion wrong? Should we accept people who are LGBTQ+ members into the congregation? Of course, many of them have clear places in Scripture that either affirm or refute the select argument. But one question that divides many Christians is on infant baptism, on whether it should be allowed or not.

There are two sides: credobaptism (disallows infants from taking baptism) and paedobaptism (that allows and affirms infant baptisms). While Baptists and Pentecostals rest on credobaptism, many other denominations including Catholics, Methodists, and Lutherans agree with paedobaptism. Now, which parties are right? There is no place like Scripture to find out.

Just to point out, I am a believer in credobaptism and I’ll give my point of view in a second, but let’s check the Bible first.

• “Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord, together with his entire household. And many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized." (Acts 18:18)

• “And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family." (Acts 16:33)

• “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16)

From these verses alone, it is very difficult to see where the Bible stand on either belief. Some verses say that the entire family believed and was baptized, while others just mention adults. Now, here is where my defense comes in.

Claim #1: It Can’t Work for Infants Due to Their Limitations

In the Bible, especially Acts, many believers followed their turn to Christianity with baptism. Scriptures consistently present, “Believe, then Baptize,” in that order, and not the other way around. Well, why does this matter?

Infants are not capable to accept Jesus into their heart, so nor should they receive baptism, as in the Bible, baptism comes after salvation. And baptism is a covenant between you and God, which an infant cannot make on their own behalf. Why should they be taking baptism when they neither believe nor understand the process? It’s like giving a child they keys to a car, and asking them to drive. Of course it won’t work, because they are not old enough, nor understand driving to the necessary extent.

Claim #2: Infants Cannot Have Personal Faith

“Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:3-4) Since baptism comes after salvation, a person must be saved before partaking in baptism. Well, unfortunately, an infant/child cannot complete that task. Furthermore, an infant cannot “die to sin” and “rise to new life” as there is no personal faith.

Claim #3: “But the Whole Households Were Saved”

This point is used heavily by proponents of paedobaptism, because while it makes some sense, it is not exactly true. At least in how I believe it. Because in those same texts, the Bible oftentimes notes that the households were either “rejoicing” or “believing” which implies that the saved/baptized were not infants.

The Arguments

This following section is on common defenses used by supporters of paedobaptism and how they are refuted by God’s Word.

1. Baptism replaces circumcision: No it doesn’t. Baptism is a sign of spiritual rebirth while circumcision is a physical change for concordance with the Old Testament laws.

2. The promise is for you and your children (Acts 2:39): Yes, that is correct, but the next part of the verse clarifies: "...and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself". That’s the promise to those who respond to God’s call, which requires faith.

3. Baptism is a means of grace for infants: This point makes the least sense, because infants don’t understand baptism, which thus leads to churches being filled with “Christians” that they claim were baptized even though they can’t even recall when, where, or how it happened. It also contradicts that salvation is though faith alone.

I am no theologian, so let me know how I did in the comments, and be sure to give me ideas for future articles! God bless!

Sexual immorality, lying, stealing, and murder are all obvious sins that are discussed in church. Maybe not enough; but they are still at least somewhat discussed. However, there is a sin that is rarely ever discussed: partiality.

I was recently reading James chapter 2 in my Bible, and the chapter started off discussing partiality. “My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “You sit here in a good place,” while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,” or, “Sit down at my feet,” have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? - James 2:1-4 (ESV)

Whether you like it or not, partiality (bias/favoritism) is a problem. When we see a rich man, in a good-looking suit, we are way more likely to talk or do something for them than to that homeless guy who’s looking for some of Jesus. Now, of course, this doesn’t apply to everyone. There are people that go past the person’s physical appearance, and instead see a person who needs Christ. We need more people like that. And most Christians know the importance of not showing favoritism. But they still do it. We react more to what’s more pleasing to the eyes. And that’s where the whole problem lies. We call ourselves imitators of Christ, followers of Christ, yet we can’t bring ourselves to evangelize or help the homeless/not the physically appealing people.

There are hundreds of thousands of people on the streets and around us that need Jesus. Many Christians desire to go abroad for missions, yet they completely ignore the mission fields around them. And it’s mainly because of favoritism. They would rather preach to the wealthy, than to the poor. They don’t want to get dirty or be seen with such people. Brothers and sisters in Christ, what type of Christ-like example is that? Are we really imitating our Savior who spent time with the poor, sly tax-collectors, lepers, and adulterers? I think not. The few verses down from the previous passage reveals something very deep:

“If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.”

That is deep. Many know that favoritism is wrong, but few know that it is sin.

God is instructing all Christians to treat others equally. No matter the skin color, ethnicity, religion, or outward appearance, they should be treated with the same respect as your friends/colleagues. Now, we don’t have to agree with them, but we need to show respect and God’s love. I struggle with it too, because it’s difficult, but it’s vital for us Christians to not show that bias. We need to see past the physical, and into the heart. Because everyone needs the love of Jesus Christ.

This is a conversation space exclusively for subscribers—kind of like a group chat or live hangout. I’ll post questions and updates that come my way, and you can jump into the discussion.

Join chat

How to get started

1. Get the Substack app by clicking this link or the button below. New chat threads won’t be sent sent via email, so turn on push notifications so you don’t miss conversation as it happens. You can also access chat on the web.

Get app

2. Open the app and tap the Chat icon. It looks like two bubbles in the bottom bar, and you’ll see a row for my chat inside.

3. That’s it! Jump into my thread to say hi, and if you have any issues, check out Substack’s FAQ.

For many years, even up ‘till today, many people believe that science and faith are incompatible. That one contradicts the other and vice versa. However, many well respected scientists have thought otherwise.

• Max Planck (Founder of Quantum Mechanics) said, “There can never be any real opposition between religion and science; for the one is the complement of the other."

• Werner Heisenburg remarked, “The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you." 

• Werner von Braun wrote, “I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science.”

• Louis Pasteur said, “A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to him".

Those are just few of the many examples that prove science and faith are compatible. They both prove the other. In our everyday lives, we can clearly see that God created the universe we live in. No Big Bang, and with no evolutionary processes. Just God.

I cover all these scientists in my upcoming book, The Greatest Christian Scientists, and many more. Hope you guys enjoyed this short article and God bless!

Many people don’t know that some of the greatest scientists ever; Newton, Boyle, Pascal, Maxwell, Faraday, and more believed in the Creator of the universe. Yes, they weren’t perfect, but neither are we.

The book will feature 25+ short biographies on Christian scientists. It will be available on Amazon soon in all formats: ebook, (on Kindle Unlimited) paperback, hardcover, and eventually audiobook. Drop any questions or thoughts on the cover.

God Bless!

While both #2 and #3 can be for anyone, they are all must reads for every Christian guy with incredible lessons.

1. Disciplines of a Godly Man

2. God’s Smuggler

3. The Heavenly Man

Have you read any of these?

What are your favorite Christian books (outside the Bible)?