Baptism

Traditional Argument
Infant Baptism has been the practice of the church since its inception,
according to St. Augustine and other early church fathers. There is no reason
to think that infants wee not baptized in good faith by the apostles. Only if
Scripture opposed a church practice could it be overturned, and this can be
done.
Heresy Suppression Argument
All church heresies have been confronted very soon after introduction. Paul
mentioned the heresies of Jannes and Jambres; these were immediately
challenged and overruled by church theologians (2 Timothy 3:8-9). The lack
of any such challenge to infant Baptism until the 1520’s is circumstantial
proof that no error existed.
Absent Church Argument
Now if God did not accept the Baptism of infants, he would not have given
any of them the Holy Spirit nor any part of him; in short, all this time down to
the present day no man on earth could have been a Christian. Since God has
confirmed infant baptism through the gift of the Holy Spirit. . . must admit
that infant Baptism is pleasing to God. For he can never be in conflict with
himself support lies and wickedness, or give his grace and spirit for such ends.
(Tappert: Book of Concord, [St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959]
pp. 442-3).
The church can not exist without Baptism; without it the church would have
ceased. If infant Baptism was invalid, then the church did not baptize anyone
for more than one hundred years. This would imply that no church existed for
over a millennium.
186