Romans 4:11 and the Case for Infant Baptism

The paedobaptist argument from Romans 4:11 asserts that because circumcision once signified the divine promise of justification by faith like baptism does now, the latter has replaced the former and should be administered to infants just as its predecessor was. An exegetical evaluation of this argument, however, demonstrates that Romans 4:11 does not establish the parallel between the two rites that is central to the case for infant baptism. In addition, a theological evaluation shows that a biblical understanding of the sign of the Abrahamic Covenant highlights specific points of discontinuity that argue against a correspondence between circumcision and baptism and therefore against the practice of infant baptism.