Recently I came across MacArthur view on Baptism while reading comments on Facebook. (Which was on another subject: Immediate baptism after conversion)
Since it was well known that MacArthur is considered a calvinist, I naturally thought he would be in agreement with paedobaptism. Which even John Calvin devoted a whole chapter 4:16 in his Institutes to.
I found one of his sermon on such subject. Perhaps a re-affirmation after the debate with R.C. Sproul.
From the first talk, I noticed while using many reformers' quotes, John mainly found the ones that supported his point of view, in spite of their infant baptism advocacy. Quoting John Calvin only once or twice as well. Perhaps he just has too much respect for Calvin to debunk the man who's written much of the stance on paedobaptism throughout history.
It does motivate me to look deeper into such subject. And I came across this page.
And as for MacArthur's first point against infant baptism: That it is not in scripture, I will respond that while the Bible does not discuss the age group of baptism, I do know that the Bible affirms that baptism is for those who are human beings, sons of Adam.
What I could gather, the root cause of this sort, is the definition of baptism as whether or not it is a sacrament of repentance and faith as Rev. Bryn MacPhail puts it. So begins the debate.
I would also note that to some extend, this is also affected by the mode of baptism.
So while many would claim the reformers are more liberal on this matter, I would say that whenever there's a chance to show that grace precedes human actions, without breaking the doctrine of salvation, it is not wise to cover nor hinder such opportunity.
Since it is normal to have disagreements even among family, I don't see much problem as long as we can agree to disagree so that the root cause is clear and truthfully identified, lest we err in our judgment against others and make false accusation in hearts.