"Those who object to infant baptism because of the invitation it presents to nominalism and presumption have a strong argument. If circumcision was the precursor to baptism, as paedobaptists like to argue, then the temptations that came with circumcision will also come with infant baptism." - Wilson, Against the Church, p30.
I completely agree with this. In fact, this was one of my "strong" arguments against paedobaptism. But I am a paedobaptist and so is Wilson. What gives? I came to see that the problem of nominalism and presumption does not go away when we wait until the nominalist is twelve years old, has learned the "ropes" for being in church, walks the aisle at the appointed time, and gives his testimony. Parents still presume and even pressure their kids to "make a decision" when the agreed upon "age of accountability" has occurred. Worse, afraid to not push the kids to make a decision, they might never call them to Christ, leaving the child doubting whether or not he is or could be saved far too long.
How is nominalism and presumption solved then? Hot gospel preaching and faithful church discipline - in both the baptist and Presbyterian churches. And ultimately, by a glorious work of the Spirit on all of our churches.