When Smith came to the introduction of circumcision as a token of God’s covenant with Abraham in Genesis 17, he added a passage condemning infant baptism. God tells Abraham: “My people have gone astray from my precepts . . . and taken unto themselves the washing of children, . . . and have not know wherein [children] are accountable before me . . . And I will establish a covenant of circumcision with thee . . . that thou mayest know for ever that children are not accountable before me till eight years old.” Previous revelations had mentioned baptizing children when they reach the age of accountability (D&C 18:42; 20:71; 29:47), but the exact age will not be given until the following November (D&C 68:25, 27). The link between infant sprinkling and circumcision is also made in the Book of Mormon (Moro. 8:1-23), which is an anachronism for the Nephites as well as Abraham. Catholics, Anglicans, and Presbyterians practiced infant baptism; Seekers, Anabaptists, Baptists, and Alexander Campbell’s Reformed Baptists rejected it. Under the Puritan system, children were included in their parents’ covenant and were said to have been “born in the covenant.” Puritan infants were baptized, not for the remission of sins, but as a “seal” of the covenant which they inherited from their believing parents. Nevertheless, some argued that the baptism of infants was justified on grounds that it replaced the circumcision of infants under the old law and was necessary to counter the effects of Adam’s original sin.