covanent thoelogy and infant baptism

[Findo]

While I don't have a very big grasp on covenant theology except that I realise the OT points to Jesus and that christians have become part of Abraham's children..

I read a statement somwhwere that said infaant baptism is an implication of this thoelogy.
I believe the bible teaches believer baptism... so I'm interested to hear some other points of view here... probably from covanent thinkers tho..

ta.

[Solly]

Since there aren't any other CTers on, and I am a Baptist too, I'll just state, standing on one leg, that CT of the Presbyterian variety holds to one covenant of grace via two administrations, and that there is a continuity between the two administrations, though some changes. The two administrations are the Mosaic economy, and the New Covenant economy.
So, under the ME, circumcision of male children was given as a covenant ordinance and sign of membership, whereas under the NCE, baptism of male and female children is the covenant sign.
Circumcision grants one access to the privileges and blessings of being in the covenant, infant baptism (or rhantism) grants one access to certain privileges. So, one could go to the temple and sacrifice in the MC, but one can't go to the Lord's Table in some Presbyterian churchs - you may recall the troubles Jonathan Edwards had about the half-way covenant.
There are other implications too, but not relevant to this thread.

I hope I haven't come across as too negative in my presentation. :grin:

[Findo]

you may recall the troubles Jonathan Edwards had about the half-way covenant.
There are other implications too, but not relevant to this thread.



no I can't say I'm familiar with the troubles.. I must admit to being an uniformed newbie in this area... I'm reading 'according to plan' by Graeme Goldsworthy, which is making a lot of sense...

[Solly]

That's an excellent book, it radically veered my thinking into new paths. Don't forget to get the more indepth follow up, Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scriptures. Then the New Dictionary of Biblical Theology

[Findo]

I think I'll need to read it again to fully understand a lot of what he says..

He's also good 'cause he's an Aussie.. there's a lot of cool stuff coming out from ihs colleagues in Sydney from Matthias Media (http://matthiasmedia.com.au/) esp a book call 'guidance and the voice of God'

back to the topic tho... you would'nt agree that covanent theology leadsd to infant baptism?

[Solly]

Off topic first, Bp Peter Jensen was on BBC radio on sunday, and John Woodbridge of Moore College. I've got a lot of respect for the work coming out of there, for instance in the New Studies in Biblical Theology series.

On topic. Ah, there's the rub. Presbyterian/Reformed Federal Covenant theology as outlined in their systematics and confessions does lead to infant baptist. That's why they do it!!

Is it a correct Biblical conclusion? No, I don't think so. There is a Covenant structure to scripture, and I am investigating it, and have a thread in Theology called Progressive Calvinism, which gives some thoughts, but I have several books to read on it first, and some scripture study to do before I say more in that thread. I am basically moving on from where John Murray of WTS got to in his article The Covenant of Grace. But I do not believe that circumcision is to be equated with baptism by a direct correlation.

[I]ps, i just saw your sig line. Nietzsche was great, and worth reading, to clear your mind of hand me down religion and preconceptions.

[Findo]

Off topic first, Bp Peter Jensen was on BBC radio on sunday, and John Woodbridge of Moore College. I've got a lot of respect for the work coming out of there, for instance in the New Studies in Biblical Theology series.

On topic. Ah, there's the rub. Presbyterian/Reformed Federal Covenant theology as outlined in their systematics and confessions does lead to infant baptist. That's why they do it!!

Is it a correct Biblical conclusion? No, I don't think so. There is a Covenant structure to scripture, and I am investigating it, and have a thread in Theology called Progressive Calvinism, which gives some thoughts, but I have several books to read on it first, and some scripture study to do before I say more in that thread. I am basically moving on from where John Murray of WTS got to in his article The Covenant of Grace. But I do not believe that circumcision is to be equated with baptism by a direct correlation.

I don't personally see a correlation either.. but I aslo need to do lot more research.


[I]ps, i just saw your sig line. Nietzsche was great, and worth reading, to clear your mind of hand me down religion and preconceptions.
anything in particular..?
I just found the quote and thought it was funny.. maybe i can just quotw you after it.. :teeth:

[Solly]

Thus Spake Zarathustra is good, Beyond Good and Evil, the Gay Science/Joyful Wisdom (depends on the translation, Die Fröhliche Wissenschaft). Also Human all to Human, The Genealogy of morals.

Nietzsche came from a long line of Lutheran pastors on his father's side, but German christianity had descended into liberalism by his time, and like Kierkegaard in Denmark, he reacted against it, though was never wholly from from it. Some of his criticisms are wide of the mark because he is fighting something else than Biblical Christianity, but he has many pertinent comments to make about presuppositions affecting our thinking. A man deeply tortured in his soul, a weak body with a strong mind, women spurned him though he sought them - hence such comments as Women deep? They aren't even shallow. He rejected, and was rejected by the establishment, yet he always sought friendship. He is to me the example of where the world goes when it opens its eyes, and sees the starkness of a world without God. A modern day Ecclesiastes.

[Findo]

so many books to read.. and so much uni work to do!

[Jude3b]

The Roman Catholic religion contends that baptism is necessary for salvation: "The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation." (The 1994 Roman Catholic Catechism page 320, #1257). "Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, and are incorporated into the Church..." (The Catechism page 312, #1213). The Catechism further states: "All the sacraments are sacred links uniting the faithful with one another and binding them to Jesus Christ, and above all Baptism, the gate by which we enter into the Church." (Page 248, #950). Therefore Rome started infant baptism.

Is water baptism necessary for salvation? Roman Catholic tradition says "yes"

God's Word says "no." Only Christ can forgive sins: "In whom we have redemption through his (Christ's) blood, the forgiveness of sins..." (Ephesians 1:7)

Who will you believe? God or Romanism?

[Findo]

The Roman Catholic religion contends that baptism is necessary for salvation: "The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation." (The 1994 Roman Catholic Catechism page 320, #1257). "Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, and are incorporated into the Church..." (The Catechism page 312, #1213). The Catechism further states: "All the sacraments are sacred links uniting the faithful with one another and binding them to Jesus Christ, and above all Baptism, the gate by which we enter into the Church." (Page 248, #950). Therefore Rome started infant baptism.

Is water baptism necessary for salvation? Roman Catholic tradition says "yes"

God's Word says "no." Only Christ can forgive sins: "In whom we have redemption through his (Christ's) blood, the forgiveness of sins..." (Ephesians 1:7)

Who will you believe? God or Romanism?

I also affirm that baptism is in no way neccessary for salvation. That wasn't the aim of this thread.. I am interested to know whether people believe that protestant covanent theology leads one to infant baptism. I personally believe the scripture teaches believer baptism.. but there are many protestant denominations, particularly those who would hold to convanental theology that do infant baptism. I read a statement somewhere (I can't remember where) that implied convanental theology leads to infant baptism.. I dont' know that this is the case.. that's why I asked.

[VFarris01]

While I don't have a very big grasp on covenant theology except that I realise the OT points to Jesus and that christians have become part of Abraham's children..

I read a statement somwhwere that said infaant baptism is an implication of this thoelogy.

I believe the bible teaches believer baptism... so I'm interested to hear some other points of view here... probably from covanent thinkers tho..Among other verses:

(16) The one who believes and is baptized will be saved, but the one who doesn't believe will be condemned.

(36) As they were going along the road, they came to some water. The eunuch said, "Look, there's some water. What keeps me from being baptized?" (37) Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." He replied, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." (38) So he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and Philip baptized him.

Infants lack the capacity to "believe."

[Findo]

Among other verses:

(16) The one who believes and is baptized will be saved, but the one who doesn't believe will be condemned.

(36) As they were going along the road, they came to some water. The eunuch said, "Look, there's some water. What keeps me from being baptized?" (37) Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." He replied, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." (38) So he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and Philip baptized him.

Infants lack the capacity to "believe."


I agree.. I believe in believer baptism and do so from a biblical support.

My question is asking how the idea of infant baptism is supposedly linked with covenant theology? Just wnating to find out...

[rmwilliamsjr]

My question is asking how the idea of infant baptism is supposedly linked with covenant theology? Just wnating to find out...

The line of reasoning is:

God the Father, from before the creation of the universe, establishes a covenant of love with God the Son. usually expressed as the decrees of God.

This eternal covenant finds it's expression in our world first as a series of renewals with various archtypic individuals: Adam, Abraham, Moses, but all point towards the 'real' or original covenant within the Godhead. These recapitulations are labelled something like: creation covenant, abrahamic covenant, mosaic covenant, or covenant of works and of grace.

The key point is to see how the covenants express a progressive nature of revelation and a conservative nature. The progressive nature is that God reveals Himself more and more in each until in Christ the full knowledge of the love, mercy and justice of God is evident. The conservative nature is seen in the nature of the means of grace, that is God teaches us in ways suitable for our frame, He accommodates His teaching to our frailities and frankly our boneheaded stupidity.

In the New Testament, it is clear that the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper are, like the covenants they teach, progressive and conservative. The Lord's supper extends the Paschal festival, the representation of the deliverance of the people of Moses's time from the Avenging Angel of Death. Likewise baptism extends our understanding of OT circumcision. It's conservativeness it marked by things like:
family, to young who do not recognize the significance, cleansing from symbolic sin. etc. etc.
Unlike anti-paedobaptists, baptism is not admission in the church, nor is it church membership, but a hope that the child will become a member of the kingdom, in time. It is an expression of the hope that the covenant is to us and our children, however, showing that a covenant child brought up in the church is not in the same position as a child brought up outside the church. S/he has benefits and a potential judgement for seeing and experiencing the covenant community first hand. Just as a circumcised Jew who did not believe was still part of the community but not part of the believing community.

does this help a little bit?

[Findo]

ok thanks...