Children that have the sign of the covenant

Status
Not open for further replies.
Matt,
Please show me a passage in the new testament that forbids placing the sign upon a child? Where did God say to change the program from what He originally decreed, that being placing the sign upon the child.

The great commission commands to make disciples (not all disciples were true believers) and to place the sign upon them.
 
Thankfully, I concur with Piper's exegesis on this issue as well:

<P>John Piper and many others, however, believe that there is one more biblical strand of evidence which must be considered. This evidence leads us to conclude that God saves <EM>all</EM> infants who die.</P>
<P>In a funeral sermon several years ago for an infant, Dr. Piper summarized the basis for his conclusion:</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>Jesus says in John 9:41 to those who were offended at his teaching and asked if he thought they were blind-he said, "If you were blind, you would not have had sin; but since you say, 'We see,' your sin remains."</P>
<P>In other words, if a person lacks the natural capacity to see the revelation of God's will or God's glory then that person's sin would not remain-God would not bring the person into final judgment for not believing what he had no natural capacity to see.</P>
<P>The other text is Romans 1:20 where Paul is dealing with persons who have not heard the gospel and have no access to it, but who do have access to the revelation of God's glory in nature:</P>
<P>Romans 1:20 "<EM>Since the creation of the world God's invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, <STRONG>so that they are without excuse</STRONG>."</EM></P>
<P>In other words: if a person did not have access to the revelation of God's glory - did not have the natural capacity to see it and understand it, then Paul implies they would have an excuse at the judgment.</P>
<P>The point for us is that even though we human beings are under the penalty of everlasting judgment and death because of the fall of our race into sin and the sinful nature that we all have, nevertheless God only executes this judgment on those who have the natural capacity to see his glory and understand his will, and refuse to embrace it as their treasure.</P>
<P>Infants, I believe, do not yet have that capacity; and therefore, in God's inscrutable way, he brings them under the forgiving blood of his Son.</P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>In another sermon, he adds:</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>God in his justice will find a way to absolve infants who die of their depravity. It will surely be through Christ. But beyond that we would be guessing. It seems to me that the most natural guess would be that babies will grow up in the kingdom (either immediately, or over time) and will by God's grace come to faith so that their justification is by faith alone just like ours.</BLOCKQUOTE>
http://www.desiringgod.org/library/theological_qa/infant_salv/infants.html
Click to expand...
 
Ok. So God has two ways of salvation. The person who never hears the gospel will be graded on a curve? Rubbish. Heresy! Baloney!

The bible is clear: ALL have sinned. Where is the propitiation for the Egyptians? For those sunk in Noahs flood? Are you trying to tell me that some of the people of Noahs day that died in the flood are possibly in heaven based upon this curve Piper says God grades upon?

Nonsense!

The bible is clear; God punishes sin. All men are plagued at birth. judgment must be distributed else God has broken His own decree. Ignorance of Gods law is no excuse.
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Ok. So God has two ways of salvation. The person who never hears the gospel will be graded on a curve? Rubbish. Heresy! Baloney!

The bible is clear: ALL have sinned. Where is the propitiation for the Egyptians? For those sunk in Noahs flood? Are you trying to tell me that some of the people of Noahs day that died in the flood are possibly in heaven based upon this curve Piper says God grades upon?

Nonsense!

The bible is clear; God punishes sin. All men are plagued at birth. judgment must be distributed else God has broken His own decree. Ignorance of Gods law is no excuse.
Click to expand...

To clearify, Romand 10:17 is clear, faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. The elect infant dying in infancy is converted by Gods word, hence proving that an infant can be regenerate/converted. No confession is needed. No isle walking or standing on the head. Just God!
 
What does the Scriptural exegesis of Romans 1:20 say?

I found it to be rather logical and harmonious with the whole counsel of God, especially if the infant exercises faith in Christ in heaven, which would make his justification on the same basis as ours, by faith alone. This is built upon some implications of Romans 1:20, that those who do not see God's eternal attributes and reject them in their heart have an excuse and will be justified by God by faith in a special way. Granted, this is very interesting and goes beyond our comprehension and reason, but the text implies it may and probably will be so.

If however, it is not so, all infants and people unable mentally to hear the Word of God and call upon His name, will be condemned because of their federal inheritance of Adam's sin. Either way, the truth is difficult to swallow.

The only question that remains: Which position most fully conforms with the Biblical Text?
 
Dear Sir, you mistake. All infants are unable to hear the Word of God and call upon His name, and therefore (assuming Piper's exegesis of Rom. 1:20 is incorrect), all infants will be eternally condemned.
 
Originally posted by piningforChrist
Dear Sir, you mistake. All infants are unable to hear the Word of God and call upon His name, and therefore (assuming Piper's exegesis of Rom. 1:20 is incorrect), all infants will be eternally condemned.
Click to expand...

So all children dying in infancy are in hell?
 
The WCF states:

III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit,[12] who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth:[13] so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.[14]

12. Gen. 17:7; Luke 1:15; 18:15-16; Acts 2:39; John 3:3, 5; I John 5:12
13. John 3:8
14. John 16:7-8; I John 5:12; Acts 4:12

The LBC of 1689:

3. Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )
 
If Romans 1:20 does not imply that God will justify those who are unable to see and reject His eternal attributes clearly seen in His creation because they are with excuse, then

God will punish them in eternal torment.
 
Originally posted by piningforChrist
Dear Sir, you mistake. All infants are unable to hear the Word of God and call upon His name, and therefore (assuming Piper's exegesis of Rom. 1:20 is incorrect), all infants will be eternally condemned.
Click to expand...

How do you know that infants are incapable? Donkeys talk!
 
In regards to Rom 1:20

Who is spoken of?

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
 
Buddy,
You're not getting it. Everyone on this board, including all the reformed understand and agree with this principle; you are just missing the target. Slow down and reread the thread.
 
Ok, they may be capable by divine intervention. If they are made to see God's eternal attributes, reject them, hear the Word, and call upon the name of the Lord, then

they will be elect and will inherit eternal life.
 
Originally posted by piningforChrist
What does the Scriptural exegesis of Romans 1:20 say?

I found it to be rather logical and harmonious with the whole counsel of God, especially if the infant exercises faith in Christ in heaven, which would make his justification on the same basis as ours, by faith alone. This is built upon some implications of Romans 1:20, that those who do not see God's eternal attributes and reject them in their heart have an excuse and will be justified by God by faith in a special way. Granted, this is very interesting and goes beyond our comprehension and reason, but the text implies it may and probably will be so.

If however, it is not so, all infants and people unable mentally to hear the Word of God and call upon His name, will be condemned because of their federal inheritance of Adam's sin. Either way, the truth is difficult to swallow.

The only question that remains: Which position most fully conforms with the Biblical Text?
Click to expand...
The paedobaptist position most clearly conforms with the Biblical text.

What it does not conform with is a misappropriation of the Covenant of Grace that implies:

1. a material difference between the faith of TRUE OT and NT believers
2. a material difference in spiritual circumcision
3. the notion that physical circumcision wasn't really linked at all to true faith so it didn't matter that it might be applied to infants who were reprobate
4. that baptism is really linked to true faith so it can't be applied to infants because they might be reprobate
5. that the "they might be reprobate" is how we ought to consider all issues within the visible Church
6. that we can existentially ensure that a person has true faith because when they're adults they say they have true faith
7. when a three year old sings "Amazing Grace" he is a liar
8. that our children are no longer a Covenantal blessing to us as the curtain fell on the old "dispensation". Now they are no more than any other random person that God just might regenerate because salvation is not ordinarily found within the Church anymore

In short, the Scriptures don't speak of a radical discontinuity so we can ensure that Romans 9-10 and adult faith and adult baptism can form the basis of our biblical hermeneutic.

[Edited on 11-15-2005 by SemperFideles]
 
God doesn't have to conform to your systematic soteriology, Matthew. You should re-read your own Confession a few times before you drift further into Hypercalvinism.
 
Originally posted by piningforChrist
Ok, they may be capable by divine intervention. If they are made to see God's eternal attributes, reject them, hear the Word, and call upon the name of the Lord, then

they will be elect and will inherit eternal life.
Click to expand...

Matthew,
Election is a decree created before the foundation of the world; it is not a reskult of something the infant does.
 
The Scripture passages that support the propositions of the WCF and the LBCF do not imply that all infants will be elect, nor do they imply that God would have any basis for justifying infants. Only John 9:41 and Romans 1:20 present a basis for God's pardoning of infants.

Regarding John 9:41,

In other words, if a person lacks the natural capacity to see the revelation of God's will or God's glory then that person's sin would not remain-God would not bring the person into final judgment for not believing what he had no natural capacity to see.
Click to expand...

Regarding Romans 1:20,

In other words: if a person did not have access to the revelation of God's glory - did not have the natural capacity to see it and understand it, then Paul implies they would have an excuse at the judgment.
Click to expand...

[Edited on 11-15-2005 by piningforChrist]
 
The creeds clearly say elect infants dying in infancy..........not all infants. No one has said that all infants dying in infancy are elect except Piper. This is a blatant error on his part!

As far as justification, no one gets into heaven outside of being justified. Hence, elect infants dying in infancy MUST be justified.
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Originally posted by piningforChrist
Ok, they may be capable by divine intervention. If they are made to see God's eternal attributes, reject them, hear the Word, and call upon the name of the Lord, then

they will be elect and will inherit eternal life.
Click to expand...

Matthew,
Election is a decree created before the foundation of the world; it is not a reskult of something the infant does.
Click to expand...

I meant, "they will be justified and will inherit eternal life." Sorry, my first mistake.

[Edited on 11-16-2005 by piningforChrist]
 
Scott, in your view what is the basis for the justification of such infants if they are totally depraved because of their federal head, Adam?
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Originally posted by piningforChrist
Well, then I found the very first error in my confession.
Click to expand...

oh my..............
Click to expand...

I read it too quickly and incorrectly, skipping over the elect part. Yes, if the infants are elect and justified, they will be pardoned and righteous. I correct my second mistake.
 
Originally posted by piningforChrist
Scott, in your view what is the basis for the justification of such infants if they are totally depraved because of their federal head, Adam?
Click to expand...

Their election. Christ has, across time, died for His people.

Mat 1:21 She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."
 
Originally posted by piningforChrist
Scott, in your view what is the basis for the justification of such infants if they are totally depraved because of their federal head, Adam?
Click to expand...

The same as it would be for every other depraved sinner, I would imagine, - grace.
 
Justification is by faith alone - whether that faith be outwardly manifested or not.

Turritin sums up your dilemma well:

Concerning the subject of faith a question is moved as to infants. There are two extremes: (1) in defect, by the Anabaptists, who deny all faith to infants and under this pretext exclude them from baptism; (2) in excess, by the Lutherans, who, to oppose themselves to the Anabaptists, have fallen into the other extreme, maintaining that infants are regenerated in baptism and actually furnished with faith, as appears from the Mompeldardensi Colloquy (Acta Colloquy Mantis Belligartensis [1588], p. 459). "The round asser­tion of our divines is that actual faith is ascribed to infants with the most just right" (Brochmann, "De Fide Justificante," 2, Q. 10 in Universae theologicae systema [1638], 2:429).

The orthodox occupy the middle ground between these two extremes. They deny actual faith to infants against the Lutherans and maintain that a seminal or radical and habitual faith is to be ascribed to them against the Anabaptists.
Click to expand...

[Edited on 11-16-2005 by webmaster]
 
Are there examples or is there a ground in Scripture for a faith that is not outwardly manifested (either in the heart or by the tongue) that does justify? Is an outward expression of faith (either in the heart or by the tongue) necessary to be called faith and therefore to justify?

[Edited on 11-16-2005 by piningforChrist]
 
Matthew,
Faith is a gift. The outward expression is a result of the gift.
The outward expression is not neccesary to make the gift real, but a fruit thereof.

[Edited on 11-16-2005 by Scott Bushey]
 
An outward manifestation of "profession" of what one believes inwardly is not necessary for salvation. If it were, we should all go back to Arminianism, and we should all become credo-baptists.

WCF:

I. The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls,[1] is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts,[2] and is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the Word,[3] by which also, and by the administration of the sacraments, and prayer, it is increased and strengthened.[4]

1. Titus 1:1; Heb. 10:39
2. I Cor. 12:3; John 3:5; 6:44-45, 65; Titus 3:5; Eph. 2:8; Phil. 1:29; II Peter 1:1; see I Peter 1:2
3. Matt. 28:19-20; Rom. 10:14, 17; I Cor. 1:21
4. I Peter 2:2; Acts 20:32; Rom. 1:16-17; Matt. 28:19; see Acts 2:38; I Cor. 10:16; 11:23-29; Luke 17:5; Phil. 4:6-7

II. By this faith, a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is revealed in the Word, for the authority of God himself speaking therein;[5] and acteth differently upon that which each particular passage thereof containeth; yielding obedience to the commands,[6] trembling at the threatenings,[7] and embracing the promises of God for this life, and that which is to come.[8] But the principal acts of saving faith are accepting, receiving, and resting upon Christ alone for justification, sanctification, and eternal life, by virtue of the covenant of grace.[9]

5. II Peter 1:20-21; John 4:42; I Thess. 2:13; I John 5:9-10; Acts 24:14
6. Psa. 119:10-11, 48, 97-98, 167-168; John 14:15
7. Ezra 9:4; Isa. 66:2; Heb. 4:1
8. Heb. 11:13; I Tim. 4:8
9. John 1:12; Acts 15:11, 16:31; Gal. 2:20; II Tim. 1:9-10

III. This faith is different in degrees, weak or strong;[10] may be often and many ways assailed, and weakened, but gets the victory:[11] growing up in many to the attainment of a full assurance, through Christ,[12] who is both the author and finisher of our faith.[13]

10. Heb. 5:13-14; Rom. 4:19-20; 14:1-2; Matt. 6:30; 8:10
11. Luke 22:31-32; Eph. 6:16; I John 5:4-5
12. Heb. 6:11-12; 10:22; Col. 2:2
13. Heb. 12:2

[Edited on 11-16-2005 by webmaster]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top