Credo Arguments Paedo-Baptism

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

matt01

Puritan Board Senior
I was speaking with someone from the URC the other day, and he asked the following question:

Are there any arguments against the baptism of the children of professing believers (infant baptism) that Abraham couldn’t have attempted to use against circumcision?

Any suggestions?
 
Last edited:
No, because the covenant was one that differed in scope. Abraham had a mixed covenant that also had to do with his posterity promises that were not included in the Covenant of Grace, such as Ishmael was not included in the Covenant of Grace but he was a member in the Covenant of Circumcision. The term Covenant of Circumcision is a term that is mentioned by Stephen in the book of Acts.
 
PuritanCovenanter said:
No, because the covenant was one that differed in scope. Abraham had a mixed covenant that also had to do with his posterity promises that were not included in the Covenant of Grace...
Click to expand...

Randy-
Isn't this one main point of contention between credos and paedos, whether or not the New Covenant is defined in part by the Abrahamic (a priori), or if the specifics of each covenant are defined by the explicit teachings on that particular covenant?
 
nnatew24 said:
PuritanCovenanter said:
No, because the covenant was one that differed in scope. Abraham had a mixed covenant that also had to do with his posterity promises that were not included in the Covenant of Grace...
Click to expand...

Randy-
Isn't this one main point of contention between credos and paedos, whether or not the New Covenant is defined in part by the Abrahamic (a priori), or if the specifics of each covenant are defined by the explicit teachings on that particular covenant?
Click to expand...

I am not sure about your question Nate. The Abrahamic Covenant is a Covenant of Promise and it's fulfillment is found in the seed (Christ). We are Abraham's seed by faith and share in the Covenant of Grace with him. So as a priori, I would say yes. But the Covenant of Circumcision is given to Abraham as its Covenant head. That Covenant is no longer in force as circumcision is also abrogated. But the Covenant given to Abraham finds its fulfillment in Christ as its promises are concerned in the Covenant of Grace. Christ is the Head of the New Covenant. I have a lot of blogs on this topic.
http://www.puritanboard.com/blogs/puritancovenanter/

Does Baptism Replace Circumcision

John Tombes on Genesis 17:7

Circumcision and Baptism A. W. Pink Colosians 2

Is the New Covenant Really New

Covenant Head and Covenant Children

The Abrahamic Covenant

Here are a few of the blogs that might be relevant to this.
 
Are there any arguments against the baptism of the children of professing believers that Abraham couldn’t have attempted to use against circumcision?
Click to expand...
All Male children were to receive this sign......in the Ot. Physical birth was all that was required.
Where does it say that that the parents had to be professing believers? in fact many, or most perished in unbelief.
Child of believers can be baptized,when they believe
Mt18:6 speaks of these little ones who believe- does that imply there are little ones who do not believe?
 
Iconoclast said:
All Male children were to receive this sign......in the Ot. Physical birth was all that was required.
Where does it say that that the parents had to be professing believers? in fact many, or most perished in unbelief.
Child of believers can be baptized,when they believe
Mt18:6 speaks of these little ones who believe- does that imply there are little ones who do not believe?
Click to expand...

Anthony,

I am not sure what you mean. I am referring to paedo-baptism, which many churches will only administer to the children of believers. I understand that circumsion was for all those male children born in Israel. The individual who I was speaking with, was basically saying that the arguments against paedo-baptism are the same as might have been used against circumsion.
 
sans nom said:
The individual who I was speaking with, was basically saying that the arguments against paedo-baptism are the same as might have been used against circumsion.
Click to expand...

I would like to know who would use the same arguments against paedo baptism and circumcision. I don't understand that and have never heard anything like that to my knowledge.

It would be interesting to hear such an argument. I can't see that is possible.
 
Randy- thanks for your answer. I saw your other forum too, with a more detailed response. Very good.

What I meant was the administration of each covenant is defined by revelation specific to that covenant being the disputed point. That is, whether the recipients of the New Covenant sign are defined by previous covenant(s), or whether each particular administration is bound to the regulations given specifically in revelation about that covenant. In relation to this issue, should we look to previous covenants to determine if children of believers are included and should receive the sign, or do we look only to the revelation given regarding the New Covenant alone to determine their place. Does the instruction reside in all covenantal history, or is it bound only to texts that teach/instruct on the New Covenant? If I'm not mistaken, this is a point of contention between both sides.
 
Each Covenant can stand alone progressively but also as progressive revelation reveals. Each Covenant is different based upon its relation to the two Prior Covenants of Works and Grace. Some are Covenants based upon individual promise as a Promise to David or Abraham in Posterity or Noah. They may include many or one (such as the seed). I believe the New Covenant is one purely of the Covenant of Grace. All of its true members are in Christ and in union with him. I also believe that some can claim this favor but are not of this covenant. That is where many fail in my estimation. Either you are in Christ or you are not in Christ. Some will hear I never knew you and some will hear enter into the joy of thy Lord. Covenant Headship is mentioned in this blog I posted by Alan Conner. I recommend his small booklet very highly.

Covenant Children Today by Alan Conner

Covenant Head and Covenant Children

If you want to discuss sanctified and covenant children based upon 1 Corinthians 7:14 you can find them here.
Sanctification and New Covenant membership pt. 1
Sanctification and New Covenant membership pt. 2
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top