06-15-2008, 04:46 PM
|
| Puritanboard Doctor | | Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Saintfield, Co. Down, Northern Ireland
Posts: 6,568
Thanks: 2,062
Thanked 1,124 Times in 740 Posts
| |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivanhoe  Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie Jacob
The sign has relevance to the infant as he gets older and is reminded of his covenantal responsibilities. The same was true of circumcision.
| That still doesn't do justice to Augustine's definition of a sign. For Augustine (see above) it was a mental recollection. When the Bible uses signs, God is doing something. In biblical use, a sign is an act.
Many uses of "sign" in Scripture, moreover, refer to God's actions, particularly His works of power against Egypt (Deut. 4:34; 6:22; 7:19; 11:3; 26:3; 29:3; 34:11; Ps. 78:43) or Jesus' miracles among the Jews (Jn. 2:18, 23; 4:48, 54; 6:26; 9:16). Again, Augustine's definition of "sign" doesn't easily fit these passages. God did indeed communicate with Pharaoh through plagues of frogs and lice and pestilence. Far more than that, however, God did something to Pharaoh, and by doing that demanded that Pharaoh do something in response. | Yes, but is Augustine absolutely right?
__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)
|