Scott Clark summarizes the reasons I had to give up my Baptist revisions to Reformed Theology, and shows why the arguments I used to use about the New Covenant in relation to the old have no impact on Abraham, circumcision, and infant inclusion:

Ishmael and Infant Baptism

You all may now feel free to comment on the article without actually reading it

__________________
Philip A - Member, High Desert United Reformed Church, Apple Valley, CA.

"Reason also is choice" - Milton, Paradise Lost
"And then shall every word also seem consistent to him, if he for his part diligently read the Scriptures in company with those who are presbyters in the Church, among whom is the apostolic doctrine, as I have pointed out." - Irenaeus, Against Heresies, IV:XXXII.
"where there is text, there is hope" - Richard A. Muller

A good read

__________________
Richard
CofE
UK

I also read the two articles by Scott Clark and Dennis Johnson linked within the article, both are excellent!

__________________
Polo
Layman, Chinese Evangelical Church/Independent
San Diego

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. (Romans 11:36)

I want to thank Scott Clark for the article, and Phillip for posting it.

It concisely helped me understand a lot of the paedo perspective. I'm not saying I'm buying it, but I'm glad to understand it a bit more.

BTW, I had a similar view of the old covenant as Prof. Clark, but his articulation of it clears a few things up for me.

__________________
R.Vic Bottomly
Providence Reformed Baptist Church, Tacoma, WA

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Sorry Philip but it doesn't adequately deal with my questions on Genesis 17, Romans 4, and Galatians 3,4, and 5.

I believe the Abrahamic administers the CoG but that isn't all it administers. And that is where I think the confusion comes from. It seems it is assumed that the Abrahamic just administers the Covenant of Grace. There are also promises made to the unelect outside of the CoG. I have started a thread on it.

__________________

(Norseman Moderator)

R. Martin Snyder
1689er
Harmony Baptist Church (Member)
PuritanCovenanter MSN Blog
PuritanCovenanter's MySpace Page

"Our object should not be to have scripture on our side but to be on the side of scripture; and however dear any sentiment may have become by being long entertained, so soon as it is seen to be contrary to the Bible, we must be prepared to abandon it without hesitation."
William Symington

Click to get:Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Thank you for this article. It is very informative. One question I was going to ask but was answered in the article is, "In relation to what is the New Covenant new?" I had viewed it as the article explained, but for some reason, in my conversations here got to thinking that Paedos viewed it as new in relation to Abraham.

Incidentally, Progressive Dispies view the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and New covenants in the same way. Both the Old and the New are progressive administrations of the Abrahamic. Where I think they miss the boat (one place at least) is the failure to see an over-arching Covenant of Grace.

BTW, I still don't buy the complete continuity of the sign, but I'm still learning.

__________________