B.J.
Puritan Board Freshman
My investigation of this debate has led to many interesting dialogues with friends on both sides. In recent discussions with a Baptist brother it was brought to my attention that he believed that children are members of the New Covenant: However, they are not, in his estimation, to be baptized until they profess faith.
This is not a typical "Reformed Baptist" view as I am aware. Typically Reformed Baptist exclude their children from being members, that is unless they die, and then they fight for the notion that they were in the New Covenant without a profession. Whats interesting about this view is that it is Paedo in hermeneutic, and Credo in practice. So to recap....
God has not abbrogated children from the New Covenant, but they dont recieve the sign until they profess. Is this non-sense, or is it something to be taken seriously?
What say you? Anyone.
This is not a typical "Reformed Baptist" view as I am aware. Typically Reformed Baptist exclude their children from being members, that is unless they die, and then they fight for the notion that they were in the New Covenant without a profession. Whats interesting about this view is that it is Paedo in hermeneutic, and Credo in practice. So to recap....
God has not abbrogated children from the New Covenant, but they dont recieve the sign until they profess. Is this non-sense, or is it something to be taken seriously?
What say you? Anyone.