Clark-Tillian
Puritan Board Freshman
If we grant the theological position that baptism replaces circumcision as the sign of covenantal initiation, and we grant that infants, or young children, of at least one parent with a credible profession of faith have a right to the sign, and if Old Covenant members who didn't have their sons circumcised were in violation of the covenantal strictures, then are credo-baptists technically in covenant breach? I'm not seeking to be incendiary, just wanting to know others thoughts on the matter.