For non-baptists on this board...

[Learner]

Scott , I am still mulling over your Calvin and Henry quotes . But for now I'll relate the words of one of your favorite authors : Greg Welty . His booklet is named : " A Critical Examination of Infant Baptism " . And this portion deals with the 1 Corinthian 7:14 passage .

The paedobaptist interpretation of this text is a classic example of what was previously identified as " Judaizing " the New Testament . That is , distinctions peculiar to the Old Testament , such as " external " or " covenantal " holiness , are read into New Testament texts . Paedobaptists forget that the entire concept of " covenantal " holiness has been abolished in the NT . In Acts 10:28 , Peter informed Cornelius' household that " You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him . But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure [ koinon] or unclean [ akatharton ] . " In the context it is obvious that Peter is speaking about external , covenantal holiness , based upon external membership in the covenant community . Thus the very thing which God commanded Peter never to do ( call men unclean because of their birth outside the covenant community ) , paedobaptists do with respect to the children of non-Christians ( i.e. call them unclean ) . They forget that such distinctions have been abolished in the New Covenant era , as God taught Peter .

 

[C. Matthew McMahon]

tim,

You basically requoted what i quoted.

Are you listening to Lightfoot or not. 3 days of debate over 8 years is nothing. His point, and the expression that the Minutes give is exactly what I did quote:

"we concluded upon nothing in it but the business was recommitted ."

The reason they did not hash it out was because it was not important to them at the time. Have you read any first hand accounts of the Assembly at all? You are quoting Lightfoot (a little) but are quoting Lightfoot, or someone else's quote of Lightfoot? And those who voted not to sprinkle, can you tell us if they were Presbyterians, Erastians, Congregationalists, Episcopalians, etc? Do you understand the context of the Assembly at this point in theological history or are you pulling "proof texts" to prove...............what are you trying to prove?? uzzled:

 

[C. Matthew McMahon]

[quote:f32e708687]Paedobaptists forget that the entire concept of " covenantal " holiness has been abolished in the NT . [/quote:f32e708687]

This is one of most ridiculous statements he makes in that work.

Even from a NT vantage point for the church, the concept of covenantal holiness is critical to the Christ/church relationship. How he can even ATTEMPT to say this denies most of the biblical restoration passages of the OT, and the continued priestly covenantal work of Christ for the church in the NT.


ESV Matthew 26:28 for this is my blood of the [b:f32e708687]covenant[/b:f32e708687], which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

ESV Mark 14:24 And he said to them, "This is my blood of the [b:f32e708687]covenant[/b:f32e708687], which is poured out for many.

ESV Luke 1:72 to show the mercy [u:f32e708687]promised to our fathers and to remember his [b:f32e708687]holy covenant[/b:f32e708687],[/u:f32e708687]

ESV Luke 22:20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new [b:f32e708687]covenant [/b:f32e708687]in my blood.

ESV Acts 3:25 You are the sons of the prophets and of the [b:f32e708687]covenant [/b:f32e708687]that God made [b:f32e708687]with your fathers[/b:f32e708687], saying to Abraham, 'And in your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.'

ESV Romans 11:27 "and this will be my [b:f32e708687]covenant [/b:f32e708687]with them when I [b:f32e708687]take away their sins[/b:f32e708687]."

ESV 1 Corinthians 11:25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new [b:f32e708687]covenant [/b:f32e708687]in my blood. [b:f32e708687]Do this[/b:f32e708687], as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."

ESV 2 Corinthians 3:6 who has made us competent to be ministers of a new [b:f32e708687]covenant[/b:f32e708687], not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the [b:f32e708687]Spirit gives life[/b:f32e708687].

ESV Ephesians 2:12 remember that [b:f32e708687]you [/b:f32e708687]were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the [b:f32e708687]covenants of promise[/b:f32e708687], having no hope and without God in the world.

ESV Hebrews 7:22 This makes Jesus the [b:f32e708687]guarantor [/b:f32e708687]of a better [b:f32e708687]covenant[/b:f32e708687].

ESV Hebrews 10:16 "This is the [b:f32e708687]covenant [/b:f32e708687]that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their [b:f32e708687]hearts[/b:f32e708687], and write them on their [b:f32e708687]minds[/b:f32e708687],"

ESV Hebrews 12:24 and to Jesus, the mediator of a new [b:f32e708687]covenant[/b:f32e708687], and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

ESV Hebrews 13:20 Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the [b:f32e708687]eternal covenant,[/b:f32e708687]

 

[Scott Bushey]

Gentleman,
Make your final statements as I will lock this thread at the end of the day.

 

[Learner]

Matt , either you are not reading my posts carefully or ... something else .You make no acknowledement of charging me falsely . Take a gander at my posts and see where your false charges are just that .

 

[C. Matthew McMahon]

Tim,

Why do I need to charge you? I qwas simply making a statement about Welty's paper (which I have read a few times). The paper is biblically inconsistent, and his charges against the paedo camp are not very good. He says most of his work is taken from Jeweett. Jewett's book is very "one eyed" and lopsided. He takes the conversation so far away from the center of debate, one wonders why he wrote it. so Welty makes statements that follow Jewett who did not debate the real issue.

I was just clarifying that Welty's argument is nonsensical. I was not making any accusations or charges against you at all.