thistle93
Puritan Board Freshman
Hi! As a reformed baptist I am concerned by a group of covenant theologians who seem to say one cannot be truly covenantal unless they believe in infant baptism.
First, who was the first to tie OT circumcision to NT baptism? Because there is no place in Scripture that makes that jump. That does not mean that it is incorrect but we need to be careful our preconceived hermeneutic does not drive our interpretations.
Second, as a reformed baptist, I believe just as strongly as one who believes in infant baptism, that God made covenant not only with individuals but with families. And that covenant was not the same as salvation but a sign of blessing, because there were those in the covenant that were not saved.
Many of us who are baptist practice infant dedication, which we see as the same sign of the covenant that those see infant baptism as. Now let me be clear, I do not believe that baby dedications are an ordinance like baptism but either was OT circumcision. Again it was a sign of blessing and dedication on the place of believing parents. I also know that infant dedications are not in the Bible but neither are specific instances of infants (it does mentions young children and families) being baptized.
My point here is not in to get into a debate over the merits of believers baptism over infant baptism but that both reformed baptist and those who practice infant baptism have equal regard for God's covanental relationship.
Any books on this topic?
For His Glory-
Matthew
First, who was the first to tie OT circumcision to NT baptism? Because there is no place in Scripture that makes that jump. That does not mean that it is incorrect but we need to be careful our preconceived hermeneutic does not drive our interpretations.
Second, as a reformed baptist, I believe just as strongly as one who believes in infant baptism, that God made covenant not only with individuals but with families. And that covenant was not the same as salvation but a sign of blessing, because there were those in the covenant that were not saved.
Many of us who are baptist practice infant dedication, which we see as the same sign of the covenant that those see infant baptism as. Now let me be clear, I do not believe that baby dedications are an ordinance like baptism but either was OT circumcision. Again it was a sign of blessing and dedication on the place of believing parents. I also know that infant dedications are not in the Bible but neither are specific instances of infants (it does mentions young children and families) being baptized.
My point here is not in to get into a debate over the merits of believers baptism over infant baptism but that both reformed baptist and those who practice infant baptism have equal regard for God's covanental relationship.
Any books on this topic?
For His Glory-
Matthew