# New Covenant - believers or believers + children?



## blhowes (Aug 29, 2008)

I listened to a very interesting message by Dr. Richard Pratt earlier today called "Why Do We Baptize Our Children", many of you I'm sure are familiar with it. What was interesting to me is his discussion about the New Covenant, that it isn't exclusively made up of believers. I have some free time on my hands, and would like to listen to other messages about the New Covenant, why it is or is not only made up of believers. Any recommendations?


----------



## Iconoclast (Aug 29, 2008)

blhowes said:


> I listened to a very interesting message by Dr. Richard Pratt earlier today called "Why Do We Baptize Our Children", many of you I'm sure are familiar with it. What was interesting to me is his discussion about the New Covenant, that it isn't exclusively made up of believers. I have some free time on my hands, and would like to listen to other messages about the New Covenant, why it is or is not only made up of believers. Any recommendations?



171 What is a Covenant Child?
Hal Brunson, Ph.D. • 46 min.
Hebrews 2; Acts 2 • First Baptist Church of Parker 
This is on sermonaudio, give it a listen


----------



## blhowes (Aug 30, 2008)

Iconoclast said:


> 171 What is a Covenant Child?
> Hal Brunson, Ph.D. • 46 min.
> Hebrews 2; Acts 2 • First Baptist Church of Parker
> This is on sermonaudio, give it a listen


Thanks. I enjoyed listening to his sermon earlier this morning. I'll probably give it a second listen later, pressing the pause button from time-to-time, to see if I see the same things he sees in the scriptures, especially what the promise given in Acts 2 is referring to. 

He seemed to give a fair representation of the paedo side, though it'd be interesting to hear a paedo listen to it and say, "Yup, that's what we believe". When you listened to it, did you think he accurately represented their position?


----------



## Iconoclast (Aug 30, 2008)

When I heard this sermon I was more looking at how he tied in the "promise "
of Psalm 16 to The Son and what that means for me.
I believe Hebrews 2:9-16 is one of the strongest passages in the bible concerning the "promise of God" to the elect .
He did not give the strongest representation of the Padeo view, as he was in a positive way trying to show what Acts 2:29-39 actually teaches.
You know how an arminian only quotes part of John 6:37/ and him that comes to me I will in no wise cast out?
In the same way if anything, Pastor Brunson seemed to be trying to say that in the * whole*context of Acts 2 we as christians who are actually, in reality,by the Spirit quickened by new birth, we are called of God to saving union with Christ.


> CHAPTER 10; OF EFFECTUAL CALLING
> 
> Paragraph 1. Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, He is pleased in His appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call,1 by His Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ;2 enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God;3 taking away their heart of stone, and giving to them a heart of flesh;4 renewing their wills, and by His almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ;5 yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by His grace.6
> 1 Rom. 8:30, 11:7; Eph. 1:10,11; 2 Thess. 2:13,14
> ...


 This is what he was alluding to


> he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead



The padeo position is obviously more substantial than looking at any one section of scripture. As many godly men have seen it , and they are seeking to be faithful to the scripture. They rightly seek a comprehensive understanding of the covenant structure of God's eternal purpose.
Some of us in seeking to do the same thing, see and agree with many aspects of their teaching as being scriptural, yet reserve the right to follow scripture where it goes,rather than remain caught up and bound up in the logic of a man made system [as good as that system may be] if they suspect that some of the man made system does not accuratly reflect the God revealed truth.

It is this aspect of Acts 2 that seems forced to a Reformed Baptist ear. This sermon seems to address this key text, as if to say- Exegetically you are not being faithful to the reading and teaching of this text.

Pastor Brunson has several other sermons dealing with this topic and I have not heard anyone willing to interact with them.

Another ministy I have found very helpful is S.G.B.C.S.V. you can email them with questions concerning the greek and hebrew. 

The padeo believes the same thing when it comes to what they refer to as the invisible church. Any padeo believes and rejoices in the Hebrews 2 passage.
What they see as the promise which may or may not be effective, 
I would see as actual and received by God given faith at regeneration, a promise that can never fail.


----------



## blhowes (Aug 30, 2008)

Iconoclast said:


> He did not give the strongest representation of the Padeo view, as he was in a positive way trying to show what Acts 2:29-39 actually teaches.


I haven't had a chance to listen to it again, and I don't want to misrepresent what he said, but as I recall he said something about paedos baptizing their children, thinking they are playing a part in their children's salvation, thereby taking away from God's grace.


----------

