# Was Ishmael in the Abrahamic Covenant?



## pastorway

[b:e2ffe6e3ef]Genesis 17[/b:e2ffe6e3ef]
19Then God said: &quot;No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name [u:e2ffe6e3ef]Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant[/u:e2ffe6e3ef], and with his descendants after him. 20[u:e2ffe6e3ef]And as for Ishmael[/u:e2ffe6e3ef], I have heard you. Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall beget twelve princes, and [u:e2ffe6e3ef]I will make him a great nation. 21[b:e2ffe6e3ef]But[/b:e2ffe6e3ef] My covenant I will establish with Isaac[/u:e2ffe6e3ef], whom Sarah shall bear to you at this set time next year.&quot; 22Then He finished talking with him, and God went up from Abraham. 

Ishmael received the sign of the covenant. But God says that Ishmael was not part of the covenant! 

Can a person receive the sign of the covenant without being in the covenant?

Phillip


----------



## Puritan Sailor

Which covenant? Redemption or Grace?


----------



## pastorway

In the context of Genesis 17 this is speaking of the [b:1ccfce65c1]Abrahamic Covenant[/b:1ccfce65c1].

Phillip


----------



## Puritan Sailor

[quote:7ccacc3131][i:7ccacc3131]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:7ccacc3131]
Can a person receive the sign of the covenant without being in the covenant?
[/quote:7ccacc3131]
You answered your own question Pastor Way.
[quote:7ccacc3131]Ishmael received the sign of the covenant. But God says that Ishmael was not part of the covenant! [/quote:7ccacc3131]


----------



## kceaster

*Phillip...*

[quote:196f47aa4d][i:196f47aa4d]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:196f47aa4d]
[b:196f47aa4d]Genesis 17[/b:196f47aa4d]
19Then God said: &quot;No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name [u:196f47aa4d]Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant[/u:196f47aa4d], and with his descendants after him. 20[u:196f47aa4d]And as for Ishmael[/u:196f47aa4d], I have heard you. Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall beget twelve princes, and [u:196f47aa4d]I will make him a great nation. 21[b:196f47aa4d]But[/b:196f47aa4d] My covenant I will establish with Isaac[/u:196f47aa4d], whom Sarah shall bear to you at this set time next year.&quot; 22Then He finished talking with him, and God went up from Abraham. 

Ishmael received the sign of the covenant. But God says that Ishmael was not part of the covenant! 

Can a person receive the sign of the covenant without being in the covenant?

Phillip [/quote:196f47aa4d]

Just because the covenant is [i:196f47aa4d]established[/i:196f47aa4d] with Isaac, does not necessarily mean that Ishmael was not in the covenant. He did receive the covenant sign. And, there is really no reason to exclude him from the gracious covenant since God did bless him.

Paul says that the relationship of Abraham to Isaac and Ishmael is symbolic. But I don't believe he is saying that Ishmael was a covenant breaker. No doubt his descendants were. But I do not think that there is sufficient evidence to show that Ishmael was either inside or outside of the covenant, not like the evidence against Esau, anyway. The Bible really doesn't speak to his faith, whether he had any. I think everyone just assumes that because the covenant is not established with him, and because he is the son of a bondwoman, that he must not be a man of faith. Unless I am mistaken, I do not believe the Bible speaks to this.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## Roldan

[quote:1dbdb6a977][i:1dbdb6a977]Originally posted by puritansailor[/i:1dbdb6a977]
[quote:1dbdb6a977][i:1dbdb6a977]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:1dbdb6a977]
Can a person receive the sign of the covenant without being in the covenant?
[/quote:1dbdb6a977]
You answered your own question Pastor Way.
[quote:1dbdb6a977]Ishmael received the sign of the covenant. But God says that Ishmael was not part of the covenant! [/quote:1dbdb6a977] [/quote:1dbdb6a977]

Pastor?


----------



## Tertullian

Hey PastorWay,

I think Paul Jewett was on to something when he made this distinction within the Abrahamic Covenant,

[quote:0f7a529e4a]" It is our conviction, to be specific, that the troubled waters of Paedobaptism can be rendered a clear and flowing stream if one recognizes that the promise of the seed made to Abraham has a twofold reference. In the age of type and anticipation, it embraced not only those who shared Abraham's faith but also the whole nation of Israel. In the age of fulfillment the promises embraces the true seed according to the Spirit, typified by the literal seed according to the flesh. This true seed of Abraham is "born, not of blood nore of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God (John 1:13). If in the typical age of the Old Testament all the literal seed of Abraham are to be circumcised, then the age of fulfillment all those who answer to the type as the true seed of Abraham are to be baptized. And who are they? They New Testament gives an unequivocal answer: those who are of faith are the sons of Abraham (Gal 3:7). Therefore, those who are of faith are to be baptized - which is precisely believer baptism. Hence, then, is the Thesean thread that will lead us out of the labyrinth, while preserving the rich treasure of biblical thought stored in the perspective of "covenant theology. (Jewett, Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace, pg 236)" [/quote:0f7a529e4a]

Therefore, if Jewett is right and I think he is, we can say that Ismael was included in the typicial aspect of the Old Covenant but that he was not part of the spiritual aspect of the Covenant, and the Spiritual aspect of the Covenant God established with Isaac, ultimatly the typical aspect of the Old Covenant has been done away with with the coming of Christ.

Therefore Ishmael received the sign because he was a physicial desdent of Abraham and as such part of the typicial aspect of the Covenant.

Hope this helps

To the Glory of Christ-Tertullian


----------



## kceaster

*Tyler...*

[quote:61905c201f]
Therefore, if Jewett is right and I think he is, we can say that Ismael was included in the typicial aspect of the Old Covenant but that he was not part of the spiritual aspect of the Covenant, and the Spiritual aspect of the Covenant God established with Isaac, ultimatly the typical aspect of the Old Covenant has been done away with with the coming of Christ.

Therefore Ishmael received the sign because he was a physicial desdent of Abraham and as such part of the typicial aspect of the Covenant.

Hope this helps

To the Glory of Christ-Tertullian [/quote:61905c201f]

Unfortunately we are back to putting our eyes on the sign instead of the thing signified. Circumcision represents not only a physical aspect, but that of the spiritual as well. This is why circumcision and baptism are linked in Col 2.

Why do we baptize? Why did they circumcise? What does the sign represent?

If you keep your eyes on the sign you will always see the wall of separation between Israel and the Gentiles. But we should look at what the sign pointed to - a circumcised heart. It is the same thing baptism points to. Baptism is a sign of the flesh too. Do we see the Spirit descending like a dove on our baptisms? Tounges of Fire? No.

Focus on what is signified by the sign. Then you'll understand.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## Roldan

[quote:0207ceaa30][i:0207ceaa30]Originally posted by kceaster[/i:0207ceaa30]
[quote:0207ceaa30]
Therefore, if Jewett is right and I think he is, we can say that Ismael was included in the typicial aspect of the Old Covenant but that he was not part of the spiritual aspect of the Covenant, and the Spiritual aspect of the Covenant God established with Isaac, ultimatly the typical aspect of the Old Covenant has been done away with with the coming of Christ.

Therefore Ishmael received the sign because he was a physicial desdent of Abraham and as such part of the typicial aspect of the Covenant.

Hope this helps

To the Glory of Christ-Tertullian [/quote:0207ceaa30]

Unfortunately we are back to putting our eyes on the sign instead of the thing signified. Circumcision represents not only a physical aspect, but that of the spiritual as well. This is why circumcision and baptism are linked in Col 2.

Why do we baptize? Why did they circumcise? What does the sign represent?

If you keep your eyes on the sign you will always see the wall of separation between Israel and the Gentiles. But we should look at what the sign pointed to - a circumcised heart. It is the same thing baptism points to. Baptism is a sign of the flesh too. Do we see the Spirit descending like a dove on our baptisms? Tounges of Fire? No.

Focus on what is signified by the sign. Then you'll understand.

In Christ,

KC [/quote:0207ceaa30]

YES! Now were getting the the heart of the matter.:bigsmile:


----------



## Tertullian

[quote:f35f71b691][i:f35f71b691]Originally posted by kceaster[/i:f35f71b691]
[quote:f35f71b691]
Therefore, if Jewett is right and I think he is, we can say that Ismael was included in the typicial aspect of the Old Covenant but that he was not part of the spiritual aspect of the Covenant, and the Spiritual aspect of the Covenant God established with Isaac, ultimatly the typical aspect of the Old Covenant has been done away with with the coming of Christ.

Therefore Ishmael received the sign because he was a physicial desdent of Abraham and as such part of the typicial aspect of the Covenant.

Hope this helps

To the Glory of Christ-Tertullian [/quote:f35f71b691]

Unfortunately we are back to putting our eyes on the sign instead of the thing signified. Circumcision represents not only a physical aspect, but that of the spiritual as well. This is why circumcision and baptism are linked in Col 2.

Why do we baptize? Why did they circumcise? What does the sign represent?

If you keep your eyes on the sign you will always see the wall of separation between Israel and the Gentiles. But we should look at what the sign pointed to - a circumcised heart. It is the same thing baptism points to. Baptism is a sign of the flesh too. Do we see the Spirit descending like a dove on our baptisms? Tounges of Fire? No.

Focus on what is signified by the sign. Then you'll understand.

In Christ,

KC [/quote:f35f71b691]

Baptism is a sign of the flesh and is identicial to circumicision in both respects? That is certainly not reformed teaching in either the Westminster or London Baptist confessions- where does it ever in either confession say &quot;sign of flesh&quot; or what verse ever taught that? Baptism is not a sign of flesh, it is a sign of regeneration and faith. Circumcision also signified regeneration but like Jewett argues it signified more.

To the Glory of Christ-Tertullian


----------



## kceaster

*Tyler...*

What I meant was that baptism is done in the flesh.

KC


----------



## pastorway

Let's take a break now and go back and read the verses I quote at the very beginning of this thread.

In them, God Himself says to Abraham that He is making a covenant with him and with Isaac, and while He will bless Ishmael, He is NOT making Ishmael part of the covenant.

&quot;[b:b9959873b3]BUT[/b:b9959873b3] MY COVENANT I WILL ESTABLISH WITH ISAAC.....&quot;

God says that Ishmael is not in the Abrahamic Covenant.

Phillip

[Edited on 2-22-04 by pastorway]


----------



## kceaster

*Phillip...*

[quote:2c86a217e0]
Let's take a break now and go back and read the verses I quote at the very beginning of this thread.

In them, God Himself says to Abraham that He is making a covenant with him and with Isaac, and while He will bless Ishmael, He is NOT making Ishmael part of the covenant.[/quote:2c86a217e0]

Sorry, Ishmael is in the covenant. The Bible is silent on Ishmael's faith. He received the covenant sign. He even was with his brother when they buried their father. When he died he was gathered to his people.

The covenant was not established with him. That is true. We cannot say that he was not in the covenant.

The reason it is important to see that the covenant is not established with him is because he was the first born. The first born had (unless they gave up their birthright, or God intervened in some other way, like with Joseph's sons) a right to certain things, among which would be the establishment of their father's legacy. God made it clear in the Word that that legacy belonged to Isaac, not to Ishmael.

But to say that Ishmael is outside of the covenant is to employ eisogesis. This cannot be gathered from Scripture.

After all, he received the covenant sign. You seem to be fine with the reprobate in Israel being membered in the Mosaic (because the OC included the elect and non-elect according to your own words). Why should it be any different with Ishmael who we don't know about his faith.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## luvroftheWord

Kevin,

I've been reading this thread and I'm a little confused as to what you believe. Do you believe that there can be unbelievers in the covenant of grace or no?


----------



## kceaster

*Craig...*

There can be unbelievers in the covenant of grace in its external administration, as Turretin puts it, or, the visible church as some would prefer.

I am simply making the case for Ishmael. The Scriptures are silent as to whether or not he had faith, and I don't believe it is right to exclude him just because the covenant was not &quot;established&quot; with him. He was in it nonetheless.

Now, it may be that he was in the visible church, but not the invisible. But, he was at least in the external administration of the covenant of grace because of his circumcision.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## Preach

Webmaster, any comment?


----------



## Puritan Sailor

[quote:4a9f2c433a][i:4a9f2c433a]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:4a9f2c433a]
Let's take a break now and go back and read the verses I quote at the very beginning of this thread.

In them, God Himself says to Abraham that He is making a covenant with him and with Isaac, and while He will bless Ishmael, He is NOT making Ishmael part of the covenant.

&quot;[b:4a9f2c433a]BUT[/b:4a9f2c433a] MY COVENANT I WILL ESTABLISH WITH ISAAC.....&quot;

God says that Ishmael is not in the Abrahamic Covenant.

Phillip

[Edited on 2-22-04 by pastorway] [/quote:4a9f2c433a]

Then why do YOU think he was circumcised?


----------



## pastorway

He was circumcised because Abraham obeyed God's command to do so for every male in his household.

However, I do not see that circumcision meant that a particular person who was circumcised was then automatically in the covenant. 

In the passage I quoted He specifically says that Isaac is in the Covenant, but indicates that Ishmael was not.

There is more to being in covenant than just receiving an outward sign.

[b:5d904c056e]Genesis 17[/b:5d904c056e]
4&quot;As for Me, behold, My covenant is [u:5d904c056e]with you[/u:5d904c056e], and you shall be a father of many nations.

7And I will establish My covenant [u:5d904c056e]between Me and you and your descendants after you[/u:5d904c056e] in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8Also I give to [u:5d904c056e]you and your descendants after you[/u:5d904c056e] the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.&quot; 

19.....you shall call his name Isaac;[u:5d904c056e] I will establish My covenant with him[/u:5d904c056e] for an everlasting covenant, and [u:5d904c056e]with his descendants[/u:5d904c056e] after him.

Those who were in the covenant were to inherit the land.....Ishmael had no right to the land promise. And the descendents in the covenant clearly follow Isaac, not Ishmael. 

Ishmael did not receive any of the promises from the Abrahamic Covenant. He was given a separate blessing and not included in the covenant promises.

Phillip


----------



## kceaster

*Phillip...*

[quote:ec43638b66][i:ec43638b66]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:ec43638b66]
He was circumcised because Abraham obeyed God's command to do so for every male in his household.

However, I do not see that circumcision meant that a particular person who was circumcised was then automatically in the covenant. 

In the passage I quoted He specifically says that Isaac is in the Covenant, but indicates that Ishmael was not.

There is more to being in covenant than just receiving an outward sign.

[b:ec43638b66]Genesis 17[/b:ec43638b66]
4&quot;As for Me, behold, My covenant is [u:ec43638b66]with you[/u:ec43638b66], and you shall be a father of many nations.

7And I will establish My covenant [u:ec43638b66]between Me and you and your descendants after you[/u:ec43638b66] in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8Also I give to [u:ec43638b66]you and your descendants after you[/u:ec43638b66] the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.&quot; 

19.....you shall call his name Isaac;[u:ec43638b66] I will establish My covenant with him[/u:ec43638b66] for an everlasting covenant, and [u:ec43638b66]with his descendants[/u:ec43638b66] after him.

Those who were in the covenant were to inherit the land.....Ishmael had no right to the land promise. And the descendents in the covenant clearly follow Isaac, not Ishmael. 

Ishmael did not receive any of the promises from the Abrahamic Covenant. He was given a separate blessing and not included in the covenant promises.

Phillip [/quote:ec43638b66]

Calvin says this,

[quote:ec43638b66]20. And as for Ishmael. He here more clearly discriminates between the two sons of Abraham. For in promising to the one wealth, dignity, and other things pertaining to the present life, he proves him to be a son according to the flesh. But he makes a special covenant with Isaac, which rises above the world and this frail life: not for the sake of cutting Ishmael off from the hope of eternal life, but in order to teach him that salvation is to be sought from the race of Isaac, where it really dwells.[/quote:ec43638b66]

There is not sufficient evidence to exclude Ishmael. You are reading into the text.

Further, because he was circumcised he was in the covenant. Verse 10 establishes the fact that circumcision, at that time, represented being in covenant with God. The language says that it is the covenant, just as under Moses, the law is the covenant as well.

In context, God reminds Abraham that any son or male who is not circumcised will be cutoff from the covenant. Ishmael was circumcised, so he could not have been cutoff. Truly, he may not have been regenerate, but we cannot say that for sure. He was an external member. We can say no more or no less.

Also, one of Ishmael's descendants was Jethro. Was he not in the covenant? How is it that Moses father-in-law was in the covenant? He was in the covenant because of Ishmael his direct descendant.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## Halliday

The key word in the text is &quot;established&quot; (in Hebrew [i:8e9a0e5f19]Aram[/i:8e9a0e5f19] also means arise, restore). God is a predestining God. The covenant was planned from the beginning to be all-reaching because there is no limit on God. His covenant is to be our God. His will then is to be our God, even to the unelected. I say this because Romans 1 and 2 clearly dispute anyone from having an excuse to deny God. If everyone is without excuse than everyone is in covenant. That means Ishmael was in covenant with God. Ishmael clearly had no excuse. Ok, this is old testatment but the covenant was established and going to be brought into fullness through Isaac by God the Son. Our communion with God would be restored by God manifested through Isaac's line. Jesus being fully God and fully man came to &quot;fulfill all righteousness&quot; (justice). For the covenant to be brought into fullness man had to be justified. In other words God could not be a God to a depraved and reprobate people. Circumcision as is baptism is to fulfill all righteousness. It is the sign that God is our God and we are His people. Abraham was righteous (just) and obedient therefore he circumcised those he had authority over. He established God's will on earth because he recognized God's Lordship over all of life. We should also recognize God's Lordship and establish righteousness (justice- God's law) by baptizing our children. We are without excuse. God chooses. We are not God but we do have the great duty to establish His law on earth. To wait on fulfilling righteousness by waiting to baptize our children is to deny God is God and become a covenant breaker.


----------



## pastorway

[quote:10e8bd26bb]To wait on fulfilling righteousness by waiting to baptize our children is to deny God is God and become a covenant breaker.[/quote:10e8bd26bb]

SO all Baptists deny that God is God, profane His name, and are covenant breakers who will receive only covenant curses as a result?

It sounds as if you are saying that we will lose our salvation for failing to baptize our children? 

Is this what you are saying about Baptists?

Phillip


----------



## Halliday

Salvation is not the center of the meaning of baptism - that is just the point. There is nothing that we can do to earn our salvation. Abraham knew that life came from God alone hence the symbol of circumcision. Don't forget that Ishmael came back to bury Abraham with Isaac. Ishmael also died amongst his brethren. Abraham trusted in God for salvation. 

God's will is central to our faith and to baptism. We pray for His will to be done on earth as it is in heaven. His will has been determined before creation. It is being brought into fulness. His will is the restoration of ALL THINGS. &quot;I make ALL Things new&quot;. In other words His will is the regeneration of the entire creation. Everyones salvation is already determined. You can not do anything to earn it or loose it. This is why God is God. Doing God's will is the power to become the children of God, the bearers of Glory, a light to the world. Our duty to spread the Gospel (Christ is Lord), teaching God's law, Baptising in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is &quot;fulfilling all righteousness&quot; (justice). It is the course of regeneration for the entire creation. When we limit salvation to man and make it central in our religion then we are denying that God is the God of all things. Jesus is not free fire and life insurance. He is God.


----------



## Roldan

[quote:f65d22c53b][i:f65d22c53b]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:f65d22c53b]
[quote:f65d22c53b]To wait on fulfilling righteousness by waiting to baptize our children is to deny God is God and become a covenant breaker.[/quote:f65d22c53b]

SO all Baptists deny that God is God, profane His name, and are covenant 
breakers who will receive only covenant curses as a result?

It sounds as if you are saying that we will lose our salvation for failing to baptize our children? 

Is this what you are saying about Baptists?

Phillip [/quote:f65d22c53b]

C'mon now Rev. , chill out, that's not what he is saying.

Do we Paedo's believe baptist are DISOBEDIENT to the covenant? YES! but not Covenant breakers in the sense of eventually being cursed eternally.:wr50:


----------



## Roldan

[quote:655bb66fc1][i:655bb66fc1]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:655bb66fc1]
He was circumcised because Abraham obeyed God's command to do so for every male in his household.

However, I do not see that circumcision meant that a particular person who was circumcised was then automatically in the covenant. 

In the passage I quoted He specifically says that Isaac is in the Covenant, but indicates that Ishmael was not.

There is more to being in covenant than just receiving an outward sign.

[b:655bb66fc1]Genesis 17[/b:655bb66fc1]
4&quot;As for Me, behold, My covenant is [u:655bb66fc1]with you[/u:655bb66fc1], and you shall be a father of many nations.

7And I will establish My covenant [u:655bb66fc1]between Me and you and your descendants after you[/u:655bb66fc1] in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8Also I give to [u:655bb66fc1]you and your descendants after you[/u:655bb66fc1] the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.&quot; 

19.....you shall call his name Isaac;[u:655bb66fc1] I will establish My covenant with him[/u:655bb66fc1] for an everlasting covenant, and [u:655bb66fc1]with his descendants[/u:655bb66fc1] after him.

Those who were in the covenant were to inherit the land.....Ishmael had no right to the land promise. And the descendents in the covenant clearly follow Isaac, not Ishmael. 

Ishmael did not receive any of the promises from the Abrahamic Covenant. He was given a separate blessing and not included in the covenant promises.

Phillip [/quote:655bb66fc1]

So NOONE but Abraham and Isaac were in the Covenant at that time until Isaac had children then to continue from there?

No onone under Abraham's rule was in the Covenant? Not the males born is his house nor the males bought with money?

Not even Sarah was in the Covenant, for according to your hermeneutics, God established His Covenant with Abraham and Isaac only until Isaac had children THEN the covenant continued with his (Isaacs) descendants.

What you fail to realize is that the Covenant of Grace is ALSO called the Covenant of Circumcision in Acts 7:7-9.

Which meant that because Ishmael was given circumcision he WAS placed in the Covenant of Grace and everyone else who was under Abraham's authority.

I think that Kevin makes a good point:

&quot;In context, God reminds Abraham that any son or male who is not circumcised will be cutoff from the covenant. Ishmael was circumcised, so he could not have been cutoff. Truly, he may not have been regenerate, but we cannot say that for sure. He was an external member. We can say no more or no less.&quot;

Roldan: To put it another way. How in the world can someone be cut off or break a Covenant that he is not in?


Also for you to say that Ishmael or anyone at that, who recieved the sign of the Covenant but was not in the Covenant holds no weight biblically and to be honest is contradictory.

:wr50:


----------



## Halliday

I wanted to add that when paedo's baptize for salvation they are also on shaky ground. We have today a large majority of lawless unprincipled Christians worried about their own tail instead of "fulfilling all righteousness". This leads to humanism. If you deny that we are experiencing curses than you are blind or deceived by the "Rapture generation". The fulfillment of all righteousness (justice) is what brings blessings not the acceptance of Jesus as free fire and life insurance. The blessings of God's justice in force is a regenerated creation, the promised land, our inheritance. God is not to be limited to the spiritual realm. As a matter of fact He gives weight to life and life to the physical world. All things are to be renewed by regeneration and glorified. We are given the responsibility over the earth. This includes our children. This is why we are walking on dangerous ground if we do not baptize our children, get them out of lawless schools , teach them the tools of learning and life (the Word), and give them a work ethic that brings God's peace and rest. Ishmael was the eldest. His authority and influence could not be over Isaac. Isaac had to be taught the great responsibility he had. They were both in covenant. God did not abandon Ishmael or cast him aside. The Law was not given at that time so clarity was given through Moses. Fulfillment was brought by God the Son. Now the regenerate can bring forth the faith (God is our God, our children's God and we are His people, true justice). Salvation is in His hands.


----------



## Roldan

[quote:ca936d70b2][i:ca936d70b2]Originally posted by Halliday[/i:ca936d70b2]
I wanted to add that when paedo's baptize for salvation they are also on shaky ground. [/quote:ca936d70b2]

To my knowledge no Reformed Presbyterian here believes in Baptismal Regeneration. And is not the groundd for Baptism


----------



## pastorway

[quote:24128c8424]Which meant that because Ishmael was given circumcision he WAS placed in the Covenant of Grace and everyone else who was under Abraham's authority. [/quote:24128c8424]

Only the elect are in the Covenant of Grace. Surely you are not saying that everyone who was circumcised was elect, are you?

Phillip


----------



## Halliday

But other denominations that baptize their children do.

[Edited on 2-26-2004 by Halliday]


----------



## Roldan

[quote:e0d04159c4][i:e0d04159c4]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:e0d04159c4]
[quote:e0d04159c4]Which meant that because Ishmael was given circumcision he WAS placed in the Covenant of Grace and everyone else who was under Abraham's authority. [/quote:e0d04159c4]

Only the elect are in the Covenant of Grace. Surely you are not saying that everyone who was circumcised was elect, are you?

Phillip [/quote:e0d04159c4]

Of course not, this is where you must seperate the Patriarichal aspect from the spiritual. They were all placed in the Earthly covenant but were not all in the Spiritual Covenant, remember not ALL Israel was Israel.

But let us not side step the questions I
asked you. Thanx


----------



## Roldan

[quote:2208183e25][i:2208183e25]Originally posted by Halliday[/i:2208183e25]
But other denominations that baptize their children do.

[Edited on 2-26-2004 by Halliday] [/quote:2208183e25]

Yes, some, but none here.


----------



## Halliday

I didn't imply that they were here. If so you misunderstood. I was saying that baptism is the fulfillment of all righteousness (justice).


----------



## Roldan

[quote:2a39b5110c]_Originally posted by pastorway
Only the elect are in the Covenant of Grace. Surely you are not saying that everyone who was circumcised was elect, are you?
Phillip [/quote:2a39b5110c]

I will ask you the same question, since only the elect are in the Covenant of Grace, do you believe everyone you baptize is elect?uzzled:

But please take your time for you still have not commented on the other questions that stemed from your view of Ishmael.

Take one at a time, I will be patient. 

Grace and Peace_


----------



## Roldan

[quote:4d1167f353][i:4d1167f353]Originally posted by Halliday[/i:4d1167f353]
I didn't imply that they were here. If so you misunderstood. I was saying that baptism is the fulfillment of all righteousness (justice). [/quote:4d1167f353]

I apologize for the misunderstanding.

Grace and Peace:saint:


----------



## Halliday

All are in covenant with God. That is why He can ban people. That is why He can carry out &quot;eschatons&quot;. If you believe in predestination and the fact that God is making all things new then all things including Ishmael are in His covenant. (To be our God and to be His people in communion)


----------



## Halliday

To be God is to be over all things. We can not limit God to being God over just the elect. He is God and we are to make that known by applying His will to our lives. If Ishmael did this or not is the question. If we do this or not is the question.

[Edited on 2-28-2004 by Halliday]


----------



## Galahad

What is the relationship between circumcision and membership in the covenant community? It is the necessary requirement. A failure to circumcise an infant (or anyone else) meant that the child (or adult) was cut off from the community.

Does administering physical sign garuntee eternal life or must the physical sign be followed with the &quot;circumcision of the heart&quot;? It seems that the reception of the physical sign was mandatory for inclusion in the Earthly Family of God (the Visible Church) but without the circumcision of the heart one was excluded from membership in the Eternal Family of God (the Invisible Church).

Perhaps this has already been dealt with, but it seems that circumcision was required to maintain a &quot;horizontal relationship&quot; within the community but did not garuntee a &quot;verticle relationship&quot; with God.

I realize the language I'm usuing is a bit imprecise, but that's in part because I'm still trying to work through these issues.
-------------
Jeffrey Brannen


----------



## Scott Bushey

Jeffrey,
You are correct, this has been dealt with extensively. Please use the search function for more.

Briefly, you are correct in your description. However, outside of the example of Ishmael, since Abraham was literally told by God that he was not the son of promise, the mindset of the Israelite was that of faith. God made a specific promise to father Abe, that in which was passed down from his generation to generations to follow. This promise, since it did come from the Lord, was sure. Hence it was viewed as being ratified in each and every seed of faithful Israelites. Those whom were faithless, the result was obvious.........


----------



## Tertullian

[quote:aa68e93925][i:aa68e93925]Originally posted by Galahad[/i:aa68e93925]
What is the relationship between circumcision and membership in the covenant community? It is the necessary requirement. A failure to circumcise an infant (or anyone else) meant that the child (or adult) was cut off from the community. [/quote:aa68e93925]

If it was a necessary requirement than no females were ever part of the Covenant community- in reality their is no logicial connection between the sign of the Covenant and Covenant members- Of God wanted to he could put the sign of the Covenant of grace on no Covenant member but on a rock or rainbow. 

[quote:aa68e93925] Does administering physical sign garuntee eternal life or must the physical sign be followed with the &quot;circumcision of the heart&quot;? It seems that the reception of the physical sign was mandatory for inclusion in the Earthly Family of God (the Visible Church) but without the circumcision of the heart one was excluded from membership in the Eternal Family of God (the Invisible Church). [/quote:aa68e93925]

Once, again I would challenge the notion that in order to be part of the visible Church you have to receive the Covenant sign- consider women in the Old Testament- instead we ought to realize that only those God commands receive the Covenant sign and no creature has an a prior right to the Covenant sign. 

[quote:aa68e93925] Perhaps this has already been dealt with, but it seems that circumcision was required to maintain a &quot;horizontal relationship&quot; within the community but did not garuntee a &quot;verticle relationship&quot; with God. [/quote:aa68e93925]

circumcision was only required of physical Israelites who were males- not necessirly Covenant members- but if a male did not receive the Covenant sign he broke God's law- but if a female took the Covenant sign she broke God's law (PS Egyptian's practiced female circumcision). So we must look at each sign case by case- before we make general statements we need the precision of a surgeon's tool not the vagueness of a sludge hammer. 

To the glory of Christ-Tertullian

[Edited on 3-7-2004 by Tertullian]


----------



## Tertullian

[quote:9bc58bc309][i:9bc58bc309]Originally posted by Halliday[/i:9bc58bc309]
All are in covenant with God. That is why He can ban people. That is why He can carry out &quot;eschatons&quot;. If you believe in predestination and the fact that God is making all things new then all things including Ishmael are in His covenant. (To be our God and to be His people in communion) [/quote:9bc58bc309]

All are in Covenant (unregenerate are in Adam's Covenant) but not all are in the Covenant of Grace as the Westminster teaches the Covenant of Grace was made by God with Christ and the elect

[Edited on 3-7-2004 by Tertullian]


----------



## Halliday

Christ is the fulfillment of the Covenant of Grace. The Covenant of Grace was predestined before creation, started with Adam, established with Abraham, clarified through Moses, and fulfilled in Christ. All are in covenant with God. Ishmael was in covenant. Now was he predestined unto eternal life? That is a limitation of the Covenant of Grace and is for God alone to know. The Covenant of Grace in its fullness is without limitations. All things are in covenant and all things, cosmic in scope, will be restore and made new. Anything else is a false eschatology and a limitation on God's grace.


----------



## Roldan

*RE-posted for Pastor Way*

[quote:15d000a7bc][i:15d000a7bc]Originally posted by Roldan[/i:15d000a7bc]
[quote:15d000a7bc][i:15d000a7bc]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:15d000a7bc]
He was circumcised because Abraham obeyed God's command to do so for every male in his household.

However, I do not see that circumcision meant that a particular person who was circumcised was then automatically in the covenant. 

In the passage I quoted He specifically says that Isaac is in the Covenant, but indicates that Ishmael was not.

There is more to being in covenant than just receiving an outward sign.

[b:15d000a7bc]Genesis 17[/b:15d000a7bc]
4&quot;As for Me, behold, My covenant is [u:15d000a7bc]with you[/u:15d000a7bc], and you shall be a father of many nations.

7And I will establish My covenant [u:15d000a7bc]between Me and you and your descendants after you[/u:15d000a7bc] in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8Also I give to [u:15d000a7bc]you and your descendants after you[/u:15d000a7bc] the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.&quot; 

19.....you shall call his name Isaac;[u:15d000a7bc] I will establish My covenant with him[/u:15d000a7bc] for an everlasting covenant, and [u:15d000a7bc]with his descendants[/u:15d000a7bc] after him.

Those who were in the covenant were to inherit the land.....Ishmael had no right to the land promise. And the descendents in the covenant clearly follow Isaac, not Ishmael. 

Ishmael did not receive any of the promises from the Abrahamic Covenant. He was given a separate blessing and not included in the covenant promises.

Phillip [/quote:15d000a7bc]

So NOONE but Abraham and Isaac were in the Covenant at that time until Isaac had children then to continue from there?

No onone under Abraham's rule was in the Covenant? Not the males born is his house nor the males bought with money?

Not even Sarah was in the Covenant, for according to your hermeneutics, God established His Covenant with Abraham and Isaac only until Isaac had children THEN the covenant continued with his (Isaacs) descendants.

What you fail to realize is that the Covenant of Grace is ALSO called the Covenant of Circumcision in Acts 7:7-9.

Which meant that because Ishmael was given circumcision he WAS placed in the Covenant of Grace and everyone else who was under Abraham's authority.

I think that Kevin makes a good point:

&quot;In context, God reminds Abraham that any son or male who is not circumcised will be cutoff from the covenant. Ishmael was circumcised, so he could not have been cutoff. Truly, he may not have been regenerate, but we cannot say that for sure. He was an external member. We can say no more or no less.&quot;

Roldan: To put it another way. How in the world can someone be cut off or break a Covenant that he is not in?


Also for you to say that Ishmael or anyone at that, who recieved the sign of the Covenant but was not in the Covenant holds no weight biblically and to be honest is contradictory.

:wr50: [/quote:15d000a7bc]


----------



## Roldan

Waiting for Pastorway:saint:


----------



## pastorway

You can keep waiting........

The text specifies that Ishmael was not in the Abrahamic Covenant, BUT Isaac was.

So your problem is with the text, not with me. I have enjoyed the circles people keep running around the text.....

&quot;As for Ishmael, I have heard you....BUT My Covenant I will establish with Isaac....&quot;

The BUT excludes Ishmael from the covenant that was established with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Phillip

[Edited on 3-15-04 by pastorway]


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Phillip,

There is no way you can say that Abraham, Isaac and no others were in the Abrahamic covenant at that time. That si simply reworking the text not matching circular ends.

All of Abraham's household was in covenant with God - for int he felsh of their foreskin the sign of the covenant was given, as with the federal headship of the fathers over thier house. You would be rewriting the OT to say otherwise.

Gen. 17:7, &quot;And I will establish My covenant between Me and you 
and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you.&quot; Not &quot;desendant&quot;. 

&quot;And God said to Abraham: &quot;As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations.&quot; Not individualism.

&quot;Every male child among you shall be circumcised;&quot; This is the covenant of the first 9 verses!

&quot;&quot;and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you.&quot; The covenant family was insigniated so that the covenant made with Abraham and God would extend to all his family. It is inscribed on all of them to demosntrate the covenant relationship given betwen God and Abraham. His whole family is under the covenant, otherwsie, God is a liar.

It does not get any more plain than God's very own words here:
&quot;&quot;He who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money must be circumcised, and My covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14 &quot;And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.&quot;

If he is circumcised, he is in covneant with God and has NOT broken it.

Ishmael was still sealed with the covenant sign, though it may have become a curse to him. The everlasting, positive aspects of the covenant were made with Isaac and his descendants, not Ishmael. Thus, we could rightly conclude that though earthly blessing is part of the covenantal status.


----------



## Roldan

[quote:64329af3e5][i:64329af3e5]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:64329af3e5]
You can keep waiting........

The text specifies that Ishmael was not in the Abrahamic Covenant, BUT Isaac was.

So your problem is with the text, not with me. I have enjoyed the circles people keep running around the text.....

&quot;As for Ishmael, I have heard you....BUT My Covenant I will establish with Isaac....&quot;

The BUT excludes Ishmael from the covenant that was established with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Phillip

[Edited on 3-15-04 by pastorway] [/quote:64329af3e5]


I did not ask you to repeat yourself on what I already know you believe but to answer the questions that are a result of your exegisis on the text, which by the way Webmaster pretty much settled that. But I wanted you to answer the questions, not that you have to or anything but if you post your view you must be ready to answer questions.

Please do not side step them anymore and just answer them honestly, thats all I ask.

Oh by the way If you re-read my posts you will notice that I dealt specifically with the text and honestly have no need to run circles around anything, if I can't answer something I am humble enough to admit it and study more then come back.
Grace and Peace

[Edited on 3-15-2004 by Roldan]


----------



## robot

God had his own &quot;covenant&quot; with Ishmael: his descendents would be kings. Ishmael feared the Lord, and followed him for the rest of his life. It seems like he was on good terms with Isaac (burial of father together), and that the Lord loved him.


----------



## Puritan Sailor

[quote:a617a439d2][i:a617a439d2]Originally posted by robot[/i:a617a439d2]
God had his own &quot;covenant&quot; with Ishmael: his descendents would be kings. Ishmael feared the Lord, and followed him for the rest of his life. It seems like he was on good terms with Isaac (burial of father together), and that the Lord loved him. [/quote:a617a439d2]
Please explain your understanding of this &quot;covenant&quot; with Ishmael. Do you think it was part of the covenant of grace? What in your mind indicates that God made a covenant? What were Ishmael's obligations in this covenant? And what was promised to him in it? What was promised to his children in it? Some things to consider.


----------



## Roldan

*Re-Post for Pastor Way*

[quote:301d01984f][i:301d01984f]Originally posted by Roldan[/i:301d01984f]
[quote:301d01984f][i:301d01984f]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:301d01984f]
You can keep waiting........

The text specifies that Ishmael was not in the Abrahamic Covenant, BUT Isaac was.

So your problem is with the text, not with me. I have enjoyed the circles people keep running around the text.....

&quot;As for Ishmael, I have heard you....BUT My Covenant I will establish with Isaac....&quot;

The BUT excludes Ishmael from the covenant that was established with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Phillip

[Edited on 3-15-04 by pastorway] [/quote:301d01984f]


I did not ask you to repeat yourself on what I already know you believe but to answer the questions that are a result of your exegisis on the text, which by the way Webmaster pretty much settled that. But I wanted you to answer the questions, not that you have to or anything but if you post your view you must be ready to answer questions.

Please do not side step them anymore and just answer them honestly, thats all I ask.

Oh by the way If you re-read my posts you will notice that I dealt specifically with the text and honestly have no need to run circles around anything, if I can't answer something I am humble enough to admit it and study more then come back.
Grace and Peace

[Edited on 3-15-2004 by Roldan] [/quote:301d01984f]


----------



## pastorway

A few questions:

So Ishmael and every one of his descendents that is circumcised is in covenant with God?

Can one receive the sign and not be in covenant?

Why does Moses write that God said that while He would bless Ishmael and his descendents that the covenant was not with him but with Isaac and his children?

The Abrahamic Covenant involved Abraham and his family through Isaac. They were not the only two in the covenant, but the language is pretty clear here that Ishmael was overlooked. Put aside the covenant presuppositions and read the text. It says that God continued the covenant through Isaac and his kids, not through Ishmael. Not through any slave or other person &quot;in the camp.&quot; The descendents of Abraham by Sarah - ISAAC and his descendents - were in the covenant. 

God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Not the God of Abraham, Ishmael, all the Arab nations, Isaac, Jacob, and all Jews. Not all Israel is Israel, and the only descendents of Ishmael that are in covenant with God are those who are also in Christ.

Read the text about the &quot;everlasting covenant.&quot;

[quote:fdba654832]15Then God said to Abraham, &quot;As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16And I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her.&quot; 17Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, &quot;Shall a child be born to a man who is one hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?&quot; 18And Abraham said to God, &quot;Oh, that Ishmael might live before You!&quot; [b:fdba654832]19Then God said: &quot;No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him[/b:fdba654832]. 20And as for Ishmael, I have heard you. Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall beget twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation. [b:fdba654832]21But My covenant I will establish with Isaac[/b:fdba654832], whom Sarah shall bear to you at this set time next year.&quot; [/quote:fdba654832]

He talks about the covenant with Isaac and his descendents then when Abraham wants Ishmael to live before God - ie. be the one in the everlasting covenant, the child of promise (you do realise that Abraham was asking God for Ishmael to be the child of promise) - God says , &quot;NO.&quot; He says He will remember and bless Ishmael, &quot;BUT&quot; the covenant will be with Isaac and his children.

How more plain can the text be.

Summary: 
1. God says He is going to give Abraham a child that will be part of an everlsting covenant. 

2. Abraham says, we can't have a new kid.....Sarai and I are too old...we already have Ishmael.

3. so he asked God to make Ishmael the child of the covenant. 

4. God replied &quot;NO&quot;, I will bless Ishmael, &quot;BUT&quot; he is not in the everlasting covenant. Isaac and his descendents are in the everlasting covenant.

Phillip

[Edited on 3-19-04 by pastorway]


----------



## kceaster

*Phillip...*

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]So Ishmael and every one of his descendents that is circumcised is in covenant with God?[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

Externally.

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]Can one receive the sign and not be in covenant?[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

Again, they can be in the covenant externally, just like baptized dead men walking today.

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]Why does Moses write that God said that while He would bless Ishmael and his descendents that the covenant was not with him but with Isaac and his children?[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

What is so hard about this, Phillip? The covenant is [b:6ff4bf36c3]established[/b:6ff4bf36c3] in Isaac and his line. All the males of Abraham's household were in the covenant.

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]The Abrahamic Covenant involved Abraham and his family through Isaac. They were not the only two in the covenant, but the language is pretty clear here that Ishmael was overlooked.[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

Ishmael was not overlooked. He was circumcised. And it was not just family, but servants, too.

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]Put aside the covenant presuppositions and read the text. It says that God continued the covenant through Isaac and his kids, not through Ishmael.[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

Put aside your baptist presuppostions and read the text. It says that the covenant was [b:6ff4bf36c3]established[/b:6ff4bf36c3] through and with Isaac. It does not mean that Ishmael and any other male in the house was not included. 

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]Not through any slave or other person &quot;in the camp.&quot; The descendents of Abraham by Sarah - ISAAC and his descendents - were in the covenant.[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

This is simply not true from the Scriptures. There were many in covenant in Israel who were not the direct descendants of Abraham and Isaac. The stranger within the gates and his children were in the covenant once they were circumcised. 

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Not the God of Abraham, Ishmael, all the Arab nations, Isaac, Jacob, and all Jews. Not all Israel is Israel, and the only descendents of Ishmael that are in covenant with God are those who are also in Christ.[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

Would you stop and think for a moment. You just included possible descendants of of Ishmael in the covenant if God chose them. Why would Ishmael not be chosen as well? We do not know that he was, but we do not know that he wasn't either. The Bible does not say he was not chosen. It says that the covenant was not established with him, the firstborn of Abraham.

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]Read the text about the &quot;everlasting covenant.&quot;

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]15Then God said to Abraham, &quot;As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16And I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her.&quot; 17Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, &quot;Shall a child be born to a man who is one hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?&quot; 18And Abraham said to God, &quot;Oh, that Ishmael might live before You!&quot; [b:6ff4bf36c3]19Then God said: &quot;No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him[/b:6ff4bf36c3]. 20And as for Ishmael, I have heard you. Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall beget twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation. [b:6ff4bf36c3]21But My covenant I will establish with Isaac[/b:6ff4bf36c3], whom Sarah shall bear to you at this set time next year.&quot; [/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

He talks about the covenant with Isaac and his descendents then when Abraham wants Ishmael to live before God - ie. be the one in the everlasting covenant, the child of promise (you do realise that Abraham was asking God for Ishmael to be the child of promise) - God says , &quot;NO.&quot; He says He will remember and bless Ishmael, &quot;BUT&quot; the covenant will be with Isaac and his children.[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

This is where you misunderstand what covenant means. The federal head is asking for a federal heir. He does not yet have Isaac, and he is old. Why would he not take a son of his body and wish that the covenant would be established on his &quot;bird in the hand.&quot; God is saying &quot;no&quot; to Abraham, not to Ishmael. God did not want the line coming through a slave girl. He wanted the line to come through Sarah.

Phillip, this does not mean that we need to change terms to Ishmael. No one is saying that the covenant was established through him. We're saying he was in the covenant. Not the firstborn, or heir. He was simply in it by virtue of his being circumcised.

I know why you're railing against this because it clearly shows covenant inclusion with a sign. Sorry, but you can't get around that. Many were included in the external relationship, but were not in the everlasting covenant. JUST LIKE TODAY. 

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]How more plain can the text be.[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

I don't know, you tell us. What is the difference between being in the covenant and having the covenant be established in you. Was it established in Judah? No, but he was in it. What about Simeon? No, but he was in it. The language is clear.

[quote:6ff4bf36c3]Summary: 
1. God says He is going to give Abraham a child that will be part of an everlsting covenant. 

2. Abraham says, we can't have a new kid.....Sarai and I are too old...we already have Ishmael.

3. so he asked God to make Ishmael the child of the covenant. 

4. God replied &quot;NO&quot;, I will bless Ishmael, &quot;BUT&quot; he is not in the everlasting covenant. Isaac and his descendents are in the everlasting covenant.[/quote:6ff4bf36c3]

This does damage to the Scriptures. It does not say Ishmael was not in the covenant. This is eisogesis. It does not say what you want it to say.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## robot

[quote:aefa72019c][i:aefa72019c]Originally posted by puritansailor[/i:aefa72019c]
[quote:aefa72019c][i:aefa72019c]Originally posted by robot[/i:aefa72019c]
God had his own &quot;covenant&quot; with Ishmael: his descendents would be kings. Ishmael feared the Lord, and followed him for the rest of his life. It seems like he was on good terms with Isaac (burial of father together), and that the Lord loved him. [/quote:aefa72019c]
Please explain your understanding of this &quot;covenant&quot; with Ishmael. Do you think it was part of the covenant of grace? What in your mind indicates that God made a covenant? What were Ishmael's obligations in this covenant? And what was promised to him in it? What was promised to his children in it? Some things to consider. [/quote:aefa72019c]

I guess &quot;covenant&quot; isn't the right word... sorry. God did make a promise to Ishmael, though.


----------

