# baptism for the remission of sins: applied to infants?



## rembrandt (May 8, 2004)

Paedobaptists, how is this to be answered: 

Baptism is for the remission of sins, but circumcision was not. Infants are not to have their sins remissed.

thanks,
Rembrandt


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (May 8, 2004)

[quote:b71ae9a721]
Baptism is for the remission of sins, but circumcision was not. Infants are not to have their sins remissed. 
[/quote:b71ae9a721]

Why do you think circumcision is not for the remission of sins?

Christ is our circumcision - Did he not die for the sins of His people?

Is circumcision a sign of regeneration? (Moses and Jeremiah say it is.)

Who says it is not?


----------



## Roldan (May 9, 2004)

You go paedo's!


----------



## rembrandt (May 9, 2004)

Thanks fellows. I agree. I just never heard the statement that &quot;circumcision is for the remission of sins.&quot; What is an OT verse that specifically says that [i:41ccf6d631]physical[/i:41ccf6d631] circumcision is for the remission of sins (or something close to it)? Of course there are all kinds of verses that talk about that for spiritual circumcision. 

The more I learn of paedobaptism, the more I see how ridiculous credobaptist presumptions are. Thanks again webmaster and Paul!

[Edited on 5-9-2004 by rembrandt]


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (May 9, 2004)

Some to think about what circumcision refers to in terms of salvation:

Genesis 17:14 &quot;And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be [b:8433ddfeaa]cut off from his people[/b:8433ddfeaa]; he has broken My covenant.&quot; 

Hell = uncircumcision.

Exodus 12:48 &quot;And when a stranger dwells with you and wants to keep the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it.

Covenant signs and allowablity to the Passover (Lord's Supper as well).

Deuteronomy 10:16 &quot;Therefore circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer.

Deuteronomy 30:6 &quot;And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.

Jeremiah 4:4 4 Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, And take away the foreskins of your hearts, You men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, Lest My fury come forth like fire, And burn so that no one can quench it, Because of the evil of your doings.&quot;

Exodus 34:7 &quot;keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children's children to the third and the fourth generation.&quot; (Generational Covenanting)

Colossians 2:11 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ,


----------



## VanVos (May 10, 2004)

I think the Cov of Grace is made up of the elect only. 

Jer 31:32 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 

Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. 

All in the covenant of Grace know God and have a circumcised heart. But maybe I'm to simplistic. Now I've heard postmillennial argument about this, but how else would a paedobaptist explain this?

Thanks VanVos


----------



## VanVos (May 10, 2004)

Thanks for your thoughts. You brought up some good points Yes I do believe in the already not yet principle in scripture. I believe that scripture such as Ezk 36 is a Jewish hermeneutic of expressing the blessing of the Cov of grace. But we see how the New testament writers apply these prophesies to the church e.g. Acts 15:15-17, Heb12:22-24. So the Old Cov in it's type shadows has passed away Col 2:16, Heb 8:13. which includes the hereditary elements of the Old covenant order. Note Jer 31:29-30. 

I see the Israel of God Gal 6:16 the elect of God under the Cov of grace as contemporary with the Old cov that was made ethinc Israel in the old Testament Rom 9:6. (Although it was hidden truth only known to those in Old Covenant 1 Peter 1:10 eph 2:11-17) With the coming of Christ and destruction of israel in AD 70 the Old Cov order has passed away and we are left with only the true israel of God, that is what the writter to the Hebrews meant in 12:26-28 And the mystery (hidden truth) of God has now been fully revealed or complete Rev 10:7, 1 Cor 13:10, which is to gather all things in Christ Eph 1:10

God Bless VanVos

[Edited on 5-10-2004 by VanVos]

[Edited on 5-13-2004 by VanVos]


----------



## VanVos (May 10, 2004)

I think regardless of how one views Jer 31:29-30 I think that the is still confusion of Israel as the type and the church as the antitype. Circumcision of the flesh put you in Israel where as circumcision of the heart puts you in the body of Christ (the church) . As bi-covenantalist I believe the Cov of works was re-administrated to Israel corporately, they were a type of Christ but now Christ has come and fulfilled the law and has fulfilled everything Israel failed to do. 

Also the scriptures such Malachi 4:1-6 is refering to the generation in which Jesus lived, starting with John the Baptist (elijah) Matt17:11-12,and finishing with destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 matt24. That was what Christ talked about in Luke 12:49-53. Israel did not repent and suffered the firery wrath of God in AD 70 Heb 10:26-27. What happend as result is found in verse 52-53. Families were divided and only those in Christ were spared. Matt 24:22 not even children were spared Matt 24:19. So I wouldn't see this as proof text for paedobaptism.

But if I end being wrong I will definitely apologize you in heaven you seem to be a nice guy

VanVos


----------



## VanVos (May 11, 2004)

I agree with John Owen on this. He sees it as refering to both the last day and AD70. So in other words I see heb 10:30 is refering the Jews as his people not the church. That is Jews as his people had seen the fulfillment of the Messianic promises (heb 10:26) in Christ and were rejecting it to the point of apostasy(heb 10:29). That is why God judged his people. The writer of Hebrews said that were not forsake the assembling of themselves together as they saw that day aproaching (heb 10:25). That is the destruction of Jerusalem. So yes I think a lot of this can be interpreted preteristically, especially since this was written to the Jews just before the destruction of Jerusalem and the Old Cov order.

VanVos


----------



## VanVos (May 11, 2004)

Yes I agree they were christain Jews that were coming out of the Old Cov order. I think this is also a transitional issue. The Jews were hedging their bets by &quot;accepting&quot; Christ and at the same time continuing to do sacrifices. I refer you back to a previous post of how I see the Old Cov. By the way judgment on the last day is not out of the question in this passage. 


By the way the context of chapter 10 tells us who is in the New Convenant Heb 10:14 then in Verse 16 we have the quotation from Jer 31 on the New Cov. If the non-elect are in the New Cov then the writer of hebrews in quoting Jer 31 makes no sense to me. He's saying the new covenant is only those who being sanctified, yes? 

I found your comments interesting and look forward to seeing your work against Hyper-Preterism. Also I was refering to John Owen commentary on the book of hebrews.

I agree with Owen here &quot;I doubt not that this hath respect unto the final judgment at the last day, and the erternal destruction of apostates. But yet evidently includeth that sore and firey judgment which God was brining on the obstinate Jews in the total destruction of the and their Church-Stat by fire and sword; and this is an eminent pledge of future judgment and the severity of God therein&quot;
Also &quot;The &quot;day approaching&quot; is an eminent day. it is not the day of death, nor the day of future judgment absolutely that is intended....&quot;the day&quot; was no other but that fearful and tremendous day, a season for the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple, the city, the nation of the Jews&quot;

God Bless VanVos

[Edited on 5-12-2004 by VanVos]


----------



## VanVos (May 11, 2004)

Good reply Paul but I think you missed my point. I'm saying that those christian coming out of the old covenant Juadism ( who were his people typological). The jewish christians were warned that the jews in which community they were in(his people in the sense they were chosen from all the nations of the world to have the oracles of God Rom 3:1-2)were going to be judged. This also was a real warning to them (the Jewish Christian) that they could be be destroyed with the coming judgment if fell back in to the old cov order and be judge with God's people (that those in the old cov, ethnic israel Rom 9:6 who were a people but not the true people, but a picture). 

Also the already not yet principle in which you spoke of seems more like progressive principle to me, if I'm understanding you correctly. I do not see that in Heb10:14-16. I think in it immediate context is refering to a full present reality. notice verses 18-23 gives it immediate fulfillment to the people of that day. 

By the way I've appreciate all your comments and it nice to talk somebody with good argumentation. 

God Bless VanVos

[Edited on 5-12-2004 by VanVos]


----------

