# Baptists? ... Anyone?



## Andrew P.C. (Aug 27, 2007)

Is there a cut between the NT and OT or is there continuity? IF yes, why? If no, why? 

I also posted in another thread this statement and question:


Andrew P.C. said:


> As I have been personally studying this issue for over a few days now, there has been something that I've seen in scripture(since this is the first time I've given serious thought to this matter). The OT and NT have continuity. NO WHERE in scripture is there a command to STOP giving the sign of the covenant to the childeren. I won't get into it now, but I'm beginning to see the continuity of the Covenant of Grace through-out the church(OT and NT).
> 
> So, the question really is: Where in scripture is the command to STOP GIVING the sign of the covenant to the infant?



Could anyone (a baptist) respond to this?


----------



## satz (Aug 27, 2007)

> Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.



There is certainly not complete discontinuity, but by the very fact that it is called the _new_ covenant implies certain things of the Old are changed or done away with. 

Even if you accept the fact that circumcision and baptism are exact parrallels for their respective covenant, it is plainly obvious that the sign has changed. There has been a massive change in the way of administration. Women now partake as well as men. 

None of this was an attemp to even try to prove the baptist position. But to simply say there is continuity between testaments does not answer the question either way, In my humble opinion.


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Aug 27, 2007)

satz said:


> > Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Prove the baptist position? Sir, I'm actually trying to get an answer FROM the baptists... you should read the thread of my earlier post. There you will get the context of what I'm saying.


----------



## satz (Aug 27, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> satz said:
> 
> 
> > > Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
> ...




I don't understand you. What I said about proving was directed at my own comments, not yours.


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Aug 27, 2007)

satz said:


> Andrew P.C. said:
> 
> 
> > satz said:
> ...




Yeah, communication is awkward on PB. You said "none of *this*". Maybe you should clarify... sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Wannabee (Aug 27, 2007)

Was the Law fulfilled in Christ? If so, did it continue? Can you explain?
Is the NC better than the old? (see Hebrews)
Do we have a Great High Priest that ends all high priests?
All of these show a degree of continuity and a degree of discontinuity.


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Aug 27, 2007)

Wannabee said:


> Was the Law fulfilled in Christ? If so, did it continue? Can you explain?
> Is the NC better than the old? (see Hebrews)
> Do we have a Great High Priest that ends all high priests?
> All of these show a degree of continuity and a degree of discontinuity.



There is a continuity in the CoG. I'm not talking about the OT ceremonial laws here. Ceremonial laws do not = CoG. So, I don't understand your post here. =/


----------



## satz (Aug 27, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Wannabee said:
> 
> 
> > Was the Law fulfilled in Christ? If so, did it continue? Can you explain?
> ...



I _think_ his point was, which is the same as mine, that while there may be continuity in the CoG, the administration changed between OT and NT. Simply saying that there is continuity between OT and NT does not of itself mean God cannot or would not change the receipients of the sign (if that is what baptism is).


----------



## Kevin Lewis (Aug 27, 2007)

*Sounds to me like you have...*



Andrew P.C. said:


> Is there a cut between the NT and OT or is there continuity? IF yes, why? If no, why?
> 
> I also posted in another thread this statement and question:
> 
> ...



a divisive chip on your shoulder more than anything...


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Aug 27, 2007)

Reformed-Kermit said:


> Andrew P.C. said:
> 
> 
> > Is there a cut between the NT and OT or is there continuity? IF yes, why? If no, why?
> ...



Huh? Divisive...? How am I being divisive? I'm not even a paedo-baptist...


----------



## Mayflower (Aug 28, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Is there a cut between the NT and OT or is there continuity? IF yes, why? If no, why?
> 
> I also posted in another thread this statement and question:
> 
> ...



Dear Andrew,

I would like to give you next articals, maybe it helps:

http://www.baptisttheology.org/documents/FromCircumcisiontoBaptism_001.pdf
http://www.rbtr.org/newnessofcovenantwhite.pdf
http://www.rbtr.org/secondlcfbaptismmartin.pdf


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Aug 28, 2007)

Mayflower said:


> Andrew P.C. said:
> 
> 
> > Is there a cut between the NT and OT or is there continuity? IF yes, why? If no, why?
> ...



I will take the time to read them, but, that doesn't answer my question.

Thank you for the articles.


----------



## Mayflower (Aug 28, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Mayflower said:
> 
> 
> > Andrew P.C. said:
> ...



You ask : Is there a cut between the NT and OT or is there continuity? IF yes, why? If no, why? 
These articels deals with the nature of the covenant, with the similarities and differences'. which als has an influences on the way how you view the covenant community with it's continuiny and discontuiny.


----------

