elnwood
Puritan Board Junior
Although I disagree w/ baby dedication, this position is not inconsistent. Of course you see infants in the covenant in the OT, but there is a change in the NT. The Baptist position is not just based upon lack of infant baptism in the NT, but that a change is taught in the administration of the covenant, not just in the signs and seals, as the paedobaptist teaches, but also in the community itself (Hebrews 8), for the fault on the Old Covenant was with the people, and that fault is removed by a regenerate membership that makes the New Covenant unbreakable. A change is taught for the covenant community, but not for baby dedication.
You begin with the OT, but make sure you you end with the NT!
You begin with the OT, but make sure you you end with the NT!
What I find as ironic with those who adhere to baby dedications is that they refer to the OT for the support of their belief, yet it is precisely when you begin in the OT that one arrives at exactly that which they reject, namely the inclusion of infants in the covenant and the administration of the covenantal sign.