Paedobaptism view of Credobaptist Children

[travis]

So, since paedos baptize their children as means of ingrafting them in to the God's covenant and visible church, what is our (presbyterian) view of the children of believers whose parents are Credo? I am seriously just thinking out loud here. I have been trying to wrap my head around all of this since I have information coming from all sides (credo and paedo).

And a second question for you FV guys. Is there any more detail that you can go in to as far as your belief of baptised children being covenantaly elect in light of non-baptized childern of elect individuals?

If this is all confusing, please forgive me.

 

[Romans922]

I dont think FVers are allowed here, at least that is what I thought.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Travis,
Specifically:

I. Baptism is a sacrament of the new testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,[1] not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible church;[2] but also, to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace,[3] of his ingrafting into Christ,[4] of regeneration,[5] of remission of sins,[6] and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life.[7] Which sacrament is, by Christ's own appointment, to be continued in his church until the end of the world.[8]

1. Matt. 28:19
2. I Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:27-28
3. Rom. 4:11; Col. 2:11-12
4. Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:5
5. John 3:5; Titus 3:5
6. Mark 1:4; Acts 2:38; 22:16
7. Rom. 6:3-4
8. Matt. 28:19-20

First of all, there are no FV supporters here on this board that I am aware of. As far as the other question, the answer is based upon a hermeneutic. Credo baptists believe generally that the NC began with Christ and was initiated at the last supper, consumated at the cross. For the Presbyterian, this is very dispensational. We see the C of G beginning in Gen 3. From a Presbyterian view, the bible says that the children will be cut off from Gods people for now submitting to placing the sign upon their seeds.

Genesis 17:10-14 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-- those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."

As well, the WCF calls it a 'great sin' to not place the sign:

V. Although it be a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[13] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it;[14] or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[15]

13. Gen. 17:14; Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; see Luke 7:30
14. Rom. 4:11; Acts 10:2, 4, 22, 31, 45, 47
15. Acts 8:13, 23

[Edited on 8-29-2006 by Scott Bushey]

 

[SRoper]

The children of credobaptist parents who are part of the visible church are covenant children who have been denied the sign.

 

[turmeric]

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

The FV position on election is that you can be elect to be in covenant with God in the church but not be elected unto eternal salvation.

As a credo I believe the Covenant of Grace is consumated in the New Covenant even though it has been around since the Foundation of the World. Maybe I am not using the correct language but Christ is the fulfilment of the Promise to Adam and Eve and Abraham.

I believe the Old Covenant is fulfilled in Christ and done away with as Paul mentions in 2 Corinthians 3 and Hebrews 8.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by SRoper
The children of credobaptist parents who are part of the visible church are covenant children who have been denied the sign.

What covenant are credobaptist parents covenanting with?

Genesis 17:7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you.

Genesis 17:10 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep;

Genesis 17:13 My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant.

What everlasting covenant was God referring to when He made this covenant w/ Abraham?

Was not the parent who rejected this command also cut off from Gods people? The parents are covenant breakers..........

[Edited on 8-30-2006 by Scott Bushey]

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

P.S. My Children were born children of wrath and remained so until regenerate. Just like I was. The Christianity Explored Series By Rico Tice, really helped awaken then.

Based upon their belief in Christ's atoning work, they where baptized by their Papaw.
The Snyder Boy's Baptism

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Was not the parent who rejected this command also cut off from Gods people? The parents are covenant breakers..........

Their is not command in the scripture that tells me specifically to Baptize my children as a seal. In fact the only seal mentioned in the New Covenant is that of the Holy Spirit Scott. I am not a Covenant Breaker. You have added to the law.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Was not the parent who rejected this command also cut off from Gods people? The parents are covenant breakers..........

Their is not command in the scripture that tells me specifically to Baptize my children as a seal. In fact the only seal mentioned in the New Covenant is that of the Holy Spirit Scott. I am not a Covenant Breaker. You have added to the law.

Randy,
Will God ever destroy the earth again with water?

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Was not the parent who rejected this command also cut off from Gods people? The parents are covenant breakers..........

Their is not command in the scripture that tells me specifically to Baptize my children as a seal. In fact the only seal mentioned in the New Covenant is that of the Holy Spirit Scott. I am not a Covenant Breaker. You have added to the law.

In the same way the sabbath has changed without any illumination, by neccesary inferrence, the command to to place the sign upon the covenant child is there as well:

Genesis 17:10-14 0 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-- those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."

You previously said:

I believe the Covenant of Grace is consumated in the New Covenant even though it has been around since the Foundation of the World.

[Edited on 8-30-2006 by Scott Bushey]

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Was not the parent who rejected this command also cut off from Gods people? The parents are covenant breakers..........

Their is not command in the scripture that tells me specifically to Baptize my children as a seal. In fact the only seal mentioned in the New Covenant is that of the Holy Spirit Scott. I am not a Covenant Breaker. You have added to the law.

Randy,
Will God ever destroy the earth again with water?

Off track question.....

Doesn't address the issue.

BTW. Hey Scott good to talk to you again. Miss you guys. Will be coming around more. But not to debate. I am burnt out from debating stupidity. ie. FV and NPP and other weird stuff.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Romans 4:8-13 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. 9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Greek
4973 sfragi,j sphragis {sfrag-ece'}
Meaning: 1) a seal 1a) the seal placed upon books 1b) a signet ring 1c) the inscription or impression made by a seal 1c1) of the name of God and Christ stamped upon their foreheads 1d) that by which anything is confirmed, proved, authenticated, as by a seal (a token or proof)

There are at least 15 occurences of the word in the NT.

It is very similar to the OT:

2368 ~t'Ax chowtham {kho-thawm'} or ~t'xo chotham {kho-thawm'}
Meaning: 1) seal, signet, signet-ring
Origin: from 02856; TWOT - 780a; n m
Usage: AV - signet 9, seal 5; 14

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

In the same way the sabbath has changed without any illumination, by neccesary inferrence, the command to to place the sign upon the covenant child is there as well:

Yeah the sabbath has changed to the Lord's Day, but the shift is easily seen in the New Testament as the Church is mentioned as meeting on the first day. And Historical writings point to it.


The early historical writings have no precedent in covenant baptism. I read a good book by a few paedos called Baptism in the Early Church that confirmed covenant baptism as you know them didn't exist. Covenant Theology as we know it hasn't even been systematized until the Reformation. It is a new concept from what I have seen.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Was not the parent who rejected this command also cut off from Gods people? The parents are covenant breakers..........

Their is not command in the scripture that tells me specifically to Baptize my children as a seal. In fact the only seal mentioned in the New Covenant is that of the Holy Spirit Scott. I am not a Covenant Breaker. You have added to the law.

Randy,
Will God ever destroy the earth again with water?

Off track question.....

Doesn't address the issue.

BTW. Hey Scott good to talk to you again. Miss you guys. Will be coming around more. But not to debate. I am burnt out from debating stupidity. ie. FV and NPP and other weird stuff.

Randy,
The question is not off topic; it is very relevant. Indulge me. Will God ever again destroy the world with water?

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

In the same way the sabbath has changed without any illumination, by neccesary inferrence, the command to to place the sign upon the covenant child is there as well:

Yeah the sabbath has changed to the Lord's Day, but the shift is easily seen in the New Testament as the Church is mentioned as meeting on the first day. And Historical writings point to it.


The early historical writings have no precedent in covenant baptism. I read a good book by a few paedos called Baptism in the Early Church that confirmed covenant baptism as you know them didn't exist. Covenant Theology as we know it hasn't even been systematized until the Reformation. It is a new concept from what I have seen.

Wrong. The first covenant was between God and Christ; before the foundation of the world. This is known as the Covenant of redemption". Hence, CT is not a 'new concept'. Theology is defined as the study of God and the things of God & covenant theology is the study of God, the things of God and how covenant works. God has always been a covenant God; he has never functioned outside the realm of covenant theology.

 

[Scott Bushey]

The shift of the sabbath is NOT easily seen. This is exactly why the majority of run of the mill church goers do not keep it.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Romans 4:8-13 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. 9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Greek
4973 sfragi,j sphragis {sfrag-ece'}
Meaning: 1) a seal 1a) the seal placed upon books 1b) a signet ring 1c) the inscription or impression made by a seal 1c1) of the name of God and Christ stamped upon their foreheads 1d) that by which anything is confirmed, proved, authenticated, as by a seal (a token or proof)

There are at least 15 occurences of the word in the NT.

It is very similar to the OT:

2368 ~t'Ax chowtham {kho-thawm'} or ~t'xo chotham {kho-thawm'}
Meaning: 1) seal, signet, signet-ring
Origin: from 02856; TWOT - 780a; n m
Usage: AV - signet 9, seal 5; 14

You are correct. I was thinking in a way of covenant sealing. But as I have stated and argued before I do not believe Baptism is circumsicion in the New Testament and it is never called that.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Romans 4:8-13 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. 9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Greek
4973 sfragi,j sphragis {sfrag-ece'}
Meaning: 1) a seal 1a) the seal placed upon books 1b) a signet ring 1c) the inscription or impression made by a seal 1c1) of the name of God and Christ stamped upon their foreheads 1d) that by which anything is confirmed, proved, authenticated, as by a seal (a token or proof)

There are at least 15 occurences of the word in the NT.

It is very similar to the OT:

2368 ~t'Ax chowtham {kho-thawm'} or ~t'xo chotham {kho-thawm'}
Meaning: 1) seal, signet, signet-ring
Origin: from 02856; TWOT - 780a; n m
Usage: AV - signet 9, seal 5; 14

You are correct. I was thinking in a way of covenant sealing. But as I have stated and argued before I do not believe Baptism is circumsicion in the New Testament and it is never called that.

OK. Wanna address the Noahic covenant please?

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

In the same way the sabbath has changed without any illumination, by neccesary inferrence, the command to to place the sign upon the covenant child is there as well:

Yeah the sabbath has changed to the Lord's Day, but the shift is easily seen in the New Testament as the Church is mentioned as meeting on the first day. And Historical writings point to it.


The early historical writings have no precedent in covenant baptism. I read a good book by a few paedos called Baptism in the Early Church that confirmed covenant baptism as you know them didn't exist. Covenant Theology as we know it hasn't even been systematized until the Reformation. It is a new concept from what I have seen.

Wrong. The first covenant was between God and Christ; before the foundation of the world. This is known as the Covenant of redemption". Hence, CT is not a 'new concept'. Theology is defined as the study of God and the things of God & covenant theology is the study of God, the things of God and how covenant works. God has always been a covenant God; he has never functioned outside the realm of covenant theology.

Name one theologian who wrote extensively on Covenant Theology, The Covenant of Redemption (which some use interchangebly with the Covenant of Grace), the Abrahamic Covenant, The Covenant of Circumcision, Noahic Covenant, The Mosaic Covenant, The Covenant of David, The New Covenant. It's formulation and understanding the way we understand it in a whole is something the Church has only come to grips with in the last 400 to 600 years.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
[

OK. Wanna address the Noahic covenant please?

Just make your statement.

 

[Scott Bushey]

One theologian? Thats Easy. Jesus! the Apostles, The writer of Hebrews. The Pharisees. Zacharias clearly speaks of it:

Luke 1:67-72 67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; 70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: 71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; 72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;

What holy covenant was zacharias referring to?

Peter:

Acts 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

Peter was a covenat theologian!

Galatians 3:15-18 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. 16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Paul was most definately a covenant theologian! No need to quote from Hebrews; we know the writer was speaking in covenantal terms. Ultimately, these men were more the covenant theologians than any of us.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I need to go right now Scott. I will get back to you later brother.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
[

OK. Wanna address the Noahic covenant please?

Just make your statement.

no. Answer the question.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
One theologian? Thats Easy. Jesus! the Apostles, The writer of Hebrews. The Pharisees. Zacharias clearly speaks of it:

Luke 1:67-72 67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; 70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: 71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; 72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;

What holy covenant was zacharias referring to?

Peter:

Acts 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

Peter was a covenat theologian!

Galatians 3:15-18 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. 16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Paul was most definately a covenant theologian! No need to quote from Hebrews; we know the writer was speaking in covenantal terms. Ultimately, these men were more the covenant theologians than any of us.

Come on Scott... You know what I am talking about. I believe it is scriptural as you do. As the doctrine of the Trinity was defined by theologians years after the scriptures were complete so has the docrine and understanding of Covenant Theology. I just believe it's formulations and understanding by the Church has been coming a bit slow. Name other Theologians outside of the Scriptures brother. Tertillian is really the first to defend the doctrine of the Trinity and coin the phrase. So Francis Territan came along later and showed the continuity of the Scriptures by Covenant Theology. I think Someone wrote about it before he did but I can't remember the Theologians name.

I need to run right now but will get back to you.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Romans 4:8-13 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. 9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Greek
4973 sfragi,j sphragis {sfrag-ece'}
Meaning: 1) a seal 1a) the seal placed upon books 1b) a signet ring 1c) the inscription or impression made by a seal 1c1) of the name of God and Christ stamped upon their foreheads 1d) that by which anything is confirmed, proved, authenticated, as by a seal (a token or proof)

There are at least 15 occurences of the word in the NT.

It is very similar to the OT:

2368 ~t'Ax chowtham {kho-thawm'} or ~t'xo chotham {kho-thawm'}
Meaning: 1) seal, signet, signet-ring
Origin: from 02856; TWOT - 780a; n m
Usage: AV - signet 9, seal 5; 14

You are correct. I was thinking in a way of covenant sealing. But as I have stated and argued before I do not believe Baptism is circumsicion in the New Testament and it is never called that.

Uhh for the record, the nC is sealed by God himself, in blood:

Genesis 15:6-17 6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness. 7 And he said unto him, I am the LORD that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it. 8 And he said, Lord GOD, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it? 9 And he said unto him, Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon. 10 And he took unto him all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each piece one against another: but the birds divided he not. 11 And when the fowls came down upon the carcases, Abram drove them away. 12 And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him. 13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; 14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance. 15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age. 16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full. 17 And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces.

Swearing against Himself.

2 Timothy 2:13 13 If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
[

OK. Wanna address the Noahic covenant please?

Just make your statement.

no. Answer the question.

No, You first....


Just being playful brother.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
One theologian? Thats Easy. Jesus! the Apostles, The writer of Hebrews. The Pharisees. Zacharias clearly speaks of it:

Luke 1:67-72 67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; 70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: 71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; 72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;

What holy covenant was zacharias referring to?

Peter:

Acts 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

Peter was a covenat theologian!

Galatians 3:15-18 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. 16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Paul was most definately a covenant theologian! No need to quote from Hebrews; we know the writer was speaking in covenantal terms. Ultimately, these men were more the covenant theologians than any of us.

Come on Scott... You know what I am talking about. I believe it is scriptural as you do. As the doctrine of the Trinity was defined by theologians years after the scriptures were complete so has the docrine and understanding of Covenant Theology. I just believe it's formulations and understanding by the Church has been coming a bit slow. Name other Theologians outside of the Scriptures brother. Tertillian is really the first to defend the doctrine of the Trinity and coin the phrase. So Francis Territan came along later and showed the continuity of the Scriptures by Covenant Theology. I think Someone wrote about it before he did but I can't remember the Theologians name.

I need to run right now but will get back to you.

Come on Randy! I learned what I know of Gods covenant from the bible and THE covenant theologians.

I will wait on your answer about the flood........as well, I will ask you, is God immutable or not?

 

[C. Matthew McMahon]

Just a historical notation:

It would be historically ignorant to say that Covenant Theology popped up int he last 400-600 years. One would certainly want to start with Iranaeus and Augustine, among other church writers of the early church in discussing the "covenants".

One would want to look at the biblical terminology "Counsel of Peace" and other like passages, and the explanations given to them by the early writers. There are tons of passages written on far before the "reformation" ever came about on theological writers who structured their theology on the covenants.

I think that is what often "irks" the Covenant Theologians of today when they hear silly statements like that.

The same concepts that they wrote about concerning CT are the same concepts the Reformers and Puritans wrote about. Its no wonder, then, that Augustine is so often quoted in these contexts.

 

[BaptistCanuk]

Scott, that's funny because I had heard that Paul was most definitely a dispensationalist. :bigsmile:

I'm curious, have any of you who believe covenant theology believed that from the start because that is what you were taught? Or were some of you dispensationalists who studied and changed what you believed?