Progressive Covenentalism

I understand they make that connection. But, they do not teach it as salvic. They teach that just as not all Israel was saved, yet all were under the Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants, so not all children of Christian families will be saved, yet the children are covered under the New Covenant by their parents faith. The infant baptism is not salvic, but it connotes the parents and the churches responsibility to raise these children toward saving grace through faith.
I agree that the thread of connection between circumcision and infant baptism is tenuous at best. But, the concept is not heretical or contrary to the gospel.

 

Did God have to show mercy to Adam and Eve? Did he have to clothe them? Did he have to make a covenantal promise that a Redeemer would come through their lineage to remove their sins?
No on all accounts.
Instead, God showed his first gracious choice in saving Adam and Eve. The covenant of Grace began. It continues to this day. It progresses forward to the Day of the Lord.

 

No I have not heard of him,
Have you read Henry Grattan Guinness's Romanism and the Reformation, ?

In lecture six he writes

Even the Romanists themselves shame you in their clear-sighted comprehension of the issues of this question. Cardinal Manning says, "The Catholic Church is either the masterpiece of Satan or the kingdom of the Son of God." Cardinal Newman says, "A sacerdotal order is historically the essence of the Church of Rome; if not divinely appointed, it is doctrinally the essence of antichrist." In both these statements, the issue is clear, and it is the same. Rome herself admits, openly admits, that if she is not the very kingdom of Christ, she is that of antichrist. Rome declares she is one or the other. She herself propounds and urges this solemn alternative. You shrink from it, do you? I accept it. Conscience constrains me. History compels me. The past, the awful past rises before me. I see THE GREAT APOSTASY, I see the desolation of Christendom, I see the smoking rains, I see the reign of monsters; I see those vice-gods, that Gregory VII, that Innocent III, that Boniface VIII, that Alexander VI, that Gregory XIII, that Pius IX; I see their long succession, I hear their insufferable blasphemies, I see their abominable lives; I see them worshipped by blinded generations, bestowing hollow benedictions, bartering lying indulgences, creating a paganized Christianity; I see their liveried slaves, their shaven priests, their celibate confessors; I see the infamous confessional, the mined women, the murdered innocents; I hear the lying absolutions, the dying groans; I hear the cries of the victims; I hear the anathemas, the curses, the thunders of the interdicts; I see the racks, the dungeons, the stakes; I see that inhuman Inquisition, those fires of Smithfield, those butcheries of St. Bartholomew, that Spanish armada, those unspeakable dragonnades, that endless train of wars, that dreadful multitude of massacres. I see it all, and in the name of the ruin it has wrought in the Church and in the world, in the name of the truth it has denied, the temple it has defiled, the God it has blasphemed, the souls it has destroyed; in the name of the millions it has deluded, the millions it has slaughtered, the millions it has damned; with holy confessors, with noble reformers, with innumerable martyrs, with the saints of ages, I denounce it as the masterpiece of Satan, as the body and soul and essence of antichrist.
​

It is available to read online.

Do you believe that the Roman church is the church of Christ, or is it the church of the devil? It is one or the other. If you believe the first you should join it. If the second, you should denounce it as such and not accept her teachings.

 

It seems the pre-trib rapture is a panacea for US Christians who are petrified of persecution that our brothers and sisters around the world are facing in ever increasing numbers.
That being said. In those countries, Christianity is growing by leaps and bounds as the elect shine like lights I the darkness.
Like they, we cry "Come Lord Jesus", not for a 7 year reprieve, but for a final judgment of the goats who martryed God's sheep.

 

It must be noted that antichrist is a spirit. The spirit of antichrist has been among us and working to incite rebellion against God and kill his children. God will not tarry forever. "Vengeance is mine, says the Lord."
I have no doubt the spirit of antichrist rests in the Vatican.

 

Craig, for starters, the Bible does not teach a pre-wrath rapture. I know some theologians believe that it does but for the majority of New Testament church history, most theologians rejected the idea. I am in keeping with quite a few other theologians (both dead and alive) that the verses used to support a pre-wrath rapture of the church are actually about the second coming.

If you are interested you can visit an informative website on 1689 Federalism. The website is about Baptist Covenant Theology, distinct from Westminster (Presbyterian) Covenant Theology.

 

Still have my Mounce Greek Grammar.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

It's definitely not found IN the Gospel

 

Agreed. We don't find infant baptism anywhere in the Bible. We also don't find baby dedications anywhere in the Bible. Nor do we find Christmas Eve meetings or celebrations of Christ's birth. We don't find Thanksgiving services or youth groups. Shall I go on?

 

I can only find two or three land mines in your last post. LOL There is enough fodder there for multiple threads.

 

Wait. I think I have the wrong Mounce. Nevery mind my last post. Carry on.

 

Look closer. I like to hide my landmines deep in the ground.
We humans are products of our culture. I don't think that's a bad thing unless the cultural productions take away from the glory of God.
It doesn't bother me if infants are baptized to display a covenantal dedication to raising them up to know God. (How thankful do you think Timothy was for his Godly Grandmother and Mother?) It is heretical, however, to say that infant baptism confers saving grace upon the child, which will be confirmed at around age 12 or 13.

 

Perhaps twin brothers from another mother?

 

I guess my point is that many who hold to infant baptism because of their covenantal theology see infant baptism as more than just a simple baby dedication. It carries much more weight than that.

 

I think you're confusing covenantal theology with Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism, which both view baptism as a means of receiving God's grace. For them, infant baptism saves the infant and places the child in their church, which represents God's church.
To understand the various views on infant baptism you should study the various catechisms, concords or confessions. While each group may use covenants as a position to express their relationship with God, infant baptism will have a different function in each tradition.

 

Paedobaptists view baptism as:

WCF 28.1 Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church, but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life: which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in his Church until the end of the world.

Paedobaptists believe baptism should be applied to adult converts and children of believers:

WCF 28.4. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one or both believing parents are to be baptized.

The "more weight" you mention is the paedobaptist belief that baptism grants admission of the party baptized into the visible church. Paedobaptists consider their baptized infants to be holy and sanctified through their believing parents, although they do not believe baptism saves. As Baptists, we are looking for our children to come to faith in Christ. Paedobaptists are not looking for a moment like that. They consider their children to be in Christ unless they repudiate their faith through reprobation as they become adults. That is why I do not subscribe to Westminster Covenant Theology, as it inexorably leads to a paedobaptist understanding of the Abrahamic Covenant. Paedobaptists believe in the continuity of the Abrahamic Covenant, whereas Baptists believe in the discontinuity of the Abrahamic Covenant. Baptism is not a one-for-one replacement of circumcision. Circumcision was a sign of the Old Covenant only and was only applied to males. Baptism is applied to all professed believers of the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

You mean synergists, not syncretists, right?

 

Slowly read Mathew 24, from the first verse to verse 16 (flee to the mountains). Who is Jesus talking to? Who is Jesus talking about? Where are the disciples? Where is the rapture, look for it? Christians are there there whole time, up until they're told to flee.

 

No, I know exactly what I am talking about. Here is the article on Baptism from the Westminster Confession:

I've bolded the relevant parts. It is more than just a simple baby dedication.

 

I just bought the Revelation Commentary based on your recommendation. Thanks!