Skip to main content

Wright: an age which is not marked by ethnic boundaries but by regeneration and commitment to the Lord.

By


Calvin, Murray, and Marcel each use the material of the NT to “corroborate” what they previously argued about the nature of the sacraments and the covenant of grace. When they define baptism alone, they rely on the NT. But when they try to apply this biblical definition of baptism to the practice of baptizing infants, they are unconvincing since the NT gives us no warrant for paedobaptism. When they seek to justify infant baptism, they disregard the NT epistolary material that teaches specifically what baptism represents. This may be because none of these passages (e.g., Rom 6:3–4, 1 Pet 3:21) mentions infants; indeed, their exclusion of infants is almost explicit since infants cannot be said to have faith in Christ. Thus the covenantal reading of the Bible by Reformed paedobaptists results in an importing of OT constructs into the NT contrary to NT teaching. Their understanding of the new covenant is not new enough.[1]

…the appeal to Acts 2:38–39 fails to read Peter’s words in context. Reformed paedobaptists assume that “the promise” here means the promise of God’s blessing to those who are within the covenant community, including the children of believers, just as Abraham’s offspring were blessed by their relationship to him. But that is not what Peter means by “the promise” here. The promise is specifically the promised new age inaugurated by the Holy Spirit (2:33), an age which is not marked by ethnic boundaries but by regeneration and commitment to the Lord (2:17–20). It is a promise of forgiveness for all who call on the name of the Lord (2:21). 

Just as in their exegesis of 1 Cor 7:14 paedobaptists are not consistent in their application of the verse to unbelieving spouses, so also in Acts 2:39 they inconsistently apply the promise to believers’ children. But Peter does not. 

Rather, the promise is “for all who are far off” (leading to forced baptisms of everyone indiscriminately according to paedobaptist logic?), for “everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” Thus, the promise, with its accompanying sign of baptism (2:41), is for all who receive the gospel in faith and repentance. The promise is for those God calls who respond in faith. 

Christian parents should pray that their children would so respond. They should use all means available to help their children understand their obligation to obey the gospel (Acts 17:30), but the church must wait until the children respond in faith before giving them the sign of faith, baptism.[2]


[1] Schreiner, T. R., & Wright, S. D. (2006). Believer’s baptism: sign of the new covenant in Christ (p. 244). Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group.
[2] Schreiner, T. R., & Wright, S. D. (2006). Believer’s baptism: sign of the new covenant in Christ (pp. 245–246). Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

John Stott on the "old man" and the "body ruled by sin" in Rom 6 v 6

By
  There are, in fact, two quite distinct ways in which the New Testament speaks of crucifixion in relation to holiness. The first is our death to sin through identification with Christ; the second is our death to self through imitation of Christ.  On the one hand, we have been crucified with Christ. But on the other we have crucified (decisively repudiated) our sinful nature with all its desires, so that every day we renew this attitude by taking up our cross and following Christ to crucifixion.  The first is a legal death, a death to the penalty of sin; the second is a moral death, a death to the power of sin.  The first belongs to the past, and is unique and unrepeatable; the second belongs to the present, and is repeatable, even continuous. I died to sin (in Christ) once; I die to self (like Christ) daily. It is with the first of these two deaths that Romans 6 is chiefly concerned, although the first is with a view to the second, and the second cannot take place w...
Post a Comment
Read more

Boice: “... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. ”

By
  Adam had been appointed by God to be the representative of the race so that if he stood, we too would stand, and if he fell, we would fall with him. Adam did fall, as we know.  So death passed upon everyone. “But isn’t that terribly unfair?” someone protests. “Isn’t it cruel for God to act in this fashion?” ... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated.  Besides, it was the only way it would later be possible for God to save us once we had sinned. In other words, federalism is actually a proof of God’s grace, which is the point the passage comes to (vv. 15 ff.). It was gracious to Adam first of all. Why? Because it was a deterrent to his sin. God must have explained to Adam that he was to represent his posterity. That might have restrained him from sinning. A father who might be tempted to steal his employer’s funds (and would if only he himself were involved), might well decide not to do it if he kne...
Post a Comment
Read more

Repackaging the gospel? It's more like obscuring the gospel!

By
Preface : I recognize this post may make me unpopular with some, but I think it is an important issue to blog about here.  I’ve had time to reflect on this video and in my opinion, I think what is in this video raises some questions.  This gentleman featured below is slotted to speak at the SBC's 2020 Pastors' Conference and it prompted me to think more about this illustration.  I want to note that I don't know him and I have no personal issue with him.   I assume he is a brother in the LORD.  Having said that, I see some significant issues here that relate to this type of preaching being clear on the gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, it appears to be obscuring it in my observation. Concern:  Should the SBC or churches, in general, be in the habit of holding this up as a  good and healthy example?  Let's think about it some together.  (Watch this clip below here first.) Context:  The clip was posted to stand on its own a...
2 comments
Read more