Over-realized eschatology has no place in the argument against infant baptism using the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34.
J. C. Ryle writes that if Jesus wasn’t circumcised on the eighth day, he would be “regarded by all Jews as nothing better than an uncircumcised Gentile and an apostate from the faith of the fathers.”
Read the Minority Report, then tell us what you think: Should Reformed churches recognize Roman Catholic baptisms?
“How many points?” Surely there are more than five. And when that larger number of points taught by the Reformed confessions is not respected, the famous five are jeopardized, indeed, dissolved â€”and the ongoing spiritual health of the church is placed at risk.
Our children are not pagansâ€””aliens and strangers to the covenants of promise”â€”but are truly “fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God.”
With this principle of “covenant solidarity,” it would have been unthinkable for Jews who became Christians to exclude their wives and children from the covenant household.
1 Corinthians10:1-2 says the Israelites were baptized in the Red Sea. If as he says, baptism is immersion, then all Israel were immersed! So the Exodus story, according to JMac, is turned on its head: Israelites, not the Egyptians, were immersed and drowned in the sea!
“This devilish conduct of infant Baptism has survived through two thousand years of church life from very early on, the third century, embedded in the fourth and still here. We could only ask, Lord, that the Reformation would be a complete Reformation.”
Reacting to a post by Mark Dever, pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., Dr. Scott Clark of Westminster Seminary says that he is not offended by Dever’s assertion that the presbyterians’ practice of infant baptism is “a sinful (though sincere) error.”