Active

This post marks the third of those advocating the practice of infant baptism. 

The significance of the following topic lies in the fact that covenantal Reformed theology builds its theology of infant baptism and the foundation of the existence of the Abrahamic covenant in New Testament times. There are a variety of challenges to the belief that the Abrahamic covenant is in existence today. One of these is that the new covenant has replaced it. Therefore it is important to examine the position in our effort to determine whether or not infants ought to be baptized. If it could be shown that the new covenant replaced the Abrahamic covenant, Reformed and Presbyterian churches would no longer have a basis for their practice of infant baptism.

2.1.1.3    The Scriptures Do Not Teach That the New Covenant Replaced the Abrahamic Covenant.

In all the references to the new covenant in both the Old Testament and the New Testament there is no indication that the new covenant replaced the Abrahamic covenant.  It is very important that this aspect is understood correctly.    

The various covenants of the Old Testament were for the most part independent of each other.  The Noahic covenant was and is a free-standing covenant.  It was neither replaced by nor linked in any particular way to another covenant.  The Davidic covenant is similarly independent; it was part of Israel’s relationship with God but was not connected, for example, with the Mosaic covenant in any particular way.  Similarly, until a specific connection can be proven from Scripture, the Abrahamic covenant must be considered as independent from other covenants, the new covenant included.

Galatians 3:15 spells this out, “Brothers, let me take an example from everyday life.  Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case.”  Paul then goes on to explain how the law, or the Mosaic covenant, did not annul the promise of the Abrahamic covenant.  This is very clear in verse 17, “The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.”  (ESV)  Just as Paul required the Galatians to be careful in properly understanding the relationship of two covenants, we today must be diligent in doing the same in order for us to properly understand the relationship of the Abrahamic covenant to the new covenant.

INFANT BAPTISM MAIN PAGE

Active Arguments