⁷And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your seed after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto you and to your seed after you.

(aaron-The covenant between God and Abraham was to include all of Abraham's posterity as well.  It would appear that all that can lay claim to the lineage of Abraham, becomes a part of this visible covenant: Which is defined here as an Everlasting Covenant.)

⁸And I will give unto you, and to your seed after you, the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.                                                     

(aaron-This everlasting possession might be applied to the future--where the land is to be portioned out according to the tribes of Israel. (Ref. Ezek.47:21-48:35)  Because of its eternal character, this might well be a promise that is to be fulfilled in the new earth.)

⁹And God said unto Abraham, And as for you, you shall keep my covenant therefore, you, and your seed after you in their generations.
 

                                                                          THE INITIATORY RITES FOR THIS VISIBLE COVENANT:    

¹⁰This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your seed after you: every male among you shall be circumcised.             

(aaron-The visible circumcision of the flesh of every man child, was the institution of God’s legal Covenant of Grace with Abraham and his seed.)

¹¹And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of a covenant between me and you.                     

(aaron-The actual circumcision of the flesh of Abraham was the initial token or badge of God's visible covenant with Abraham.)  

¹²And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any foreigner that is not of your seed.                       

(aaron-The token pledge of God's covenant with Abraham was to reflect the absolute sovereignty of God’s grace.  This is most evident in the helplessness of the recipients involved in these initiatory rites.  After the initial institution of visible circumcision--which included Abraham himself at the age of ninety-nine, this badge was thenceforth to be applied to all male infants when they reached this tender age of eight day old.  Following this initial initiation, the individual works that one might take into account is completely removed.  The works that are involved in the circumcision of these infants, is no more creditable than the works that are involved in the baptism of an infant, or the putting of the bread and the wine into our mouths as we receive them from the Lord’s table.  All of these situations are nothing more than being obedient to the commands of God, which facilitates the efficacy of God’s Covenant of Grace.)

¹³He that is born in your house, and he that is bought with your money, must be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.                                                  

(aaron-This initiation of the Everlasting Covenant might also be called the "flesh Covenant" because of its initiatory rites.)

¹⁴And the uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.                                                                (aaron-Though these initiatory rites are being applied to these eight day old infants, their failure to receive these rites has a direct affect upon each of them.  By the language of this verse, we must surely see that the Circumcised Flesh Covenant has an absolute benefit and an absolute consequence.  When the parents circumcise these male infants, these infants receive a place in God’s people and in God’s Covenant.  Failure to circumcise these male infants, resulted in their being cut off from God’s people and from God’s Covenant.  The visible Covenant of Grace is a legal binding agreement between God and His peoples.  Thus, their participation in these visible initiatory rites established their family entitlement to God’s visible Covenant of Grace.  This same scenario might be directly applied to the visible baptism rites of the New Testament.)

¹⁵And God said unto Abraham, As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall her name be.

¹⁶And I will bless her, and moreover I will give you a son of her: yes, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be of her.

¹⁷Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is a hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?

¹⁸And Abraham said unto God, Oh that Ishmael might live before you! 

(aaron-Abraham makes this plea with God for Ishmael's sake.  We must keep in mind that the Circumcised Flesh Covenant was not yet in full effect when this request was made.)  

¹⁹And God said, No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son; and you shall call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him and for his seed after him, for an everlasting covenant.                           

(aaron-With this passage in hand, it would be very easy to confine God’s covenant just to the lineage of Isaac.  Though there is some truth in that theory, because the patriarchal line does in fact run through Isaac, it tends to distort the true picture of God’s Covenant of Grace.  Some may have rightly interpreted this passage, as the formation of the Messianic Covenant within the Covenant of Grace; Or as Louis Berkhof explained it, as possibly viewing “the covenant in a broader sense”.  This interpretation is specifically drawing the hereditary line along which the invisible Messianic Covenant would run, but its elect membership would actually represent a very small portion of the whole peoples of God: Which is analogous to the Levitical Priesthood, who also represented a very small portion of the whole peoples of God.  From this Old Testament example of God’s structuring of His peoples, I might suggest that the Messianic Covenant line contain only God’s invisible priestly line (Ref. Ex.19:6; 1Pe.2:9).  Then from the perspective of the New Testament, this royal Priestly line must be viewed from its Head downward: That is, we must see Jesus our Head as the Apostle and High Priest of this high calling from God (Ref. Heb.2:17, 18; 3:1; 4:14-5:10; 6:17-10:29).  This is surely the Heavenly station from which the invisible elect are now called to serve successively and simultaneously, both here on earth (Ref. Rev.1:6; 5:10) and then in Heaven as well (Ref. Rev.20:6; 6:9).

  Does this statement toward the establishment of the invisible Messianic Covenant through the lineage of Isaac eliminate the visible Circumcised flesh Covenant?  No, not at all!  Verses twenty-three through twenty-seven will confirm this inclusive conclusion.)

²⁰And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.

²¹But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear unto you at this set time in the next year.  

²²And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham.

²³And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham’s house, and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him.                                

(aaron-The visible Covenant of Circumcision, which we might also interpret as the Circumcised Flesh Covenant, is within the Covenant of Grace.  This initial covenant also has an absolute measure of works involved in its initiatory rites.  God grace, in this case of visible circumcision, does flow through the willful act of man; God told Abraham, that if he would circumcise the foreskin of every male of his household, that all of his family and their offspring would be initiated into God’s Covenant.  We are also told that this initial covenant included peoples who were specifically excluded from the Messianic line.  That is, Ishmael was included in the visible Covenant of Grace; the Circumcised Flesh Covenant, but was excluded from the invisible Messianic Covenant which was to flow only through the direct lineage of Isaac.  It is obvious here from Abraham’s obedient actions, that the invisible Messianic Covenant did not replace the visible Circumcised Flesh Covenant.  This invisible Messianic Covenant might also be called the Covenant of Promise.) 

                                                                      THE CIRCUMCISION OF ABRAHAM

²⁴And Abraham was ninety-nine years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.

                                                                      THE CIRCUMCISION OF ISHMAEL

²⁵And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.  

²⁶In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised, and Ishmael his son.  

²⁷And all the men of his house, those born in the house, and those bought with money of a foreigner, were circumcised with him.

THE CIRCUMCISION OF ISAAC

Genesis 21:

  ⁴And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old, as God had commanded him.                                                     

(aaron-Though Isaac was the progenitor of the invisible Messianic line, he still received the visible circumcision of the flesh.  From the New Testament perspective, Isaac was the second in a long patriarchal line that would ultimately produce the Messiah--Jesus the Christ: Through whose eternal sacrifice upon the cross, God’s grace was fully manifested.

Ref. Acts 7:8 “⁸And he gave him the covenant of circumcision: and so Abraham begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac begat Jacob, and Jacob the twelve patriarchs.”)  

  ¹⁰Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this handmaid and her son. For the son of this handmaid shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.

                                                                  (aaron-Now here we have two individuals who are both a part of God’s covenant with Abraham, the Circumcision of the Flesh Covenant, yet we are told once again that the expected inheritance for these two individuals was not the same.  Isaac was to inherit something that was being withheld from Ishmael.  With the plain statement in this passage, we would conclude that the eternal destiny of Ishmael lies within just two options: That is, he would either be saved or he would be lost; he would either be included in God’s covenant, or he would be excluded from God’s covenant.  But before we make any decision in this matter of Ishmael, we must more fully consider the whole breadth of God’s covenant with Abraham.)   

  ¹¹And the thing was very grievous in Abraham’s sight on account of his son.  

  ¹²And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in your sight because of the lad, and because of your handmaid. In all that Sarah says unto you, hearken unto her voice. For in Isaac shall your seed be called.        

(aaron-There should be no doubt that the line that is being referred to here, is the invisible Messianic line.

Ref. Gal 3:16 “¹⁶Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed. He says not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to your seed, which is Christ.”  Mat.1:1-16) 

THE CIRCUMCISION OF JESUS

Luke 2:25-32 “²⁵And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon; and this man was righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Spirit was upon him. ²⁶And it had been revealed unto him by the Holy Spirit, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. ²⁷And he came in the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, that they might do concerning him after the custom of the law, ²⁸then he received him into his arms, and blessed God, and said, ²⁹Now let your servant depart, Lord, According to your word, in peace; ³⁰For my eyes have seen your salvation, ³¹Which you have prepared before the face of all peoples; ³²A light for revelation to the Gentiles, And the glory of your people Israel.”

Ref. Isaiah 49:6 “⁶yes, he says, It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give you for a light to the Gentiles, that you may be my salvation unto the end of the earth.”

(aaron-This clear statement concerning these two separate groups of God’s people: 1. Visible- “To raise up the tribes of Jacob” and 2. Invisible-“To restore the preserved of Israel”, should restrain us from casting visible Israel off to the side as not being included within God’s Covenant of Grace.)  

Genesis 21:13 “And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.”

(aaron-What must be determined here, is the absolute value of being in the visible line of Abraham and being a part of the visible Circumcision of the Flesh Covenant.  Must we believe that God’s gracious covenant with Abraham, would find fertile ground only within the invisible Messianic Covenant line?  Or does His gracious covenant extend to the visible Circumcision of the Flesh Covenant as well?)

               -----------------------------------------

Division two

BAPTISM SCRIPTURES

(Is the Scripture context visible or invisible? Or both?)

Matthew 3:

“⁷But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said unto them, Offspring of vipers, who has warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

¹¹I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that is coming after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire:                               

(aaron-As this passage presents both the visible and the invisible baptisms, the question that must be answered is--What is the efficacy of John’s water baptism unto repentance for the remission of sins?)

                                                                      THE BAPTISM OF JESUS 

  ¹³Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.  

  ¹⁴But John would have forbid him, saying, I have need to be baptized of you, and you come to me?                                               

(aaron-If we look carefully at these passages, we again see the two baptisms of the New Testament; (1) The visible water baptism unto repentance which John introduced. (2) The invisible baptism of Jesus, which is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.  This is accomplished in the regeneration of the invisible elect: Which coincides nicely with the two circumcisions of the Old Testament; (1) The visible circumcision of the flesh--a command which Abraham and his offspring received from God; the visible initiatory rites for believers and their families. (2) The invisible circumcision of the heart, which is the Circumcision of Christ.  This is also accomplished in the regeneration of the invisible elect.  The invisible baptism of regeneration, like the invisible circumcision of the heart, is not in lieu of, but in addition to, the established initiatory rites; visible circumcision/baptism.)  

¹⁶And Jesus when he was baptized, went up straightway from the water: and behold, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him;”  

Mark 1:

  “⁴John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins.                                     

(aaron-This shows the visible baptism of repentance, and explains its precise purpose; It was for the remission of sins.  For this dispensation of grace, could visible water baptism possibly replace the Old Testament sacrificial offerings that the priests made for the sins of the peoples?)  

  ⁵And there went out unto him all the country of Judaea, and all they of Jerusalem; And they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.                                                              (aaron-There is no doubt that this passage is essentially referring to adult baptism.  It would appear that God brought great conviction upon the peoples of that era.)

  ⁸I baptized you in water; But he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit.

(aaron-This is another conformation of the visible and the invisible baptisms.) 

JESUS’ BAPTISM  

  ⁹And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan.”  

Mark 16:16 “¹⁶He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that disbelieves shall be condemned.”

(aaron-There is shown here, two basic requirements for anyone to become a part of God’s people: (1) Water baptism. (2) Belief in Christ.  Some would say that belief must precede baptism, implying that only adults are to be baptized: But that would totally contradict the Old Testament covenant example of visible circumcision.)  

Luke 3:

“³And he came into all the region round about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance unto the remission of sins;

(aaron-Notice again the real benefit of the visible baptism of repentance: It is the remission of sins.)  

⁷ He said therefore to the multitudes that went out to be baptized of him, you offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

(aaron-This passage reflects the eternal benefits of this visible water baptism; That is, by their participation in this visible water baptism, they could escape from the wrath to come.)  

  ¹²And there came also publicans to be baptized, and they said unto him, Teacher, what must we do?  

  ¹⁶John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but there comes he that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire:”

(aaron-Both the visible and the invisible baptisms are again evident in this passage.  John was also telling them about the One whom they should look for and believe in: The Christ.)  

Luke 7:

  “²⁹And all the people when they heard, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John.

  ³⁰But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected for themselves the counsel of God, being not baptized of him.”

(aaron-This passage would seem to confirm the conclusions that were reached in the Lu.3:7 comments.  That is, recognizing the efficacy of the visible water baptism, and also understanding that visible water baptism is a command of God: “they rejected the counsel of God”.  This is not only the ignoring of the conviction, but ignoring God’s will concerning baptism as well.)  

John 1:33 “³³And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize in water, he said unto me, Upon whomsoever you shall see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon him, the same is he that baptizes in the Holy Spirit.”

(aaron-The visible and the invisible baptisms are again in evidence.)  

Acts 1:5 “⁵For John indeed baptized with water; but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days hence.”

(aaron-This passage is pointing toward the invisible baptism of the Holy Ghost on the Day of Pentecost.)  

Acts 2:38, 39 “³⁸And Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. ³⁹For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.”

(aaron-This is a very important passage for understanding God’s covenant relationship with the family: That the covenant promises not only apply to the individual who has been baptized for the remission of sins, these same promises are extended through them to their children and all their generations.  This is exactly the same as the family relationship that God established through visible circumcision in the Old Testament economy.

  Peter also said that they were to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost as an integral part of this act of obedience.  We must now ask this question: Is this the same as being baptized in the Holy Ghost?)  

Acts 8:12 “¹²But when they believed Philip preaching good tidings concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.”

(aaron-Many passages apparently refer to this baptizing as applying strictly to adults.  Though this is commonplace in Scripture, this must not be seen as a doctrinal standard.)  

Acts 8:13 “¹³And Simon also himself believed: and being baptized, he continued with Philip; and beholding the signs and great miracles that were done, he was amazed.”

(aaron-Simon is an example of an individual who was baptized with the visible water baptism of repentance unto the remission of his sins, and then apparently failed to completely repent of all of his evil deeds.  This noted failure got him into a considerable amount of trouble. 

It was his past that he held on to: He made a great deal of money with his sorcery in the past, and with the miracle working Holy Spirit, he saw that he could continue to do the same in the future.  His grievous error was trying to purchase the power of God’s Holy Spirit (Acts.8:13-24) so he could use it for his own personal gain: And his forgiveness for this error is only in the hands of God.)

  Acts 8:14-17 “¹⁴Now when the apostles that were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: ¹⁵who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit: ¹⁶for as yet it was fallen upon none of them: only they had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. ¹⁷Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.”

(aaron-These passages describe a very interesting situation concerning the visible and the invisible baptisms.  It came to the attention of the Church at Jerusalem, that some of the Samaritans had received the word of God.  They do not tell us the precise evidence that brought them to this conclusion concerning these Samaritans, only that they had received the word of God.  Could it have been the fact that they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus?  We might venture a guess here, by saying that they were excited about God.[Lu.7:29]  This excitement existed, because each of them had come to know God in a personal way.  Yet according to this passage, none of them had received (been baptized by) the Holy Ghost.  Does this mean that a person, when they are baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus; Baptized with the visible water baptism of repentance for the remission of their sins, obtain an intimate relationship with God and Christ?  We have a tendency to combine all of these attributes together: That is, the visible and the invisible.)  

Acts 9:17, 18 “¹⁷And Ananias departed, and entered into the house; and laying his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who appeared unto you in the way which you came, has sent me, that you may receive your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit. ¹⁸And straightway there fell from his eyes as it were scales, and he received his sight; and he arose and was baptized; ”

(aaron-Here again, we have an example of the visible and the invisible baptisms.  This relates to the baptism of the apostle Paul, after his life changing experience on the road to Damascus.  After being brought to the house of Judas in Damascus, God sent his servant Ananias to assist Paul in this transition.  The first task was to restore Paul’s sight and to fill him with the Holy Ghost; the invisible baptism of the Holy Spirit. 

The laying on of the hands was the normal procedure for miraculous healings and the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Acts.8:17).   Then after all of this had been accomplished, it would appear that Paul was baptized with the visible water baptism of repentance unto the remission of his sins.)  

Acts 10:37 “³⁷that saying you yourselves know, which was published throughout all Judaea, beginning from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;”  

Acts 10:47 “⁴⁷Can any man forbid the water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we?”

(aaron-This passage is an example of the evident manifestation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, which may have been received before the individuals had been baptized with the visible water baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.)  

Acts 10:48 “⁴⁸And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.”  

Acts 11:16 “¹⁶And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, John indeed baptized with water; but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit.”

(aaron-The active Holy Spirit in the lives of believers, was the promise that was to become fully effective following the ascension of our Lord Jesus Christ and the coming of the Day of Pentecost.  Now before this specific point in time, what was the active power that sustained those who heard the word of God?)

Acts 13:24 “²⁴when John had first preached before his coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.”  

Acts 16:15 “¹⁵And when she was baptized, and her household, she urged us, saying, If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us.”  

Acts 16:33 “³³And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, immediately.”  

Acts 18:8 “⁸And Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.”  

Acts 18:24-26 “²⁴And a certain Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian by race, an eloquent man and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.  ²⁵This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.  ²⁶And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto themselves, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.”  

(aaron-This passage is a good example of the power that believers possess while having only John’s baptism.  That is, though they had only received the visible baptism of repentance unto the remission of their sins, yet they were still empowered by a fervent spirit to boldly proclaim the things of the Lord.)

Gal 3:27 “²⁷For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ.”

(aaron-According to this passage, to be baptized into Christ is to put on Christ.  Does this passage apply only to the invisible Spirit baptism, or could this also represent the invisible benefits of the visible baptism?)  

Acts 19:1-5 “And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper country came to Ephesus, and found certain disciples: ²and he said unto them, Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed? And they said unto him, No, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was given. ³And he said, Into what then were you baptized? And they said, Into John’s baptism. ⁴And Paul said, John baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people that they should believe on him that should come after him, that is, on Jesus. ⁵And when they heard this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.”

(aaron-It would appear, that when these folk received a proper explanation of their situation, the baptism of Christ became efficacious in each of their lives.  The thought of re-baptism here is unlikely.)  

Acts 19:6 “⁶And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.”

(aaron-The thought that strikes my mind, is that it would appear that the apostle Paul was a Pentecostal.  Though most of us, when we think of the gifts of speaking in tongues and prophecy, think first of the Church at Corinth.  But this passage from Acts.19: clearly tells us that some Christians in Ephesus also had these supernatural gifts of the Spirit.)

THE BAPTISM OF PAUL

Acts 22:16 “¹⁶And now why do you tarry? arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.”

(aaron-As Paul rehearses his own conversion on the road to Damascus, he uses a little more detail when explaining his visible water baptism of repentance unto the remission of his sins.  Here he says that his sins were being washed away by this visible baptism.)  

Jesus Himself confirms God’s covenant command for this visible water baptism: Mat.28:19, 20 “¹⁹Go you therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: ²⁰teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.”

(aaron-Not teach them and then baptize them, but to baptize and teach them.)

            -----------------------------------------------

Division three     

New Testament proofs for both the visible Covenant of Grace and the invisible Messianic Covenant: As it is seen in the universal character of God’s reconciliation.

Gal 4:21-26 “²¹Tell me, you that desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? ²²For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, and one by the freewoman.” 

(First, the visible covenant) “²³Howbeit the son by the handmaid is born after the flesh;” Ref.Gen.17:1-14, 18, 20, 23-27

(aaron-This aspect might be representative of the broader view of God’s Covenant of Grace; God’s legal covenant that He made with Abraham and his offspring; The visible Covenant of Grace.)

(Second, the invisible covenant) “but the son by the freewoman is born through promise.”  Ref.Gen.17:15-17, 19

(aaron-Then this aspect might be representative of the narrow view of God’s Covenant of Grace; Just those selected into the invisible Covenant of Promise.  That is, the narrow view is viewing just the invisible Messianic Covenant line.)

(aaron-These same facts are borne out in this next portion:)

“²⁴Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants;”

(aaron-The statement that has been made, is that there are two covenants to be considered.  The strong implication here, as was indicated above, is that of a visible covenant: Which is to be viewed on the visible earthly plane.  And then second, that of an invisible covenant: Which is to be viewed on the invisible Spiritual and Heavenly plane.)  

(First) “one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar. ²⁵Now this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia and answers to the Jerusalem that now is: for she is in bondage with her children.” Ref.Gen.21:11-13

(aaron-This is the visible Covenant of the flesh: All tangible things, such as the flesh, are the visible elements of this bondage.  Those who occupy this station, not having a clear view of the supernatural, would naturally be subjected to a greater struggle within their own flesh.)  

(Second) “²⁶But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother.”

(aaron-Though this statement reflects God’s habitation and the location of the Church triumphant, this is also representative of the invisible Covenant of Promise; Reflecting just the mystical line, which contains only those elect priests belonging to the Messianic Covenant. Ref. Rev.20:4-6; Heb.12:22-24 “²²but you are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, ²³to the general assembly and Church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, ²⁴and to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better than that of Abel.”)

           -------------------------------------------------

-ROMANS-

Especially observe the necessary transition and the defined identification --as God now manifests the universal character of His reconciliation:

(aaron-So after explaining the established universality of justification and of condemnation in Romans 1:1-2:24, it is these last five verses of Romans chapter two that most clearly reveals the universal character in God’s program of reconciliation and the defined identification of both God’s visible peoples and of God’s invisible peoples.  That is, it is also here that God allows us to clearly see His visible dispositions along side His invisible dispositions.  This is accomplished through His explanation of a visible Jew and an invisible Jew, and of visible circumcision and of invisible circumcision.  These dual terms are designed to give us real insight into this invisible mystery. [Ref.Rom.1:20]  Then later on, we will find that these same universal principles are again confirmed in Romans chapter nine.)

  Romans 2:25-27  “For circumcision is indeed profitable, if you are a doer of the law: But if you are a transgressor of the law, your circumcision is become uncircumcision. ²⁶If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? ²⁷And shall not the uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge you, who with the letter and circumcision are a transgressor of the law?”

(aaron-  We can observe here, within this portion of Romans, the apparent neutralization process for the visible Circumcision as it relates to God’s invisible dispositions.  Two very important things are being presented here.  First, the retained value for the Old Testament initiatory rite of visible circumcision.  Then second, the introduction to the invisible character of God’s dispositions.  This course is absolutely essential, for the leveling process in God's reconciliation to be successful.  That is, for God’s Covenant of Grace to be fulfilled, the visible Jew, the visible Circumcision, and visible Israel must be substantially neutralized within this dispensation of grace!  The neutralization of God’s visible dispositions was necessary for the progress of God’s reconciliation, and for the manifestation and explanation of God’s invisible dispositions.  Now for us to understand this complicated riddle: How an uncircumcised person can become as one circumcised and vice-versa, we are forced to consider both God’s visible dispositions and God’s invisible dispositions:)

Romans 2:28, 29 “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh.  But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter.  Whose praise is not of men, but of God.”

(aaron-Here again, God is explaining the dual meaning of two of the identifying names of His peoples.  Simply put, these definitions are giving us insight into the visible and the invisible.  Charles Hodge roughly put it this way: These are visible examples of God’s invisible dispositions.^237-1

So when we see the terms Jew and circumcision, we must always remember that each of these terms has both a visible and an invisible characteristic.  We must also keep these two things in mind: This does not mean that the visible Jew is non-existent because of the revealed presence of the invisible Jew, or does this mean that the visible Circumcision is non-existent because of the revealed presence of the invisible Circumcision.  Both of these identifying names have a dual role and are coexistent within God’s redemptive plan.)

(aaron-  Now this portion of Romans has dealt with the specific details of how God identifies His invisible ELECT within this expanded reconciliation.  And the most important aspect, and probably the most confusing part of this teaching, is in the fact that God continues to identify His people as being Jews and as being the Circumcision.  The critical difference that must be noted here in Romans chapter two, is where this expanded identification is being made: That the identification of this very special group, THE INVISIBLE ELECT, is being made on the inside and not on the outside.  That is, having an absolute understanding of how God identifies His invisible priestly line: And then understanding that this identification is supernaturally made by God Himself. 

 Understanding that within God’s expanded reconciliation:

 1. Physical circumcision can become Uncircumcision.

 2. Uncircumcision can be counted as Circumcision.

 3. The physical Jew may no longer be counted as a Jew, when we are considering just God’s invisible dispositions.

 4. When considering God’s mystical line, the only authentic Jew is one who is a Jew inwardly.

 5. For the Covenant of Promise that was to come through Isaac, the only authentic Circumcision is the invisible Circumcision of the heart. 

We, who might be counted as THE ELECT members of the invisible Church, must know the absolute of who and what we are:  "For we are the Circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and glory in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh."  Phil.3:3  Ref.Deut.30:6; Jer.4:4; and 9:26  But to believe that the whole Church must all be numbered among God’s invisible priestly line is incorrect.  The Church is being numbered exactly the same as God numbered His first peoples--visible Israel.)             

NOW IF THIS IS THE FACTUAL CASE CONCERNING VISIBLE ISRAEL:----------

Romans 3:1, 2 “What advantage then has the Jew?  Or what is the profit of circumcision?  Much every way: First of all, that they were intrusted with the oracles of God.” Ref.9:1-5

(aaron-The visible Jews and the visible circumcision were necessary examples of the relationship that God wanted to establish with His creation.  And because physical Israel fulfilled this vital role in God’s redemptive plan, they do have an advantage even now.  Many have determined that they are out of fellowship and removed far from God’s grace, but that is not the case at all.)

Romans 3:3, 4 “For what if some were without faith?  Shall their lack of faith make the faithfulness of God of no effect?  God forbid. Yes, let God be found true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That you might be justified in your words, and might prevail when you come into judgment.”

(aaron-We have now come to understand, that it is only God’s boundless grace that matters in our relationship.  Whether we believe or whether we lack belief matters not: It is only God’s faithfulness to His promises, that continues on to stand as that firm foundation. Ref.Ps.51)  

Romans 3:5, 6 “But if our unrighteousness commends the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who visits with wrath? (I speak after the manner of men.)  God forbid.  For then how shall God judge the world?”

Romans 3:7, 8 “But if the truth of God through my lie abounded unto his glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner?  And why not (as we are slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say), Let us do evil, that good may come?  Whose judgment is just.”

(aaron-Verses five through eight absolutely confirms the stated conclusions concerning verses three and four.  The only things that the creature is capable of bringing into this relationship are “unrighteousness”, “lies”, “sin”, and “evil”.  They are able to bring only their total and unmitigated depravity.)  

Romans 3:9 “What then? Are we better than they? No, in no way.  For we before laid to the charge of both Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin;”

(aaron-Verse nine again confirms for us, the total equality that is evident in the universal character of God’s program of reconciliation.  It is because of our inherent total depravity, that we all stand equally condemned in its completed form--for all are lost without God’s sovereign grace.  We then see this same truth confirmed in these next nine verses that are being quoted from the Old Testament:)  

Romans 3:10-18 “as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none that understands, There is none that seeks after God. They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable; There is none that does good, no, not so much as one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit; The poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.  Their feet are swift to shed blood; Destruction and misery are in their ways; And the way of peace have they not known.  There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

(aaron-These clear passages confirm the absolute depraved state of the whole human race, and reflects their complete helplessness in that failed condition.)  

Romans 3:19, 20 “Now we know that what things soever the law says, it speaks to them that are under the law; that every mouth may be silenced, and all the world may be brought under the judgment of God.  Because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.”

(aaron-These passages again show us the universal character of God’s justification and of God’s condemnation.  Then this passage, in a sense, would appear to neutralize the law so as to manifest God’s boundless grace.  That is, the law has become subordinate to God’s grace. 

But no matter how we stand before God, whether we are in the legal relationship^240-1 or in the communion of life, our absolute need for His grace is being explained here in very clear terms:)

(aaron-I would like to divert for a few moments from our Romans study, so as to gather some needed background on how the Reformed view and understand the complexity of God’s Covenant of Grace:)

Charles Hodge’s Systematic Theology - Volume three

pp.513, 514

(aaron-We can demonstrate some of the difficulties in the Reformed view, by simply observing Professor Hodge as he explains some of the great sacramental differences in the understandings between the Romanists and the Protestants.  This whole argument basically surrounds the efficacy of the visible covenant symbols, and exposes some deficiencies on both sides.  To begin, the Protestants believe that the Roman Church is much to liberal in matters concerning the sacrament of water baptism.  Then moving a bit further, we begin to recognize that a large part of the problem lies within the interpretation of some common Christian terms: Terms like FAITH, REGENERATION, SAVING FAITH, SANCTIFYING INFLUENCE, PENITENTS, BAPTISM and BELIEVERS.  The following comments are intended to show that these terms are frequently misappropriated in many commentaries.  Then these comments also represent an attempt to more precisely define each of these important terms according to their common usage in the Scriptures.)  

  4. “Another argument is derived from the constant practice of the Romish Church.  There is no pretence of her recognized ministers demanding the profession, or evidence of what Protestants understand by saving faith in order to the reception of the sacraments, or as the conditions of their sanctifying influence.” 

(aaron-Here are the basic demands for some sort of visible evidence by the Protestants.  

 1. They are requiring a profession of faith as the evidence of an individuals saving faith [which they would also interpret as a necessary part of their initial conversion].

 2. These are the conditions of the evident sanctifying influence that must be present before the person receives the sacrament of baptism.  This process is more commonly known as the believer’s profession and conversion.

  These are the exact principles upon which adult baptism was, and still is, founded.  It supposes that belief and repentance [confession] are necessary actions before any person can be baptized.  Though this may be partially true so far as adult conversion is concerned, these early Protestants have gone one step further by excluding infants from this visible initiatory rite.  They reject infant baptism on the basis that infants do not understand their own personal sin and their own personal need for a Savior: Thereby, it would be impossible for infants to confess and repent of their sins.

  All of these demands that are put forward by the Protestants, seem to be deficient in the most important area of salvation.  That deficient area that is being missed here, is that area that belongs totally to God.  These Protestant demands tend to exclude God’s sovereign grace, and many of God’s covenant promises as well.  By imposing these demands, they are taking the control of determining who is included in God’s peoples and who is not included in God’s peoples.  The clear result of that misappropriation is here: They insist on seeing some sort of visible evidence of a person’s conversion, before determining that person’s salvation status.)

“On the contrary, they [the Romanists] act on the principle, that the sacraments confer grace in the first instance.”

(aaron-With respect to Covenant Theology and the broad and narrow concepts that one might understand from the Gen.17 description, under the broad concept of the visible initiatory rites into the Covenant of Grace, this statement would definitely hold some truth with respect to God’s grace.  The basic problem that the Protestants are having here is that they do not understand nor accept God’s visible dispositions.)

“They baptize crowds of uninstructed heathen, without the slightest pretence that they are penitents or believers.”   

(aaron-How does one actually determine whether a person is penitent or a believer?  Since both of these are internal qualities, it is very doubtful that anyone really can.  Why would any person be baptized if they did not believe?  And if they did believe, they would surely be penitent.

  As a prerequisite to baptism, these early Protestants have mistakenly concluded a required level of individual understanding far beyond that of the Scriptures.  These early Church fathers seem to insist on instructing them before they are baptized, but the great Scriptural commission would have us instruct them after they are baptized. Ref.Mat.28:18-20  Order: 1. Make disciples of all Nations.  2. Baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost.  3. Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.

  Then Act.2:5-42 tells us about three thousand people, who, with a minimal amount of instruction; That is, one short sermon that was given by Peter, were all baptized at the same time.  There is no reason to believe that each of these individuals was subjected to any additional instruction, or to a litany of questions, before their individual baptism.  All appearances here, would be that of baptizing a crowd of uninstructed heathen: With absolutely no assurance that they were penitent or true believers.)

“If faith be a fruit of regeneration,”

(aaron-This is a very interesting statement, because it immediately represents a questionable connection of two very important terms.  The faith here, is the same saving faith that was said to be evidenced by an individuals profession.  Now this stated principle, that faith is a fruit of regeneration, is derived from the assumption that the whole Church is made up of only the invisible elect: That the entire Church is born again; Born from above; Born of the Holy Spirit.  There are some very important things for us to consider, whenever we discuss either faith or regeneration.  To begin, it is true that both faith and regeneration are gifts that come from God: Gifts, which are received by us through the work of His Holy Spirit.  But now, can we say with any certainty that one of these gifts is a product of the other?  To say that faith is a product of regeneration, is to say that everyone who has faith is regenerated.  The evident problem that we have here, is in finding an adequate interpretation for regeneration.  Tit.3:5 would define regeneration, as the born again experience.  And according to Mat.19:28, the same word would be defined as the restoration of all things; Looking forward to the new heavens and the new earth.  So then to state that faith is the product of regeneration, is to state a conclusion that is not fully supportable in the Scriptures.  

Though both faith and regeneration have the same origin in God’s heavenly realm, they have completely different offices within God’s redemptive plan.  First, according to Eph.2:8, faith is a free and unmerited gift from God.  Second, according to Heb.11:1, faith, within itself, is substantial and evidential; it is the proof of those things that cannot be seen.  Third, according to Rom.12:3, faith is given to every believer by measure.  Forth, according to 2Cor.10:15, we can anticipate that our faith will increase as we grow in God’s grace.  Faith is a living, moving, changing characteristic of every Christian’s life experience, which will ultimately culminate in their salvation.  So faith then, must be seen as the vehicle upon which God’s grace is supplied to every believer.  And regeneration, according to Tit.3:5, is simply the born again experience that every invisible elect saint must possess.  Consequently, where regeneration is the established state of each and every elect priest, faith, on the other hand, is involved in, and continuously reflects, the changing conditions in the life experience of every believer.)

“and if, as Romanists all teach, regeneration is effected in baptism,

how can the presence of faith in the recipient be a condition of the efficacy of baptism.”(?)

(aaron-To say that “regeneration is effected in baptism” is a difficult statement to immediately address.  For example, if we mean that a person must be baptized along with their regeneration, the statement would seem to be correct.  But if our meaning is that every person that is baptized is regenerate, then that statement would not be correct. 

This is similar to the discussion in the previous comments, where we considered the difference between regeneration and faith.  But here, we must now consider the difference between regeneration and baptism.  Remember, regeneration, according to Tit.3:5, is simply the born again experience that every invisible elect saint must possess: Regeneration is an established state of all who are in the elect priestly line.  Baptism then, according to the Covenant of Grace, and following the example that was set down by God for believers and their families in Gen.17, is the visible initiatory rite for our covenant relationship with God.  The visible Church, like visible Israel, is the visible institution through which peoples have access to God.  Then finally, the efficacy of baptism is not conditional, nor dependent on faith or regeneration: but the efficacy of baptism, like circumcision, is dependent only upon God’s faithful promise to father Abraham.  That is, if you are obedient to the established visible initiatory rites, you are entitled to become a part of the visible peoples of God.)

pp.521, 522

  “2. This ritual system is utterly inconsistent with the whole genius of Christianity.  God is a Spirit, and He requires those who worship Him, to worship Him in spirit and in truth.” 

“External rites are declared to be nothing.” 

(aaron-This conclusion is a continuation of the Reformed principles sighted by Professor Hodge on pages 516 and 517:  “5. The Necessity of the Sacraments...”  

  “The question between the Reformed on the one hand, and Lutherans and Romanists on the other, is in which of these senses are the sacraments necessary.” 

[aaron randall This statement expresses the basic proposition to be considered:]

“According to the Reformed they have the necessity of precepts.  The use of them is enjoined as a duty; but they are not necessary means of salvation.  Men may be saved without them.  The benefit which they signify and which they are the means of signifying, sealing, and applying to believers, are not so tied to their use that those benefits cannot be secured without them.  Sins may be forgiven, and the soul regenerated and saved, though neither sacrament has ever been received.” 

  We first understand from the Reformed position, that the sacraments [especially baptism] are necessary precepts.  But as a matter of Scriptural fact, we understand that sacraments are actually commanded by God.  Yet, the Reformed Church has essentially invalidated these sacraments, simply because common sense tells us that the water and the bread and the wine are nothing more than water and bread and wine. 

This same statement is then confirmed by Professor Hodge on [p.518  “the Reformed Church teaches that the visible signs as such do not convey the invisible grace, and that the Christian can by faith receive the same divine benefits without the use of the sacraments, and consequently that the sacraments are not absolutely necessary, much less the middle point of the Christian plan of salvation.”]

  This contrary position in which the Reformed Church has placed itself, has absolutely no direct support from the Scriptures.  By taking this stand, that the true Church is made up of only the invisible elect, the Reformed Church has essentially chosen to depart from the clear teachings of Covenant Theology, and has chosen rather, to follow a similar road to that of the Baptist.  If the Reformed Church wholly believed these statements, they would have long ago ceased their practice of infant baptism.  The ongoing struggle for the Reformed Church is evident right here at this apparent contradiction.  If we accept their stated position in Lord’s Day 26 and Lord’s Day 27--Questions 69-74 of the Heidelbergh Catechism, we cannot believe that what we see there, is nothing more than the Reformed Church just going through the motions.  The key element to resolving this apparent contradiction, would be found in our thorough understanding and our holding fast to the principles of Covenant Theology.)

“The Lutherans and Romanists, on the other hand, hold that the sacraments are necessary means of grace, in the sense that the grace which they signify is not received otherwise than in their use.  There is no remission of sin or regeneration without baptism;..”   (aaron-See Division two-BAPTISM SCRIPTURES  pp.3-240-245:  Mk.1:4; Lu.1:77; 3:3; and Acts.2:38 confirm the remission of sins for their obedient act of visible baptism.)  

(aaron-If we take the doctrine of Covenant Theology at its face value, this statement would essentially be correct.  There is absolutely no doubt that the Covenant of Grace that we find established with father Abraham in Gen.17:1-27, has both a visible and an invisible character in operation on an eternal basis.  The visible character of the Covenant of Grace is the Covenant of the Flesh; Or, the Covenant of Bondage.  The invisible character of the Covenant of Grace is the Covenant of Promise; The Messianic Covenant.  The apostle Paul tells us that the depiction that is given in Gal.4:21-31 is an allegory of the Covenant of Grace.  Though it might seem to contain two covenants because of the wording in Gal.4:24, by returning to Gen.17:1-27 we can see that these two are actually the component parts to the one Covenant of Grace.  Gal.4:25, 26, in presenting the earthly Jerusalem and the heavenly Jerusalem, also confirms the visible and the invisible characteristics of this same Covenant of Grace.)  

(aaron-Professor Hodge presses on in his depreciation of the visible symbols: He begins with an excerpt from 1Cor.7:19)

Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing. 

(aaron-Now this statement from 1Cor.7:19 has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the validity of circumcision.  It is not implying that circumcision has no value, but that the believer was to be content in whatever state they were called.  These passages are essentially giving us insight into the universal character of God’s reconciliation.  When God made the Covenant of Grace with father Abraham, that covenant was to ultimately reach into every other Nation of the world.  Now throughout the New Testament, we must closely follow the fulfillment of that promise to father Abraham:)

“He is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” Rom.ii.28,29. 

(aaron-Rom.2:28, 29 have a completely different instructive purpose in mind, yet the context is still directly associated with the universal character of God’s reconciliation: The manifestation of the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham--that he would be the father of many Nations.  These passages are a detailed explanation of some of the difficult transitional aspects of God’s reconciliation.  Again, to grasp the meaning of these two verses from Rom.2:, we must first understand the purpose behind this tiny Nation called Israel.  This begins with the basic knowledge that Israel, the Circumcision, and the Jews were established as the peoples of God.  Then understanding that 1Cor.10:1-11 more precisely establishes Israel as an example and a type of the relationship that God desired to have with the human population.  From that perspective of Israel’s being an example and a type, as well as the visible peoples of God, one can plainly see the difficulties that are involved in explaining any transitional change.  Because of our limitations when it comes to understanding and segregating those things associated with the Spiritual dimension, we might more easily maneuver through this complex set of circumstances by simply looking at these definitions before us as being either visible or invisible. 

These same visible and invisible principles that are already a part of our theological understanding and vocabulary.  But now we must be able to see these terms in more of an absolute sense.  It is obvious that this portion of Rom.2: has both the visible and the invisible in view.  But the central teaching of this Scripture is expressed thus: That just because you are a visible Jew or a part of the visible circumcision, does not mean that you are automatically an invisible Jew or a part of the invisible circumcision.  These passages are essentially explaining the character of the invisible Messianic Covenant line, and how we would identify those who are part of the invisible Covenant of Promise.  And to further help our understanding here, we must come to understand that the existence of one [visible or invisible] does not preclude the simultaneous existence of the other [visible or invisible].  This principle applies to all dispensations.) 

“This is not merely a fact, but a principle.” 

(aaron-Much of the confusion within today’s Church, is the result of giving general application to Scripture that is written very specifically.  First Peter is written to the elect; to the invisible. Ref.1Pe.1:2; 2:5 and 9)  

“What St. Paul here says of circumcision and of Jews, MAY be said, and is substantially said by St. Peter in reference to baptism and Christianity.  A man who is a Christian outwardly only, is not a Christian; and the baptism which saves, is not the washing of the body with water, but the conversion of the soul. 1Pe.iii.21.” 

(aaron-This interpretation is viewing salvation through the narrow lens that recognizes only the elect mystical line within the bounds of the Church.  God’s initiatory rites of baptism and circumcision have never saved anyone!  But all of God’s peoples are saved only by God’s free and unmerited grace through the propitiatory work of Christ Jesus.)  

“The idea that a man’s state before God depends on anything external, on birth, on membership in any visible organization, or on any outward rite or ceremony, is utterly abhorrent to the religion of the Bible.” 

(aaron-This statement would seem to openly contradict the Covenant of Grace that was made with father Abraham. Ref.Gen.17:1-27  The only requirement there, for a covenant relationship with God, was that all of the males of Abraham’s family was to be circumcised.  And if any eight-day-old child was not circumcised, that soul was cut off from God’s people because he had broken God’s Covenant of Grace. Ref.Gen.17:14  This would represent the broad concept of the Covenant of Grace; The visible Covenant of the Flesh. Ref.Gen.17:13; the Covenant of Bondage Ref.Gal.4:21-31)  

“It did not belong to Judaism except in the corrupt form of Pharisaism.  It is true, that under the old dispensation a man could not be saved unless he belonged to the commonwealth of Israel, and was one of the children of Abraham.” 

(aaron-This is an example of leaving Covenant Theology behind by discounting its real efficacy.  First, admitting that salvation was achieved through their association with the visible commonwealth of Israel.  But then Professor Hodge makes a more refined definition by using passages that apply just to the invisible elect; Only to those who had membership in the Covenant of Promise; The Messianic line of which Isaac was the progenitor. Ref.Gal.4:28)

“But according to St. Paul [Rom.ix.8.; Gal.iii.7 and 29], this only meant that they must believe in Abraham’s God and the promise of redemption through his seed.”   

“If a man of heathen birth and culture came to the knowledge of the truth, believed the doctrines which God had revealed to his chosen people, relied on the promise of salvation through Christ, and purposed to obey the law of God, then he was a Jew inwardly and one of Abraham’s seed.  His (Abraham’s) circumcision was only ‘a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had, yet being uncircumcised.’ Rom.iv.11.” (aaron-Only the sign of the seal.)

(aaron-Here again, this question must be asked: Does everyone who makes a profession of faith become a part of the invisible elect?  But this passage from Rom.4 is more specifically showing the intended universal character of God’s reconciliation.  What it is actually showing, is that both the circumcision and the uncircumcision were to be included within God’s Covenant of Grace.)

“The doctrine that such a man, notwithstanding this thorough change in his inward state in knowledge, conviction, and character, is under the wrath and curse of God, until a little piece of flesh is cut from his body, never was a part of the religion of God.” 

(aaron-This statement would again remove the entire efficacy from the visible initiatory rites that were established by God.  Can we say that what God has commanded is not correct? Ref.Gen.17:13, 14   Can we be so bold, as to say that God’s promise to Abraham was not sincere? Ref.Gen.17:1-27)

“It is part and parcel of the religion of his great adversary.  Any one, therefore, who teaches that no man can be saved without the rite of baptism, and that by receiving that rite he is made a child of God and heir of heaven, is ANTICHRIST, and ‘even now are there many antichrists.’ 1Jn.ii.18.”

(aaron-This statement is made with very little consideration for Covenant Theology in general, and the visible initiatory rites [specifically circumcision and baptism] that God has established in both the Old and the New Testaments.  We have a tendency to see things only in a singular way--where we seem to end up with what is known as a one-track mind.  So great care must be taken whenever we decide to devalue the visible initiatory rites that God has specifically put in place.)

  “3. This ritualistic system, which makes the sacraments the only channels of grace, and consequently absolutely necessary to salvation, naturally leads to the divorce of religion and morality...” 

(aaron-If the visible initiatory rites are to be observed as our obedient participation in God’s Covenant of Grace, then that portion of the Covenant of Grace would be somewhat ritualistic.  We must also believe that this participation in these visible rites would be predicated on faith.  Why then, do we have to make a complete separation between the sacraments and faith?  Is it not conceivable that both faith and the sacraments are involved in these visible initiatory rites?  This would be true, because of the Protestants stated understanding that both the sacrament and faith are clearly involved in their ritual of adult water baptism.)

“The great question at issue in the controversy with ritualism is, Whether a man’s salvation depends on his inward state, or upon outward rites; or, as some would give it, Whether his state is determined by outward rites, or whether the rites depend for their value and efficacy on his inward state.  In either form the question is, Are we saved by faith or by sacraments?”

(aaron-Actually, both!  This great controversy has arisen within the Church, because we Protestants have come to understand salvation in only a singular way.  That is, in receiving and understanding the invisible characteristics of God’s dispositions through this New Covenant dispensation, we have determined that it is only God’s invisible dispositions that has any efficacy.  We must understand that each and every attribute that God has distributed to His creation potentially has both a visible and an invisible characteristic: Elect; Israel/Circumcision/Jew; Church/Baptism/Christian.)

  (aaron-To summarize these visible and invisible dispositions of God, we should now see that the dual character of the Covenant of Grace can also be seen in the progressive order which accompanies the believer into their relationship with God.  This evident order that is presented in the process of God’s actions, as it is seen within the transitional terms “called” and “chosen”.

  First, the apostle Peter, in Acts 2:39, is plainly speaking about the broad concept in the covenant connection between believers and their offspring: “For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.”  It is extremely important for us to understand, that it is only our sovereign God who actually does the entire calling.  But then here in this passage, we are also told that God’s promise is extended to our children, and to our children’s children, and so on in their generations.  It is because of God’s clear covenant promise, that we can anticipate that God will also welcome our offspring into a covenant relationship with Himself.  The calling that we have here, must be seen as the inclusive call of all of those who have entered this legal covenant relationship through the visible initiatory rites (circumcision and baptism) that have been established by God.  Then we must also see that their entrance into this covenant relationship, is achieved only through the visible institutions that have been established by God as well.  Remember, this is looking at just the broad concept of the Covenant of Grace that God made with Abraham and his offspring; Just the visible dispositions of God.  This absolute need for these visible initiatory rites, is defined best in Gen.17:1-27: Where we are given our first real glimpse into both God’s visible dispositions (Gen.17:10-14) and God’s invisible dispositions (Gen.17:15-19).  Though Isaac was to be the progenitor of the invisible mystical line that was determined by these internal dispositions of God (the circumcised heart and the regenerated spirit)--That same line that would ultimately produce the Messiah, the visible initiatory rite of circumcision/baptism was still required before one could fully participate in God’s Covenant of Grace.  We can also notice from Lu.2:25-32/Mat.3:13 that our Lord Jesus Himself participated in these same visible initiatory rites that were commanded by God. 

The Protestants seem to struggle so much with these visible and invisible concepts.  But they are simply the obvious characteristics of God’s dispositions.  Their argument over the efficacy of God’s dispositions becomes mute, because both the visible characteristics and the invisible characteristics are indispensable parts of the one Covenant of Grace.  And then they must also remember that all salvation, whether with respect to the visible characteristics or the invisible characteristics of God’s Covenant of Grace, is effected only by God’s free and unmerited grace through the propitiatory work of Christ Jesus.)

  (aaron-These next passages will more clearly define both the broad [visible] and the narrow [invisible] concepts of the Covenant of Grace:

Matthew 20:16-- “¹⁶So the last shall be first, and the first last.  [For many are called but few are chosen.]”  Ref.Mat.22:14  

This passage from Matthew is showing us two very important terms that have come to express these visible and invisible concepts of the Covenant of Grace, as well as expressing God’s absolute sovereignty in all of these matters of salvation.  The first thing that we must see here, is the evident order that is being established: “the last shall be first, and the first last”.  Then understanding this progressive order with respect to these terms--“called” and “chosen”.  Though the calling is the first order in God’s reconciliation, to be chosen is the second and last order in God’s reconciliation.  It is also a Scriptural fact that the chosen ones will be resurrected and gathered before God first [Mat.24:30, 31; Mk.13:26, 27; 1Thes.4:13-17; 1Cor.15:23-26].  Then the called ones will be resurrected and gathered before God last [Jn.5:28, 29; Mat.25:31-46; Rev.20:11-15].  But unfortunately, the Church has mistakenly come to the conclusion that there is little or no real value in being called by God: That only the invisible elect ones are to be counted as true Church members.  Notice should also be given to the ratio between the many who are called and the few who are chosen, with respect to our visible example [1Cor.10:1-11]--the peoples of Israel.  From the many that were included in the twelve tribes that comprised the peoples of Israel, only the tribe of Levi was set apart to represent God’s priestly line.  Understanding this proportional division between the eleven elect tribes and the one elect priestly tribe, should allow us to more clearly see Israel’s counterpart through these New Testament Church terms--the “called” visible elect and the “chosen” invisible elect.  

  Then in 1 Peter 2:9 and 10: “⁹But you are an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, that you may show forth the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light: ¹⁰who in time past were no people, but now are the people of God: who had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.” we are given definition for the narrow concept of the Covenant of Grace.  These chosen ones (eklektos) are being identified as God’s elect priestly line.  This is the invisible mystical line that was to flow out through the lineage of Isaac: Those elect ones who will ultimately become the component parts of the completed Kingdom [Rev.1:6; 5:10; 20:4-6]; A part of the Messianic Covenant; The invisible Covenant of Promise. 

This visible and invisible concept is also confirmed for us in this passage--Rev.17:14 “¹⁴These shall make war against the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings; and they that are with him, those who are called and chosen and faithful.” 

What we see presented here, are these two important terms sequentially tied together in a prophetic description of the elect armies of heaven. Ref.Rev.19:11-16  This should also represent the mandated order for entrance into this elect group: They must first be called, and then they are chosen. Ref.Mat.20:16)                                        Amen.                              

            ----------------------------------------

  (aaron-Now to better understand the Reformed view of Covenant Theology, it will be helpful if we continue on in this brief study of Berkhof’s Systematic Theology.  It is here that we will discover that the Reformed Church has some understanding about the visible/external characteristic and the invisible/internal characteristic of God’s Covenant of Grace.  Dr. Berkhof now presents a number of differing Reformed views on this very important subject:)

 See Berkhof’s Systematic Theology,  pp.284-289

  In speaking of the contracting parties in the covenant of grace it was already intimated that the covenant may be considered from two different points of view.  There are two different aspects of the covenant, and now the question has been answered in different ways.  

A. An External and an Internal Covenant.

...  Thomas Blake...  Mastricht

B.  The Essence and the Administration of the Covenant.

(aaron-Define:

 (1) The Administration as the external/visible; The visible Church; The called.

 (2) The essence as the internal/invisible; The invisible Church; The chosen.)  

     Others, as for instance, Olevianus and Turretin, distinguish between (2) the essence and (1) the administration of the covenant.  According to Turretin:

 (2) the former (the essence) corresponds to the internal calling and the invisible Church formed by means of this calling; and

 (1) the latter (the administration), to the external calling and the visible Church, as consisting of those who are called externally by the Word.  

 (1) The administration of the covenant consists only in the offer of salvation in the preaching of the Word, and in the other external privileges in which all share who have a place in the (visible) Church, including many non-elect. [aaron randall Define the non-elect as the visible elect who have been called into covenant with God. Ref. Rom.11:28-32; Acts.2:39]

 (2) The essence of the covenant, however, also includes the spiritual reception of all the blessings of the covenant, the life in union with Christ, and therefore extends to the elect only. [aaron randall The elect here represents only the invisible elect who have been chosen by God’s into His invisible priestly line. Ref. 1Pe.2:9-10] 

This distinction certainly contains an element of truth, but is not altogether logical and clear.  While essence and form would constitute an antithesis, essence and administration do not.  They may refer to the invisible and the visible Church, as Turretin seems to intend, or to the final end or realization and the announcement of the covenant, as Olevianus understands the distinction.  But if the former is meant, it would be better to speak of essence and revelation; and if the latter is intended, it would be preferable to speak of the aim and the means of its realization.  Here, too, the question remains unanswered, whether and in how far the non-elect are covenant children also in the sight of God.

(aaron-Dr. Berkhof’s last statement “Here, too, the question remains unanswered, whether and in how far the non-elect are covenant children also in the sight of God.” seems to have overlooked the clear statement made by Turretin concerning “many non-elect” within the visible Church.  It would seem that Dr.Berkhof wants to establish an antithesis between the visible and the invisible.  I believe this to be a mistake, because both of these dispositions are an integral part of the one Covenant of Grace.

It would seem that most Church scholars give no eternal efficacy for the visible initiatory rites into covenant relationship with God.  This is referring to the initiatory rites of visible circumcision and visible baptism.  Their basic problem is in the fact that they have lost touch with God’s wonderful grace.  The same grace by which all of God’s peoples are saved through Christ’s propitiatory work.  Nevertheless, all must eventually enter the Covenant of Grace through God’s established visible institutions--having participated in God’s established visible initiatory rites. Ref. Gen.17:1-14; Mat.28:17-20)

C. A Conditional and an Absolute Covenant.

    Still others, as for instance, Koelman, speak of a conditional and an absolute covenant.  Koelman emphasizes the fact that, when (1) an external and (2) an internal covenant are distinguished, only a single covenant is meant, and the terms “external” and “internal” simply serve to stress the fact that all are not in the covenant in exactly the same way...  

D. The Covenant as a Purely Legal Relationship and as a Communion of Life.

    Reformed Theologians, such as Kuyper, Bavink, and Honig, speak of two sides of the covenant, (1) the one external and (2) the other internal.  Dr. Vos uses terms that are more specific, when he distinguishes between   

 (1) the covenant as a purely legal relationship and

 (2) the covenant as a communion of life. 

There is clearly a legal and a moral side to the covenant.  The covenant may be regarded as an agreement between two parties, with mutual conditions and stipulations, and therefore as something in the legal sphere.  The covenant in that sense may exist even when nothing is done to realize its purpose, namely the conditions to which it points and for which it calls as the real ideal.  The parties that live under this agreement are in the covenant, since they are subject to the mutual stipulations agreed upon.  In the legal sphere everything is considered and regulated in a purely objective way.  The determining factor in that sphere is simply the relation which has been established, and not the attitude which one assumes to that relation.  The relation exists independently of one’s inclination or disinclination, one’s likes and dislikes, in connection with it.   

It would seem to be in the light of this distinction that the question should be answered, Who are in the covenant of grace?   

If the question is asked (1) with the legal relationship, and that only, in mind, and really amounts to the query, Who are in duty bound to live in the covenant, and of whom may it be expected that they will do this?--the answer is, believers and their children. 

(aaron-The answer to this question here is clear and to the point.  That is, that believers and their children have full entitlement to participate in the Covenant of Grace.  This above stated conclusion, would require us to accept the complete efficacy for the visible initiatory rites [circumcision and baptism] that God has commanded for the Covenant of Grace.  What this actually means is that our obedience brings us into good standing in God’s Covenant of Grace, which is facilitated only by the propitiatory work of Christ.)  

But if the question is asked with a view to (2) the covenant as a communion of life, and assumes the quite different form, In whom does this legal relationship issue in a living communion with Christ?--the answer can only be, only the regenerate, who are endowed with the principle of faith, that is, in the elect...

(aaron-This statement is true in every respect.  When we recognize the visible Church as the present access point for peoples to come to God, we should then understand that all of those who are in the visible Church were called into this legal relationship with God.  This group that remains within this legal relationship, would constitute a large portion of all those who have ever attended Church.  Then, it is from this large body that is in this legal relationship with God, that His high priestly line is chosen. See p.23)  

    Now the question arises as to the relation between the sinner’s being under the “bonds of the covenant” as (1) a legal relationship and (2) his living in the communion of the covenant.  The two cannot be conceived of as existing alongside of each other without some inner connection, but must be regarded as being most intimately related to each other, in order to avoid all dualism. 

(aaron-The intimacy of the visible and the invisible can be expressed in this way: The invisible is that fractional part that comes out from the visible.  Every one of God’s peoples is called into a legal relationship in the Covenant of Grace.  But few are chosen out of all of these called out ones, to become a part of His Royal Priesthood; To become a part of the invisible Messianic Covenant line; To become a part of the invisible Covenant of Promise.  Keeping in mind that this is also likened to the nation of Israel as the Old Testament counterpart of the peoples called out into this legal relationship with God.  There, the priestly line that came through the tribe of Levi, was a very small portion of the whole of Israel.  Then understanding that, even though they were the priestly line, they remained an integral part of Israel.  The implication in the above question, is that there is no salvation for those who are within the Covenant of Grace on the basis of only a legal relationship.  This postulation may not be correct.)

When one takes the covenant relationship upon himself voluntarily, the two must naturally go together; if they do not, a false relation ensues. 

(aaron-This last conclusion seems to assume regeneration in the life of everyone who voluntarily comes into the covenant.  Since God Himself accomplishes regeneration, much more thought is required here in determining its distribution.  This conclusion, like so many of the Protestant churches today, presumes that every person who is in covenant relationship with God is regenerate.)  

But in the case of those who are born in the covenant the question is more difficult.  Is the one (1) then possible without the other (2)?  Is the covenant in that case (1) a bare legal relationship, in which that which ought to be--but is not--takes the place of (2) the glorious realities for which the covenant stands? 

Is there any reasonable ground to expect that (1) the covenant relation will issue in (2) a living communion; that for the sinner, who is of himself unable to believe, (1) the covenant will actually become (2) a living reality?  In answer to this question it may be said that God undoubtedly desires that (1) the covenant relationship shall issue in (2) a covenant life.  And He Himself guarantees by His promises pertaining to the seed of believers that this will take place, not in the case of every individual, but in the seed of the covenant collectively.  On the basis of the promise of God we may believe that, under a faithful administration of the covenant, (1) the covenant relation will, as a rule, be fully realized (2) in a covenant life.

(aaron-This is the same as the earlier statement.  According to many commentators, there is little or no covenantal efficacy to be found in the visible seed.  There is something more required from them before they can enter into the covenant life: Indicating that there is no covenant life to be found in the legal relationship of the visible covenant.  This is not the case at all.  As we examine the institution of God’s Covenant of Grace in Gen.17:1-27, we fully understand that both the visible side and the invisible side of this covenant was founded only on God’s free and unmerited gift of grace.)  

E. Membership in the Covenant as a Legal Relationship.

In discussing membership in the covenant as (1) a legal relationship, it should be borne in mind that the covenant in this sense is not merely a system of demands and promises, demands that ought to be met, and promises that ought to be realized; but that it also includes a reasonable expectation that (1) the external legal relationship will carry with it (2) the glorious reality of a life in intimate communion with the covenant God.  This is the only way in which the idea of the covenant is fully realized.

(aaron-Many commentators have mistakenly come to this conclusion, that true covenant standing is realized only in the invisible elect: Insisting that the whole covenant peoples of God, are to be found only within the invisible Messianic Covenant line.  But by simply observing God’s first peoples Israel as our visible and invisible example, one should quickly recognize the fallacy of that conclusion. Ref.Gen.17:1-27)  

    1.  Adults in the covenant.  Adults can only enter this covenant voluntarily by faith and confession.  From this it follows that in their case, unless their confession be false, entrance into the covenant as (1) a legal relationship and into the covenant as (2) a communion of life coincide.  They not merely take upon themselves the performance of certain external duties; nor do they merely promise in addition to this, that they will exercise saving faith in the future; but they confess that they accept the covenant with a living faith, and that it is their desire and intention to continue in this faith.  They enter upon the full covenant at once therefore, and this is the only way in which they can enter the covenant.  This truth is implicitly or explicitly denied by all those who connect the confession of faith with a merely external covenant.

(aaron-Again, this interpretation precludes God’s sovereignty in the application of His invisible dispositions.  We cannot necessarily assume that something that comes only from God, is accomplished when we voluntarily submit ourselves to a certain protocol.  This careless assumption is the major reason for much of the confusion within today’s mainline denominations.  That is, many of today’s denominations, because they hold this restricted understanding of salvation, not only deny infant baptism but they deny God’s covenant for the Church as well.  They would mistakenly say that the covenant belongs only to Israel.)

    2.  Children of believers in the covenant.  With respect to the children of believers, who enter the covenant by birth, the situation is, of course, somewhat different. 

Experience teaches that, though by birth they enter the covenant as (1) a legal relationship, this does not necessarily mean that they are also at once in the covenant as (2) a communion of life.  It does not even mean that the covenant relation will ever come to its full realization in their lives.  Yet even in their case there must be a reasonable assurance that the covenant is not or will not remain a mere legal relationship, with external duties and privileges, pointing to that which ought to be, but is also or will in time become a living reality. 

(aaron-This statement reveals this exact problem that we are following.  That these commentators give no appreciable value to the visible initiatory rites, so far as the eternal destiny of a believer is concerned.  They do go on to say that most of these [the seed of believers], because of God’s promises, will eventually come to a saving faith: Implying that there is no real saving faith received through their visible initiatory rites.  There seems to be no real benefit to be found for them in Gal 3:27--“²⁷For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ.”)  

This assurance is based on the promise of God, which is absolutely reliable, that He will work in the hearts of the covenant youth with His saving grace and transform them into living members of the covenant.  The covenant is more than the mere offer of salvation, more even than the offer of salvation plus the promise to believe the gospel.  It also carries with it the assurance, based on the promise of God, who works in the children of the covenant “when, where, and how He pleaseth,” that saving faith will be wrought in their hearts.  As long as the children of the covenant do not reveal the contrary, we shall have to proceed on the assumption that they are in possession of the covenant life.  Naturally, the course of events may prove that this life is not yet present; it may even prove that it is never realized in their lives.  The promises of God are given to the seed of believers collectively, and not individually. 

(aaron-I would inquire into the basis and the authority for this last statement “The promises of God are given to the seed of believers collectively, and not individually”?  This might be acceptable to those whose seed was determined to have made this transition, but not to those whose seed was not determined to be included in this “collective”.)  

God’s promise to continue His covenant and to bring it to full realization in the children of believers, does not mean that He will endow every last one of them with saving faith.  And if some of them continue in unbelief, we shall have to bear in mind what Paul says in Rom. 9:6-8.  They are not all Israel who are of Israel: the children of believers are not all children of promise. 

(aaron-Clearly, Dr. Berkhof is unwittingly defining just the invisible elect here.  This “saving faith” that some of the children have and some do not, seems to be much more than the simple faith that is required by the Scriptures for one to be saved. 

This is much more than “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ” to be saved.  All sorts of different measurements are being used here.  The largest problem continues to be the amalgamation of the visible characteristics and the invisible characteristics of the Covenant of Grace.)

Hence it is necessary to remind even children of the covenant constantly of the necessity of regeneration and conversion.  The mere fact that one is in the covenant does not carry with it the assurance of salvation.  When the children of believers grow up and come to years of discretion, it is, of course, incumbent on them to accept their covenant responsibilities voluntarily by a true confession of faith.  Failure to do this is, strictly speaking, a denial of their covenant relationship. 

(aaron-Sadly, the only covenantal efficacy that most of these commentators see, is within the invisible characteristics of God’s determinations.  It excludes God’s saving grace.)

It may be said therefore that (1) the legal relationship in which the children of believers stand, precedes the covenant as (2) a communion of life and is a means to its realization.  But in emphasizing the significance of the covenant as a means to an end, we should not stress exclusively, nor even primarily, the demands of God and the resulting duty of man, but especially the promise of the effectual operation of the grace of God in the hearts of covenant children.  If we stress the covenant responsibility only or exclusively, and fail to give due prominence to the fact that in the covenant God gives whatever He demands of us, in other words, that His promises cover all His requirements, we are in danger of falling into the snare of Arminianism.

(aaron-Dr. Berkhof now comes back to the real issue in this discussion.  He does not quite say it in so many words, but it is there between the lines.  He recognizes that the whole process is in God’s hands: And that whatever we receive from God, is by grace, grace, wonderful grace.  Yes, everyone’s salvation is by God’s grace alone.  Then this last statement would seem to be a complete capitulation of most of his previous statements.)  

    3. Unregenerate in the covenant.  From the preceding it follows that even unregenerate and unconverted persons may be in the covenant.  Ishmael and Esau were originally in the covenant, the wicked sons of Eli were covenant children, and the great majority of the Jews in the days of Jesus and the apostles belonged to the covenant people and shared in the covenant promises, though they did not follow the faith of their father Abraham.  Hence the question arises, in what sense such persons may be regarded as being in the covenant.  Dr. Kuyper says that they are not essential participants of the covenant, though they are really in it; and Dr. Bavinck says that they are (in the covenant), but not (of the covenant). 

The following may be said regarding their position in the covenant:  

    a.  They are in the covenant as far as their responsibility is concerned.  Because they stand in (1) the legal covenant relationship to God, they are in duty bound to repent and believe.  If they do not turn to God and accept Christ by faith, when they come to years of discretion, they will be judged as breakers of the covenant.  The special relationship in which they are placed to God, therefore, means added responsibility.

(aaron-If their own actions are the determining factor for their position in the covenant, then there is little or no room left for God’s grace.  Then added to that, God never breaks one of His promises.  Additionally, I do not think that they would even be there if they did not “believe”.)

    b.  They are (1) in the covenant in the sense that they may lay claim to the promises which God gave when He established His covenant with believers and their seed.  Paul even says of his wicked kinsmen, “whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises,” Rom.9:4  As a rule God gathers the number of His elect out of those who stand in this covenant relationship. (See p.20)

(aaron-This whole statement is precise in every detail.  It shows God’s nature, and all of the unchanging promises that are contained in His Everlasting Covenant of Grace.  The specifics of Rom.9:4, is the conformation of the continuance of His promises and the election of His first peoples--visible Israel.  Dr. Berkhof then refers to the invisible elect.)   

c.  They are in the covenant in the sense that they are subject to the ministrations of the covenant.  They are constantly admonished and exhorted to live according to the requirements of the covenant.  The Church treats them as covenant children, offers them the seals of the covenant, and exhorts them to a proper use of these.  They are the guests who are first called to the supper, the children of the kingdom, to whom the Word must be preached first of all, Mat.8:12; Lu.14:15-24; Acts.13:46.

(aaron-I would agree with these comments, but these underlined passages would represent the invisible elect and their Lu.21:25-28 experience--their coming out of the great tribulation in their pre-Armageddon resurrection.  Then Mat.8:12 would represent the conditions for the rest of visible Israel/Church as they continue on through the great tribulation period.)  

    d.  They are in the covenant also as far as the common covenant blessings are concerned.  Though they do not experience the regeneration influence of the Holy Spirit, yet they are subject to certain special operations and influences of the Holy Spirit.  The Spirit strives with them in a special manner, convicts them of sin, enlightens them in a measure, and enriches them with the blessings of common grace, Gen.6:3; Mat.13:18-22; Heb.6:4-6.  

    It should be noted that, while the covenant is an eternal and inviolable covenant, which God never nullifies, it is possible for those who are in the covenant to break it.  If one who stands in (1) the legal covenant relationship does not enter upon (2) the covenant life, he is nevertheless regarded as a member of the covenant.  His failure to meet the requirements of the covenant involves guilt and constitutes him a covenant breaker, Jer.31:32; Ezek.44:7.  This explains how there may be, not merely a temporary, but a final breaking of the covenant, though there is no falling away of the saints.

(aaron-As the occasion presents itself, many times we loose sight of grace.  The real hope for all of us here, is in the fact that God never breaks His promises or His covenant.)

  (aaron-I would also like to add these selected comments from John Calvin:)

Calvin’s Commentary on Genesis - Chap.17 - pp.449, 450  vv.7, 8

  “And that this is the case, is proved without difficulty; for the promise by which the Lord had adopted them all as children, was common to all: and in that promise, it cannot be denied, that eternal salvation was offered to all.” 

(aaron-Three times in this comment, John Calvin rightly recognized that Israel’s adoption to eternal salvation was common to them all.  But he also uses this catch word--“offered”.)  

“What, therefore, can be the meaning of Paul, when he denies that certain persons have any right to be reckoned among children, except that he is no longer reasoning about the externally offered grace, but about that of which only the elect effectually partake?”

(aaron-There is no doubt that John Calvin is giving definition to the visible and the invisible dispositions of God.  The visible dispositions of God, would be effectual in those who were positioned to receive “the externally offered grace”.  Then “only the elect effectually partake” of the invisible dispositions of God; The internal work of God’s Holy Spirit.  But it is this amalgamation of the visible and the invisible Scriptural principles that adds to this present confusion.  Which is the same confusion that caused Calvin to ask this question: “What, therefore, can be the meaning of Paul, when he denies that certain persons have any right to be reckoned among children”?)

“Here, then, a twofold class of sons presents itself to us, in the Church; for since the whole body of the people is gathered together into the fold of God, by one and the same voice, all without exception, are, in this respect, accounted children; the name of the Church is applicable in common to them all: but in the innermost sanctuary of God, none other are reckoned the sons of God, than they in whom the promise is ratified by faith.” 

(aaron-Again, within the Church, Calvin defines the dual characteristics that are evident within the dispositions of God.  He says that the whole body must pass through the Church.  But he then goes on to define a very special group who would be eligible to pass into “the innermost sanctuary of God”.  This group would consist of only those in whom “the promise is ratified”.  Which would include only those belonging to the invisible elect priests of God.)

  aaron randall Now for us to move around this present confusion, we must try to determine exactly where the denominations have gone beyond the bounds of sound interpretation. 

Unfortunately,

    1. The Roman Catholic Church has crossed this line in their doctrine of baptismal regeneration. 

REASON: Baptismal regeneration supposes that through their obedience in performing God’s visible initiatory rite of water baptism, each and every individual would simultaneously receive that regeneration.   

First, regeneration must be defined as the special operation that only God uses for selectively choosing those who belong to His invisible priestly line; the invisible Messianic Covenant line; His invisible Covenant of Promise. 

The specific condition of “regeneration”; the born again experience; born of the Spirit; born from above, originates and proceeds only from God and cannot indiscriminately flow from the willful act of man.   

And then under the Covenant of Grace we find that water baptism would validate God’s grace, as it is associated with His universal call for His corporate peoples.   

But the basic confusion that we have here concerns the distinctively different characteristics of God’s grace and of God’s regeneration.  Though “grace” and “regeneration” both come forth from God, they are not of the exact same office.   

So then by saying that grace effects the calling of God, and regeneration effects the election of God would essentially summarize this proposition.  

Second, the Roman Catholic’s error here in baptismal regeneration, is similar to, if not exactly the same as, the error that exists within the Protestant Catholic’s understanding of adult baptism.  These Protestant Catholics also suppose that regeneration always accompanies their willful act of adult water baptism.  Again, the confusion here continues to be the result of the amalgamation of 1-justification, 2-sanctification, and regeneration.  These dispositions of God are not intended to be the same, and the distinctiveness of each must always be considered.  Though justification, sanctification, and regeneration are all God’s graces and are certainly interconnected, yet they must always be seen as functionally independent.

(Hodge’s Systematic Theology vol.ii, p.176

Doctrine of the Church of Rome.

4. The Synod condemns all who teach that newborn children should not be baptized; or, that although baptized for the remission of sins, they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which needs to be expiated in the laver of regeneration in order to attain eternal life, so that baptism, in their case, would not be true but false...

  From this it appears that according to the Council of Trent there is sin in newborn infants, which needs to be remitted and washed away by regeneration.

(aaron-Their sins are absolutely washed away by the visible water baptism of repentance unto the remission of their sins. Lu.1:76-79; Mk.1:4)  

5. The fifth canon asserts that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted, and everything is removed which has the true and proper nature of sin...  It is admitted that concupiscence remains in the baptized, against which believers are to contend...

(aaron-We must be mindful that the first part of this canon is talking about just the soul, and the second part is talking about only the flesh.  But now can we say with any certainty that “through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ conferred in baptism” that our sins are remitted?  The answer to that question would be positively yes! Ref.Gal.3:27; Col.2:12)

 In the sixth session when treating justification (i. e., regeneration and sanctification), the Council decides several points, which go to determine the view its members took of the nature of original sin.  In the canons adopted in that session, it is among other things, declared:

(1) That men cannot, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, by their own works,     i.e., works performed in their own strength, be justified before God.

(aaron-This article would be identical to St. Augustine.

This article also wholly precludes any sort of works doctrine in the Church of Rome.

But then for them to lump justification, sanctification, and regeneration all together is not Scripturally viable, as well as being one of the primary causes for much of the confusion within the whole of today’s Church.  It is extremely important that we understand this stated fact: that each of these important terms has its own specific function and definition within God’s reconciliation.)  

(2) That grace is not given simply to render good works more easy.

(aaron-But it certainly does help.)  

[aaron randall Define 1-JUSTIFICATION; 2-SANCTIFICATION; and also REGENERATION:]

(3) That men cannot believe, hope, love, or repent so as to secure regenerating grace without the preventing grace of God.

(aaron-Here we are given a dual definition for grace: 1-preventing grace.  2-regenerating grace.  One might suggest that preventing grace [or justifying grace] is the initial work of God in the heart of the believer, and would be validated in the fount of water baptism.  [Sanctifying grace helps the believer to grow in their faith.]  And then regenerating grace [or to be born of the Spirit] must be understood as a second work of God’s Spirit, and would be received as the validation of God’s elective process.  This understanding of a “second work of God’s Spirit” is difficult for the Reformed Church to receive.  This is partly due to the Pentecostal’s use and interpretation of this vernacular and its association with their speaking in tongues.  But the intent of the stated principle above is directed more to the conformation process of God’s elective activities.  An example of this fact is found in John chapter three’s description of Nicodemus’ conversation with Jesus.  Nicodemus was very much a part of the corporate peoples of God and a believer, yet he was still not regenerated; not born again; not born of the Spirit; not born from above.  Then in Jn.3:5, Jesus plainly tells Nicodemus that he must be born of (1) water and (2) the Spirit to come unto the kingdom.  But chiefly here, Jesus is introducing and explaining God’s invisible dispositions.  And then Jesus also goes on to explains the evident difficulty that visible Israel has with these invisible heavenly things.)  

    2. The Protestant Catholic Church has also crossed this line, in the very restricted way in which they improperly defined faith. 

REASON: They have mistakenly amalgamated the saving faith of 1-justifying grace with the abiding faith of 2-sanctifying grace.  This confusion has essentially caused them to slip into a form of works doctrine, where some level of performance is required before the individual can be counted as a believer or be certain of their salvation.  Yes, faith is an absolute necessity in the salvation process.  But exactly whose faith are we defining here?  Are we defining the monergistic 1-justifying faith that is wholly a gift from God?  Or are we defining the synergistic 2-sanctifying faith, through which God aids all believers as they grow in His grace?  The confusing difficulties here are self-evident.

    3. The Protestant Catholic Church has also crossed this line again in their failure to properly identify the peoples of God. 

REASON: They, because they have now come to understand the existence of the invisible dispositions of God, have attempted to force the whole of God’s peoples into this very select group.  This is that very select group that represents only the invisible elect priests of God who collectively make up the body of Christ.  The very same body, which is also the Kingdom of God.)      Amen

(Once again, no matter how we stand before God, whether we are in the legal relationship or in the communion of life, our absolute need for His grace is being explained here in very clear terms:)

Romans 3:21-23 “But now apart from the law a righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God through the faith of Jesus Christ unto all them that believe.  For there is no distinction; for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God;”

(aaron-This is that pure grace that we all cherish so much.  Eph.2:8--“for by grace have you been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.”  It is also from the law and the prophets, that this passage confirms the universal character of God’s reconciliation.  It is most clearly explaining God’s wonderful grace.  This universal character is also seen in the fact that both the Jews and the Gentiles find themselves in exactly the same place, having exactly the same needs.  This is evident in the fact that “all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God.”)  

Romans 3:24-26 “being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God has set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood.  To show his righteousness, because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God.  For the showing, I say, of his righteousness at this present time: That he might himself be just, and the justifier of him that has faith in Jesus.”

(aaron-The two main ingredients that are involved in God’s reconciliation, are God’s grace and the redemption that is in the propitiatory work of Christ Jesus. 

God’s righteousness is most clearly expressed in His gracious dealings with the sins of His creation.  That is, excusing all of their sins--past, present, and future.  It is only the blood of Jesus that cleanses us from all sin: Which was the enabling act that allowed for the full distribution of God’s grace.  You need only trust in that propitiation for complete absolution.)

Romans 3:27, 28 “Where then is the glorying? It is excluded. By what manner of law? Of works? No! But by a law of faith.  We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.”

(aaron-Remember, God’s reconciliation mandates the total equality of all peoples when it comes to His justification.  So it matters not whether we are considering the first covenant or the second covenant, because all are saved by His boundless grace because of Christ’s propitiatory work.)  

Romans 3:29, 30 “Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also: If so be that God is one, and he shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith.”

(aaron-These passages give us a summary statement for the universal character of God’s reconciliation.  God is extending His love equally to both the Jews and the Gentiles; the Circumcision and the Uncircumcision.  We must also understand that there is a transitional process in God’s reconciliation, which must be gleaned from these important passages.)

Romans 3:31 “Do we then make the law of no effect through faith? God forbid: No, we establish the law.”

(aaron-The statement that we have here is also clear and to the point.  That GOD’S LAW and GOD’S GRACE are also coexistent within God’s reconciliation.)

              -------------------------------------------------

Romans 4:1, 2 “What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has whereof to glory; but not toward God.”

(aaron-The value of our own works, with respect to God’s covenant of grace, is being evaluated: And we are told, that with respect to individual justification, our own works have absolutely no value whatsoever.  God’s free and unmerited grace must stand-alone.)  

Romans 4:3 “For what do the Scriptures say? And Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.”

(aaron-We find the balance of the answer right here.  The only thing that matters, is the believing faith that Abraham received from God.  We need only take God at His word, to receive all that He has freely offered.)

Romans 4:4, 5 “Now to him that works, the reward is not counted as of grace, but as of debt.  But to him that works not, but believes on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”

(aaron-Every work that one can suppose to do toward this relationship with God, must be, as a matter of conscience, cast off to the side when we consider justification.  Though there may appear to be a measure of works involved in the legal side of the Covenant of Grace, for grace to be grace, we can bring absolutely nothing at all into this relationship.  Again, any and all works that we might suppose to do toward this relationship, only serves to place a needless burden upon each of us:)  

Romans 4:6-8 “Even as David also pronounced blessing upon the man, unto whom God counted righteousness apart from works, saying: Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, And whose sins are covered.  Blessed is the man to whom, the Lord will not reckon sin.” Ref.Ps.32:1, 2a

(aaron-This is the simplest and best definition of God’s Covenant of Grace that one will find in the entire Bible.  This is not suggesting that man does not sin, but that God’s imputation for that sin is being graciously withheld.  Whether you stand in the legal relationship or in the communion of life, your place is secured only by God’s promised grace alone.)  

Romans 4:9 “Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also?  For we say, To Abraham his faith was counted for righteousness.”

(aaron-Our attention is yet again directed toward the universal character of God’s reconciliation.  This question reveals God’s original intention: It was to extend His reconciliation far beyond His first peoples--Israel.)  

Romans 4:10 “How then was it counted?  When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:”

(aaron-Our attention is now shifted back to the state of father Abraham.  We are told that Abraham was yet in uncircumcision when God’s grace was first imputed unto him.  This might be describing the exact time that Abraham’s heart was circumcised.  That time when Abraham was regenerated as the progenitor of the Messianic line.  This clearly reveals, that the universal character of God’s reconciliation was initially included in His Covenant of Grace.)  

Romans 4:11, 12 “And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while he was in uncircumcision.  That he might be the father of all them that believe though they be in uncircumcision, that righteousness might be counted unto them.  And the father of the circumcision to them who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham which he had in uncircumcision.”

(aaron-The discussion is now expanded to incorporate both God’s visible dispositions and God’s invisible dispositions within His program of reconciliation.  [1] Interpreting “the sign of circumcision”, as simply the visible circumcision of the flesh.  The visible initiatory rite for the Covenant of Grace that God established with Abraham and his descendants.   

Which was also the visible representation of [2] the invisible “seal of the righteousness of the faith that he had while he was in uncircumcision”: The invisible circumcision of the heart that Abraham received while he was yet in uncircumcision.  Then this invisible initiatory rite for the Messianic Covenant line; the invisible Covenant of Promise, is to be seen as an addition to the visible initiatory rite.  The invisible initiatory rite is God’s method for selectively choosing His mystical priestly line that was to flow only through the lineage of Isaac.  The complexity here is awesome.  God is attempting, within these few short verses, to give us an overview of His entire program of reconciliation.  That is, even though His Covenant of Grace is founded here in Abraham and then in this tiny nation of Israel, He is showing us that His original intent was to incorporate every nation of the world into this Covenant of Grace as well.  Abraham is defined as the father of all.  The most important thing that we can do here, is for us to maintain some perspective with respect to both God’s visible dispositions and to God’s invisible dispositions.)  

Romans 4:13 “For not through the law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed that he should be heir of the world, but through the righteousness of faith.”

(aaron-What we are told here, is that the whole efficacy of God’s reconciliation is founded on His grace alone.  This benefit is efficacious only because of the “righteousness of faith” that we now have; which is the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ that He exhibited through His propitiatory work on the cross. Ref.Rom.3:22)  

Romans 4:14, 15 “For if they that are of the law are heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is made of no effect.  For the law works wrath; but where there is no law, neither is there any transgression.”

(aaron-This passage is speaking about the qualifications for the invisible Covenant of Promise, and that the visible peoples of Israel were not to be automatically included within this select group.  We must remember that God’s visible dispositions had to be neutralized before His plan could be fully realized.  We must also add that the law was instituted to expose transgressions. Ref.Rom.3:20  “But before faith came to us, we were all kept under the law.” Gal.3:23a)

Romans 4:16, 17 “For this cause it is of faith, that it may be according to grace; to the end that the promise may be sure to all the seed.  Not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all

(as it is written, A father of many nations have I made you) before him whom he believed, even God, who gives life to the dead, and calls the things that are not, as though they were.”

(aaron-We are again reminded of the complete universality in God’s program of reconciliation; the Covenant of Grace.  And that this Covenant of Grace was to be effective not only toward those of visible Israel, but it was to be effective toward all of the other Nations as well.  This universality is also evident from these two analogizes: “that only which is of the law” is analogous to “the dead”, as “that also which is of the faith of Abraham” is analogous to “calls the things that are not, as though they were”.  Showing us once again, the intended universality in God’s reconciliation.)  

Romans 4:18 “Who in hope believed against hope, to the end that he might become a father of many nations, according to that which had been spoken, So shall your seed be.”  

Romans 4:19-22 “And without being weakened in faith he considered his own body now as good as dead (he being about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah’s womb.  Yet, looking unto the promise of God, he wavered not through unbelief, but waxed strong through faith, giving glory to God, and being fully assured that what he had promised, he was able also to perform.  Wherefore also it was counted unto him for righteousness.”

(aaron-Here, we have another clear example of faith.)  

Romans 4:23-25 “Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was counted unto him; but for our sake also, unto whom it shall be counted.  Who believe on him that raised Jesus our Lord from the dead; who was delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our justification.”

(aaron-Even in these last few verses of chapter four, God continues to reveal the universal character of His Covenant of Grace that He made with Abraham so long ago.  And God also reminds us once again that the work was completely finished in the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.  We must also focus on this perceived transition.)

            --------------------------------------------

Chapters five, six, seven, and eight of Romans, gives us more of the details about where we are in God’s reconciliation by explaining precisely how we got there.  That it is only by God’s grace, grace, wonderful grace.  We should especially notice the subtle definitions that are being given to the visible characteristics and the invisible characteristics of God’s dispositions.

(Our access by grace is defined:)

“5Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ; ²through whom also we have had our access by faith into this grace wherein we stand; and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

³And not only so, but we also rejoice in our tribulations: Knowing that tribulation works steadfastness; ⁴and steadfastness, approval; and approval, hope: ⁵And hope puts not to shame; because the love of God has been shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which was given unto us.”

(Then here, we are given the condition that all peoples are in before God’s grace is received:)

^“6For while we were yet weak, in due season Christ died for the ungodly. ⁷For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: Yet peradventure for the good man some one would even dare to die. ⁸But God commends his own love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”                                                    

(God’s grace absolutely flows through Christ’s propitiatory work.)

(We then see the full affect of God’s boundless grace:)

^“9Much more then, being now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from the wrath of God through him.” Ref.1:18

(aaron-It is not a matter here of anything at all that we might contribute of ourselves: Everything necessary has been accomplished by God Himself:)

^“10For if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.  ¹¹And not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ through whom we have now received the reconciliation.”

(Define sin with respect to the law--in the light of God’s grace:)

 ^“12Therefore, as through one man, sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all have sinned:--

¹³for until the law, sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. ¹⁴Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam’s transgression, who is a figure of him that was to come.

¹⁵But not as the trespass, so also is the free gift. For if by the trespass of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound unto the many. 

(aaron-Again, this is talking about God’s free and unmerited grace through Christ’s propitiatory work on the cross.)    

¹⁶And not as through one that sinned, so is the gift: For the judgment came of one unto condemnation, but the free gift came of many trespasses unto justification. ¹⁷For if, by the trespass of the one, death reigned through the one; much more shall they that receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, even Jesus Christ.

¹⁸So then as through one trespass the judgment came unto all men to condemnation; even so through one act of righteousness the free gift came unto all men to justification of life. ¹⁹For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the one shall the many be made righteous.”                    

(aaron-We must not overlook the complete passive role that is assigned to God’s whole creation.  It was only through the direct act of another, that their conditional state as being either sinners or righteous was determined.  The active role here, is assigned just to the first and the second Adam.)