The Aaron Papers www.the-aaron-papers.net
Part
eight
COVENANT
THEOLOGY
Addendum
“D”
COVENANT THEOLOGY HISTORY
aaron-
Because of its importance in our understanding of this present dispensation, this section is repeated here in THE AARON PAPERS for added clarification:
This understanding has broad
ramifications for the elect priests of God from every age.
For the elect priests of God from the Old Testament times (Ref.Ex.19:6)
the souls of whom are then seen under the Heavenly alter (Ref.Rev.6:9, 10).
And then the elect priests of God from the New Testament times
(Ref.1Pe.2:9) who are pictured at various times and in various states up in
Heaven (Ref. Rev.20:4; 7:9-17; 19:1-9; 19:11-14).
What we have come to see here, are some of the complexities that are
involved in the proper identification of the peoples that have been brought into
Covenant with God. The New
Testament Church has generally failed to comprehend the breadth of this Covenant
relationship with God, because it has failed to properly understand the precise
identification of the elect priests of God.
Consequently, as they have defined who is and who is not part of this
select community, there is a strong possibility that they have excluded some
that should have been included. The
case we are building here, is a case for Covenant Theology: That is,
Covenant Theology that is more precisely defined. The best question to ask, is what is our understanding
concerning the state of baptized infants and children who have subsequently
passed on before their profession of faith?
-----------------------------
Dr. James Buswell writes
in his Systematic Theology, vol.ii,
p.256
(4) Baptism a consecrative ordinance.
“We agree that those who have been baptized in
Christian baptism, have ‘put on Christ’ (Gal.3:27).
Baptism is an outward badge or sign which signifies, as the initiatory
rites (Leviticus 12) of the Old Testament signified, that the individual belongs
to and is under the care of God’s covenant people.”
p.261
2. The significance of
Circumcision
“In the Old Testament,
circumcision was the sign of the covenant relationship between God and the godly
family and the godly people who constituted the Church.
For the outsider the rule was, ‘Believe and be circumcised (and accept
the entire complex of initiatory rites) and be numbered among God’s
people.’”
p.262
“Whereas God’s covenant
instituted with the sign of circumcision, had special reference to Israel, yet
it was definitely connected with the promise that Abraham would be ‘the father
of many nations.’ Paul develops
this thought in the epistle to the Romans.
See especially chapter 4. In
the seventeenth chapter of Genesis, although Abraham knew definitely that
Ishmael was not to be in the Messianic line, yet he prayed, ‘Oh, that Ishmael
might live before thee’ (v.18). And
God replied, ‘As for Ishmael, I have heard thee...’ (v.20).
In connection with the doctrine of election discussed above, I have
pointed out that Ishmael, and Esau in the next generation, were both within the
covenant of grace, though not within the covenant of the Messianic line.”
vol.ii, pp.148, 149
1. Election to Specific
Functions (aaron-Election--Two Specific Functions)
“It is a simple fact,
against which our wishes are of no avail, that the writers of the Scriptures use
exactly the same word to indicate election to a specific function and to
designate election to eternal salvation. When
God said of Saul of Tarsus, ‘He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name
before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel; for I will show him
how great things he must suffer for my name’s sake;’ [Acts.9:15, 16].
The word ‘chosen’ is ekloges,
which simply means ‘elect.’ There
can be no doubt that in this context God used the word with reference to a
specific function, which the great Apostle was to perform.
There are several references
to election in the early part of the ninth chapter of the epistle to the Romans,
which seem rather clearly to indicate election to the line of the ancestry of
the Messiah, rather than to eternal salvation as such.
When we read [v.8], ‘the children of the promise are reckoned for the seed,’
the word ‘reckoned’ comes from the same root and has the same general
meaning as the word ‘elect.’ Paul
is referring to the fact that the Messianic line was to be perpetuated in Isaac,
not in Ishmael. But we are
certainly not to understand by this that Ishmael was necessarily among the
reprobate, so far as eternal salvation is concerned.
The Genesis record tells plainly of Abraham’s prayer for Ishmael his
son and of God’s firm promise... ‘As
for Ishmael, I have heard thee. Behold
I have blessed him and will make him fruitful...
But my [Messianic] covenant I will establish with Isaac...’
(Gen.17:18-21). The reference in
Romans 9 to Jacob and Esau is similar. ‘... not yet having been born, not
having done anything good or evil in order that the purpose of God according to
election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls, it was said to her
[Rebecca] that the greater will serve the less’ (Rom.9:11, 12).
In this case the comment
with which Paul concludes the reference to Jacob and Esau coincides with the
view that the ‘election’ here referred to is an election to the Messianic
line, and not an election of an individual to eternal life. Paul says, ‘Just as it is written, “Jacob I have loved
and Esau I have hated” [Mal.1:1-4] (Rom.9:13).
In the Malachi passage from which Paul quotes these words, the prophet is
clearly referring not to the individual Esau, but to the people of Edom who had
been a sinful and rebellious people, though they were, according to the promises
of God, eligible to be considered within God’s covenant with Israel. There
is nothing in the Genesis record to indicate that Esau, when Jacob returned to
his home land, was other than a sincere worshiper of Jahweh.
The fact that he and Jacob together performed the burial rites for their
father [Gen.35:29] would seem to indicate that he was personally ‘numbered
among the holy people of God.’
The fact that God selects
individuals for the particular work to which He calls them is indisputable.
Compare the selection of Bezaleel and Aholiab [Ex.31:1-11; 35:30-35], and
the selection of Paul and Barnabas for missionary activities [Acts.13:1-3]. The point presently under discussion is the fact that the
common word for ‘election’ is used for such vocational appointments.
That the ‘remnant’ of
Israel to which Paul refers in Romans 11:5,7 are the subjects of ‘the election
of grace,’ would seem to be an instance of election to salvation and at the
same time election to the special function of serving as a witness to God’s
grace.”
(aaron- This is an extremely interesting statement: That Ishmael
was part of the covenant of grace, yet Ishmael was to be excluded from the
covenant of the Messianic line. What
does Dr. Buswell mean by this? It
would appear that he has a eye toward the covenant of grace as inclusive of all
those who have become a part of the covenant family: And then at the same time,
a sharper focus is used when determining those who would be included in the
Messianic line. This is the exact
principle that is being presented here for consideration: That this priestly
line that God has so meticulously elected throughout the generations, is not
intended to fully represent the total number of God’s peoples; all those whom
He has called.)
p.262
“Circumcision then in the
Old Testament was a sign of membership in a godly family and in a godly people.
Certainly not every child who was circumcised was regenerated.
Not everyone put his faith in God when he attained the age of
discretion. Paul explains,
‘They are not all Israel who are of Israel’ (Rom.9:6; cf. 2:27-29).”
(aaron- If we believe in these applications that are being
performed upon these helpless infants, then belief cannot be a prerequisite at
all.)
“To summarize the argument
from the analogy of circumcision, in the first place we have one God.
The God of the New Testament is the God of the Old Testament (cf.
Rom.3:29). Moreover, we have one
race of fallen sinners; we have one covenant of grace; and we have one
relationship of parents and children within the covenant of grace.
God in the Old Testament, explicitly commanded that there should be
initiatory rites performed upon the children of godly parents, indicating their
membership in His covenant. The
same God through His apostle Paul, in the New Testament, explicitly draws the
analogy between baptism and the chief initiatory rite of the Old
Testament.(Col.2:11, 12) It follows by inexorable implication from the data of the
Scripture that baptism is to be applied to those to whom the initiatory rites
were applied in the Old Testament.”
pp.265, 266
“The most important
consideration connected with the discussion of infant baptism is that God
establishes a covenant with a Christian family, as He has established a covenant
with His Church. No one could be
stronger in emphasizing the ‘covenant theology’ in general, and the family
covenant in particular, than the great Baptist preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon
(1834-1892). Spurgeon was a strong
Calvinist, and his difference from the Presbyterians was chiefly in the fact
that he did not see that infant baptism is the sign of the family covenant, on
the analogy of the initiatory rites of the Old Testament.
God promised to Abraham
emphatically and repeatedly that He should be the God of Abraham’s children. Paul
clearly teaches that the children of Christian parents, if even one parent is a
Christian, are in a holy relationship (1Cor.7:14). On the analogy of the Old Testament initiatory rites, analogy
clearly taught by the New Testament Scriptures, the Reformed theology holds that
infant baptism is the sign and mark of this family covenant, the sign not only
of the vows of the parents, but the sign of the obligation and responsibility of
the Church toward the children under its care.”
------------------------
Louis Berkhof writes in his Manual of Christian Doctrine:
p.157
A. The Contracting Parties in
the Covenant of Grace.
“God is the first party in
the covenant of grace, the party that takes the initiative and graciously
determines the relation in which the second party will stand to Him...
There must be some limitation, and therefore some hold that God made the
covenant with Abraham and his seed, that is,
his natural but especially his spiritual descendants; or,
slightly different, with believers and their seed.”
pp.159, 160
2. The Covenant as a Means to
an End, a Purely Legal Relationship Indicative of the Spiritual End that Should
Be Realized.
“It is quite evident that
the Bible also speaks of the covenant in a broader sense, as including
many who do not share in the life of the covenant, and even some in whom the
covenant promises are never realized. Ishmael
and Esau were in the covenant; so were the wicked sons of Eli.
The rebellious Israelites, who died in their sins, were covenant people,
and even the Scribes and Pharisees, so strongly denounced by Jesus, shared in
the privileges of the covenant. The
covenant may be regarded as a purely legal agreement, in which God guarantees
the blessings of salvation to all those who believe.
This agreement may exist as a purely objective arrangement even where
nothing is done to realize its purpose. The
relation which it represents may exist independently of the attitude assumed by
man to his covenant obligations. That
is, a man may not meet the covenant requirements, may (appear) not (to) believe
in the Lord Jesus Christ, and yet stand in covenant relationship to God.
If we conceive of the covenant in this broader sense, as a purely
legal relationship, as a means by which God realizes the blessings of salvation
in the lives of those who meet the covenant requirements, --then we shall have
to say that God established the covenant with believers and their children.”
(aaron-Professor Berkhof, by defining the visible Covenant of
Grace in a broader sense, would be in complete agreement with Ed’s
footnotes in Calvin’s Commentary on Romans: “The children of
Israel were denominated holy in all their wickedness and disobedience, because
they had been consecrated to God, adopted as his people, and set apart for his
service, and they enjoyed all the external privileges of the covenant which God
had made with their fathers.”)
B. The Promises and
Requirements of the Covenant of Grace.
“Every covenant has two
sides: it offers certain privileges and imposes certain obligations.
There are in it promises and requirements.
1. The Promises of the Covenant. The
main promise of the covenant, which includes all other promises, is contained in
the oft-repeated words, ‘I will be a God unto thee and to thy seed after
thee.’ This promise in its full
or in an abbreviated form is found in several Old and New Testament passages,..
The promise is fully realized when at last the new Jerusalem descends out
of heaven from God, and the tabernacle of God is pitched among men, Rev.21:3.”
(aaron-This is a huge jump in time. There is here, a specific process that the elect must go
through. Looking forward from this
present time, the salvation of His elect priestly line is completed only when
Jesus comes in the clouds to receive His kingdom to Himself.
Ref.1Cor.15:23, 24)
p.161
2. The Requirements of the
Covenant...
“There are especially two
things which God demands of those who stand in covenant relationship to Him.
He requires of them, (a) that they accept the covenant and covenant
promises by faith, and thus enter upon the life of the covenant; and (b) that,
from the principle of the new life born within them, they consecrate themselves
to God in a new obedience.”
(aaron-Exactly what is in man to accomplish these things?
This happens only when God is working within him--causing him to do His
will. Phil.2:13)
pp.162, 163
C. The Characteristics of the
Covenant...
4. It Is a Particular and not
a Universal Covenant.
“This means that the
essence of the covenant, the relation of friendship with God and of life in
communion with Him, will be realized only in the elect, and that even the
external covenant relationship does not extend to all men, but only to believers
and their seed.”
(aaron-Dr. Berkhof, like so many of us, was drawn toward viewing
this covenant relationship with God from the perspective of just the invisible
elect. This is seen in his
statement “will be realized only in the elect”.
But then we see that Dr. Berkhof also recognized the Covenant in its
broader context, when he observes that the external or visible covenant also
extends “to believers and their seed”.
p.164
7. The Covenant Can Be Called
a Testament.
“The covenant is, of
course, two-sided, that is, it is an agreement between two parties.
An absolutely one-sided covenant is a contradiction in terms.
Yet there is a sense in which the covenant of grace can be called
one-sided. In origin the covenant
is simply of the nature of a divine disposition or arrangement by which God
communicates His blessings to man. Moreover,
in the covenant God freely gives all that He demands.
And because the covenant is a free and sovereign disposition on the part
of God, it can also be called a testament, Heb.9:16, 17.
This name stresses the facts, (a) that the covenant is as a whole a gift
of God; (b) that its New Testament dispensation was ushered in by the death of
Christ; (c) that it is firm and inviolable; and (d) that in it God gives what He
demands.”
p.165
Membership in the Covenant. “In
speaking of membership in the covenant the distinction between the covenant as a
purely legal agreement and the covenant as a communion of life should always be
borne in mind.”
pp.165-167
2. Children of Believers in the Covenant. “Children of believers enter the covenant as a legal
relationship by birth, but this does not necessarily mean that they are also at
once in the covenant as a communion of life.
It does not even mean that the covenant relation will ever come to its
full realization in their lives. At
the same time there is in the case of these children a reasonable assurance that
the covenant will in them become a living reality in their experience.
This is based on the promise of God, which is absolutely reliable, that
He will work in the hearts of the covenant seed with His saving grace and
transform them into living members of the covenant.
As long as they do not manifest the contrary, we shall have to proceed on
the assumption that they are in possession of the covenant life.
And when these children come to years of discretion, it is 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-What specific Scripture mandates this deferred confession?)
3. Unregenerate in the Covenant. “From
the preceding it follows that even unregenerate and unconverted persons may be
in the covenant as a legal agreement. They may claim the covenant promises, which God gave when He
established the covenant with believers and their seed, Rom.9:4.
They are subject to the ministrations of the covenant, and are constantly
admonished and exhorted to live according to its requirements.
The Church treats them as covenant children, offers them the seals of the
covenant (The Lord’s supper and baptism) and exhorts them to a proper use of
these. They also share in the common blessings of the covenant, and
are even subject to certain special operations 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 choicest blessings of
common grace, Gen.6:3; Matt.13:18-22; Heb.6:4, 5.
Finally, they are also under covenant responsibility, and are in duty
bound to repent and believe. (aaron-When?)
If they do not turn to God and accept Christ by faith, they will be
judged as breakers of the covenant.” (aaron-When, how, and by whom is this
determined?)
pp.206-208
1.The Spiritual Kingship of
Christ.
b. The Realm Over Which it Extends...
“This kingdom is first of all the kingship of God in Christ
established and acknowledged in the hearts of man by the work of regeneration.
In the second place it is also the realm over which the rule of
God in Christ extends, a realm created by the Spirit of God and composed
exclusively of those who share in the life of the Spirit...
The citizenship of the kingdom is co-extensive with the membership of the
invisible Church.”
(aaron-This last statement is a prime example of the problem that
the Reformed Church is now struggling with.
Each and every aspect that is mentioned here [“regeneration”, “life
of the Spirit”, and “membership in the invisible Church”], is referring
only to the invisible priestly line; the invisible Messianic Covenant line.
Now every serious Christian would like to be a part of the invisible
priestly line and a part of the invisible Messianic Covenant.
But by looking at the visible Church through the history of visible
Israel, it would appear that that would be highly unlikely.
Though, from these comments from Professor Berkhof, it would seem that
every person within the Church must enter into God’s high priestly line. By this course of action, we would end up with just the
invisible Church as the legitimate Church.
Even though Professor Berkhof recognized the broader element of the
Covenant of Grace, it is also clear by his comments that he was greatly
influenced by the Reformed dogma. Like
so many other commentaries in the Reformed Church, the broad concept of the
Covenant of Grace [the visible character of the Covenant of Grace as a part of
God’s elective sovereignty] is completely overshadowed by the narrow concept
of the Covenant of Grace [the invisible character of the Covenant of Grace and
the invisible characteristics of God’s elective sovereignty].)
----------------------------------------
Calvin’s Commentary - Romans - pp.426, 427
footnote 2 ‘That the holiness here mentioned is external and relative,
and not personal and inward, is evident from the whole context.
The children of Israel were denominated holy in all their wickedness and
disobedience, because they had been consecrated to God, adopted as his people,
and set apart for his service, and they enjoyed all the external privileges of
the covenant which God had made with their fathers.
Pareus makes a
distinction between what passes from progenitors to their offspring and what
does not pass. In the present case
the rights and privileges of the covenant were transmitted, but not faith and
inward holiness. “Often,”
he says, “the worst descend from the best, and the best from the worst; from
wicked Ahaz sprang good Hezekiah, from Hezekiah descended impious Manasse, from
Manasse again came good Josiah, and from Josiah sprang wicked sons, Shallum and
Jehoiakim.” But all were alike
holy in the sense intended here by the Apostle, as they were circumcised, and
inherited the transmissible rights and privileges of the covenant.
“The holiness,” says
Turrettin, “of the first-fruit and of the root was no other than an external,
federal, and national consecration, such as could be transferred from parents to
their children.”
“The attentive reader,” says Scott, “will readily perceive that relative holiness, of consecration to God, is here exclusively meant. . . Abraham was as it were the root of the visible Church. Ishmael was broken off, and the tree grew up in Isaac; and when Esau was broken off, it grew up in Jacob and his sons. . . . When the nation rejected the Messiah, their relation to Abraham and to God was as it were suspended. They no longer retained even the outward seal of the covenant; for circumcision lost its validity and baptism became the sign of regeneration: they were thenceforth deprived of the ordinances of God.” --Ed.’
(aaron
Then to come to this conclusion "They no longer retained even the outward seal of the covenant; for circumcision lost its validity and baptism became the sign of regeneration: they were thenceforth deprived of the ordinances of God." shows a lack of understanding in the full meaning of God's initiatory symbols. First, circumcision is still the valid initiatory rite for visible Israel. Second, the circumcised heart is still the invisible sign of regeneration. Without a proper understanding of these complex terms-Israel, Circumcision, Jew, Elect, Baptism, it is impossible for one to arrive at any correct theological conclusions.)
-----------------------------
Old Testament instructions for separation--the vow of a Nazarite:
Numbers 6:1-8
“1And Jehovah spoke
unto Moses, saying, 2Speak
unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shall
make a special vow, the vow of a Nazarite, to separate himself unto Jehovah, 3he
shall separate himself from wine and strong drink; he shall drink no vinegar of
wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any juice of grapes,
nor eat fresh grapes or dried. 4All
the days of his separation shall he eat nothing that is made of the grape-vine,
from the kernels even to the husk. 5All
the days of his vow of separation there shall no razor come upon his head: until
the days be fulfilled, in which he separates himself unto Jehovah, he shall be
holy; he shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow long. 6All
the days that he separates himself unto Jehovah he shall not come near to a dead
body. 7He shall not make
himself unclean for his father, or for his mother, for his brother, or for his
sister, when they die; because his separation unto God is upon his head. 8All
the days of his separation he is holy unto Jehovah.”
New Testament instructions for separation:
2 Cor 6:14-18
“14Be not unequally
yoked with unbelievers: for what fellowship has righteousness and iniquity? or
what communion has light with darkness? 15And
what concord has Christ with Belial? or what portion has a believer with an
unbeliever? 16And what
agreement has a temple of God with idols? for we are a temple of the living God;
even as God said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their
God, and they shall be my people. 17Wherefore
Come out from among them, and be separate, says the Lord, And touch no unclean
thing; And I will receive you, 18And
will be to you a Father, And you shall be to me sons and daughters, says the
Lord Almighty.”
The specified diversity within God’s peoples:
1 Cor 12:27-31
“27Now you are the
body of Christ, and severally members thereof. 28And God has set some in the Church, first apostles,
secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings,
helps, governments, divers kinds of
tongues. 29Are all
apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? 30have
all gifts of healings? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? 31But
desire earnestly the greater gifts. And moreover a most excellent way show I
unto you.”
(aaron-The diversity within God’s peoples must be recognized
from the original structure of the nation of Israel itself; That is, the priests
of Israel were not taken from every tribe, but only from one--the tribe of Levi.
All of God’s peoples did not hold the same office, nor carry the same
identification, nor receive the same tasks to perform.
------------------------
Charles Hodge’s Systematic Theology
vol. iii.
p.582.
“The doctrine of the
Reformed Church, therefore, on the efficacy of baptism includes in the first
place the rejection or denial of certain false doctrines on the subject.
(1.) That baptism conveys
grace ‘ex opere operato’ in the sense which Romanists attach to those words,
by any objective supernatural power belonging to the ordinance itself; or in
virtue of the divine efficiency inherent in the word of promise of God connected
with the sacrament.
(2.) That the cooperation of
the Spirit, to which the efficacy of the ordinance is due, always attends its
administration, so that remission of sins and the renewing of the Holy Ghost.
(3.) That conveying, in the
first instance, the merits of Christ’s death and the saving influences of the
Spirit, so that those benefits may not, except in extraordinary cases, be
obtained before or without baptism.
In the second place the
Reformed doctrine on this subject affirms,
(1.) That baptism is a divine
ordinance.
(aaron-yes, its benefits are completely under the sovereign
control of God Himself: conveyed through His initiatory rites that were first established with
Abraham through circumcision.)
(2.) That it is a means of
grace to believers.
(aaron-Its efficacy is contingent only upon the sovereignty of
God’s promise. If we view baptism
as the New Testament counterpart for the Old Testament initiatory rite of
circumcision, then it would positively be the initial means of God’s grace
within the confines of the covenant family structure.)
(3.) That it is a sign and
seal of the covenant of grace.”
(aaron-This is one of the more important statements here.
It would appear that we tend to loose sight of the Covenant of Grace, as
we expound our theory on the process of salvation.
This has resulted from combining the visible and the invisible together,
which has created more than a considerable amount of confusion within today’s Church.
Both the visible and the invisible characteristics are included in the Covenant of Grace, but they are
of distinctively different offices.)
“(4.) That the ordinance
was intended to be of perpetual obligation, in the sense that all, not baptized
in infancy, are required to submit to baptism as the divinely appointed way of
publicly professing their faith in Christ and their allegiance to Him as their
God and Savior; and that all such professors of the true religion are bound to
present their children for baptism as the divinely appointed way of consecrating
them to God.”
(aaron-This is an excellent covenant statement.
It specifically points to baptism as God’s established visible means
for accessing His supernatural realm. It
speaks of adult baptism as their public profession of faith, and then their
responsibility to present their infant children for baptism as well.
But then it seems to be written in a particular way, that would placate
those who promote the adult baptism doctrine.
This statement, by its irresolute stand on the principle of infant
baptism as the means of God’s grace, opens wide the door for the adult baptism
proponents.)
“(5.) That God, on his
part, promises to grant the benefits signified in baptism to all adults who
receive that sacrament in the exercise of faith, and to all infants who, when
they arrive at maturity, remain faithful to the vows made in their name when
they were baptized.”
(aaron-This statement is a prime example of combining the visible
and the invisible dispositions of God’s covenant together. What must be determined here, is the exact efficacy of
visible water baptism upon its recipient. Now
to understand this efficacy of water baptism, we must understand God’s
covenant with Abraham. When God
told Abraham to circumcise all the male infants of his household when they
became eight-days-old, what was the real efficacy of that obedience?
Its efficacy was to be in relationship with God as an individual and as a
family--a part of His holy peoples. So
if we make the statement that the visible symbols of God’s covenant have no
real value, we would be effectively saying that God’s visible covenant is essentially
worthless. One of our primary
problems is right here: Whenever we bring any form of personal works into the
basic plan of salvation, the simplicity of the Covenant of Grace becomes obscure
and completely unrecognizable. These
are the consequences of combining the principles of the visible baptism of
grace; which includes all of God’s holy peoples, with the principles of the
invisible baptism of regeneration; which only includes God’s royal priestly
line; the Messianic Covenant line.)
------------------------
pp.583, 584
“The Reformation was in
its essential character a protest against ritualism.
It proclaimed salvation by a
living faith which purified the heart, in opposition to the doctrine of
salvation by rites and ceremonies.”
(aaron-This statement is interesting, because it basically
presents the problem of combining both the visible and the invisible attributes
of God’s Covenant of Grace. First,
the “living faith which purified the heart” would be representative of the
regenerative process; Or, the born again experience. This is the process that we would associate with God’s
election of His invisible Messianic line. Second,
“the doctrine of salvation by rites and ceremonies” would be representative
of God’s visible initiatory rites [visible circumcision and visible baptism]
that are required for any institutional participation in His covenant family.
Though the visible circumcision and the visible baptism of these infants
may seem ritualistic, this obedience to God’s covenant command has great
reward. Ref.Gen.17:14)
“It insisted that religion was a matter of the heart, and therefore
denounced as apostasy the Church returning to ‘weak and beggarly elements’,
to observing ‘days, and months, and times, and years,’ subjecting the people
to ‘ordinances, touch not; taste not; handle not; which are all to perish with
the using; after the commandments and doctrines of men’. Ritualism is a broad, smooth, and easy road to heaven, and is
always crowded.”
(aaron-The real struggle for us here, is maintaining a proper perspective
between grace and works-BETWEEN JUSTIFICATION and SANCTIFICATION: That is, the knowledge that works must always follow
grace. Grace must always stand alone.)
(aaron-Our resistance to these visible covenant rites is quite
understandable. How can we access
something so grand in such a simple way? You
should have to do something! Repent!
Believe! But if we properly
understand God’s sovereign grace, then we understand that everything that we
might think to contribute must fall by the wayside.
The very young age mandated by God for these initiatory rites into His
covenant, clearly reflects their participatory inability and His absolute sovereignty in
this matter of salvation.)
(aaron-Here again in this next segment, the problem of
distinguishing between the visible and the invisible once more comes to the
front. Because of our amalgamation
of the visible and the invisible dispositions of God, we have resolved that God
has a very restricted covenant. So
to say that God’s covenant consists only of the invisible elect, may not be
completely accurate. Have we now
concluded that all of God’s peoples are to be a part of His invisible priestly
line? If this is our understanding,
then what value can we attribute to the visible covenant signs of circumcision
and baptism? The Baptist insistence
on recognizing only adult baptism, is a prime example of this covenant problem.)
“It was much easier in Paul’s time to be a Jew outwardly than to be
one inwardly; and circumcision of the flesh was a slight matter when compared to
the circumcision of the heart. A
theory which allows a man to be religious, without renouncing the world, will
never fail to find numerous supporters.”
(aaron-This is also an absolute truism for the whole Church today.
Even today it is much easier to be a Christian outwardly than to be one
inwardly. Having lost sight of our natural propensities, we may have
mistakenly identified these outward Christians as not being Christians at all.
Because Paul presents this visible Jew as only a Jew outwardly and not a
Jew inwardly, he did not mean for us to understand that this outward Jew was not
a Jew. We seem to have come to the conclusion that this outward
condition, Jew or Christian, has absolutely no value whatsoever within God’s covenant:
Another conclusion that may not be exactly right.
The visible is as intricate a part of God’s covenant as is the
invisible. This is true, because
both the visible and the invisible together constitute God’s Covenant of Grace.
This necessary understanding might be
most evident in the make-up of our visible example--the nations of Israel
[1Cor.10:1-11]. Similarly, these many
evident difficulties that they experienced as God’s first peoples, should give us
some added insight into the problems that we might expect to encounter in our own
relationship with this awesome God. That
is, we see that they, like so many of us, generally end up doing what comes
natural. All of these things are
confirmed in this next statement.)
“That there is such a
theory; that it has prevailed extensively and influentially in the Church; and
that it is prevalent over a large part of Christendom, cannot be disputed.
It does not follow, however, that all who are called ritualists, or who
in fact attribute undue importance to external rites, are mere formalists.
Many of them are, no doubt, not only sincere, but spiritual Christian
men...
As the corruption of the
Church of Rome consisted largely in making Christianity to consist in the
punctual attendance on Church rites; in teaching that the merits of Christ and
the renewing of the Holy Ghost were conveyed in baptism even to unbelievers
(i.e., to those destitute of saving faith); that when those blessings had been
forfeited by sin, they could be restored by confession and absolution;”
(aaron-If we lack this complete understanding of the visible dispositions
and the invisible dispositions being coexistent within the Covenant of Grace, then we
will not understand these simple principles.
That is, considering the Church rites as the sacraments [baptism and the
Lord’s supper] just as they were given to us by our Lord.
Then to know that just to believe in God requires a work within us by
the Holy Ghost. To understand that
if one did not believe, then neither would they put themselves or their children forward to be
baptized. And if sin were to cause
any of us to forfeit our blessings, we would all be destitute indeed.
Finally, there is no other way to be loosed from the bonds of sin, than
by confession and absolution. There
are many things done in the Roman Church that one must look upon as error, but
the greater error may be ours because of our deficiency of the Spiritual fruit.)
“that the Eucharist is a
true propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead; and that, in short, the
religion of Christ is purely ritualistic, its benefits being conferred through
external rites, and in no other way, so that those rites were indispensably
necessary to salvation; it would have been natural had the Reformers gone to the
opposite extreme, and unduly depreciated the importance of the sacraments which
Christ himself had appointed. From
this extreme, however, they were mercifully preserved...”
(aaron-Gen.17:1-14 is God’s instructions to Abraham concerning
the visible rites [visible circumcision] for membership in the Covenant of Grace.
And the failure to conform to these instructions [to circumcise every
eight-day-old male child] would result in the forfeiture of his birthright and
of the Covenant. These same covenant rites, with the same time requirements,
probably should be observed in the Church through the initiatory rites of visible
baptism.)
-------------------
(aaron-Now if the error that we are confronted with does not
absolutely destine that soul to Hell, practically
speaking, what
is that error to us anyway? So if
we ourselves look into a mirror, we may discover that their error is only a very small
splinter.)
--------------------
(aaron-Part of this problem can be traced back to the Puritans,
where all distinction between the visible and the invisible became completely
blurred. It would appear that their
self-determined piety brought them to conclude that just the invisible elect was
to be included within the Covenant Church.
“In America, Puritan moralism and its sense of an elect people in
covenant with God deeply affected the national character.”
And we can surely see, that this same problem is also prevalent
throughout the whole of today’s Church.)
---------------------
p.585
“As our Lord intended not only
to save men by the renewing of the Holy Ghost, and thus to bring them into
membership in his mystical body, but also to constitute a visible Church to
consist of all those who confessed Him to be their God and Savior, He appointed
an outward visible sign by which they should be known and enrolled among his
people.”
(aaron-Professor Hodge recognizes this “mystical body” as
factually the invisible Church. He
then goes on to identify the visible Church as well. He describes them this way.
First, “a visible Church to consist of all those who confessed Him to
be their God and Savior.” Now
there would be serious doubt that we would find many within the visible Church
who would not make that simple confession.
Then second, “He appointed an outward visible sign by which they should
be known and enrolled among his people.”
Here, Professor Hodge is surely describing visible baptism as this mark
of membership. The question that
must be answered here, is exactly what is the whole efficacy of this visible
baptism and visible Church membership?)
“This was in accordance with the example set in the Old Testament.
When God determined to organize Abraham and his descendants into a
visible Church, to be the depository of the truth and the treasure-house of his
gifts, he appointed circumcision to be the sign of the covenant and also is
according to the common usage in human society...”
(aaron-Here, Professor Hodge makes the Old Testament connection
for the initiatory rites to the Covenant of Grace. We must also understand that this “mystical body” existed
there in the Old Testament time as well.)
“Circumcision did not make a man a Jew.
It gave him neither the knowledge nor the grace necessary to his being
one of the true children of Israel.”
(aaron-Yes, circumcision did make a man a Jew; a visible Jew!
This initiation into the peoples of God was not without great reward
[Ref.Rom.9:1-5].
The knowledge is the same now as then: It comes only through a great deal
of instruction and study. This next
segment makes the same statement of fact:)
“(1) It was the appointed means of avowing that he was a Jew, (2) it was
the sign of his being included among the worshippers of the true God; and (3) it
secured for him the privileges of the theocracy.”
“In like manner, baptism does not make a man a Christian.”
(aaron-Yes it does! For
better or for worse, whether he likes it or not, he has become a visible
Christian through this visible initiatory rite.)
“(1) It is the appointed means of avowing that he is a Christian; (2) it
is the badge of his Christian profession before men, (3) it secures for him the
privileges of membership in the visible Church, and (4) it is a pledge on the
part of God that, if sincere and faithful, he shall partake of all the
benefits of the redemption of Christ.”
(aaron-Recognizing the continuance of the Covenant of Grace, we
see that Professor Hodge has set down some similar principles for this New
Testament dispensation. But
remember this: It is only God who is working within man that facilitates the
doing of His will.)
“It is only in this sense that the Reformed Church teaches the necessity
of baptism. It has the necessity of
a divine precept. It is the
condition of salvation, in the same sense in which confession is, and in which
circumcision was.”
(aaron-You can clearly see the divergence of subject in this last
statement. Where circumcision and
baptism are the God established initiatory rites for the Covenant of Grace:
These rites that were to be performed upon the infant offspring of God’s
people, confession is to be associated only with the Covenant initiation of
adults. But if we are saying that
the circumcised/baptized children must, in their later years, make a profession
of faith for salvation, then infant circumcision/baptism would have no efficacy
whatsoever.
With the required
self-examination that the Lord has established before anyone’s participation
at His table, an initial confession here, such as The Apostle’s Creed, would
not be unthinkable or unbeneficial.
This would assure those who are responsible for the participants, that these
participants had some knowledge of what they were embarking upon and their own personal
responsibility in the matter. But
we must repeat this fact: That this deferred confession for previously baptized
infants would have absolutely
nothing to do with their personal salvation.
And this may be a contributing factor to our baptismal confusion within
the whole of today's Church.
Four things must be kept in
view: First, the visible circumcision/baptism of adults as God’s initiatory
rites for His Covenant of Grace. Then
second, infant circumcision/baptism as God’s continuous initiatory rites for
the families within His Covenant of Grace.
Third,
the invisible circumcision/baptism as God’s supernatural initiatory rites for His Messianic
Covenant. That is, His invisible
priestly line. Finally, a personal
confession and self examination before any participation at our Lord’s table.)
“The uncircumcised child was cut off from among the people.
He forfeited his birthright. But
he did not forfeit his salvation. The
Apostle teaches us that if an uncircumcised man kept the law, his uncircumcision
was counted for circumcision. To
this the Jews objected by asking, What profit then is there in circumcision?
Paul answered, Much every way. It is not useless, because not essential. The same is true of baptism.
Although not the means of salvation or necessary to its attainment, its
benefits are great and manifold.”
(aaron-Paul, in these passages from Romans chapter two, is
explaining more the openness of God’s Covenant of Grace than the particulars
concerning the visible/invisible dispositions of circumcision /baptism.
His point was, that even the Nations were to be included in this
Covenant. As to who is, or is not,
a Jew or the Circumcision, is not the real question here.
What if we were to decide that they are both to be identified as a Jew or
as the circumcision. What we are actually receiving here, are insight into God’s two
dispositions. That is, His visible
dispositions and His invisible dispositions.
The inadequacies in understanding these coexistent visible and invisible
identifications, have also resulted in a great deal of theological confusion.)
-----------------------
p.587
Professor Hodge writes: “And in Hebrews the Mosaic economy, with its
temples, sacrifices, priesthood, and ritual, is declared to be the unsubstantial
shadow, of which the gospel dispensation is the substance...”
(aaron-First, we must understand that the establishment of all of
these rituals that are mentioned here, were intended to be a shadow of only the
Heavenly things (Heb.8:5). Secondly,
it is more important here that we understand the exact reason behind the
establishment of this tiny nation of Israel.
So looking to the New Testament, and these passages from 1Cor.10:1-11, we are
given the special reason for their existence.
Then the summary of this simple explanation is specifically found in
verse eleven: [Paraphrase] Now all
these things [All the historic events that happened during Israel’s
relationship with God.] happened unto them [Unto the Nation of Israel.] for
examples [Every recorded event that happened to the nation of Israel, happened
to them as life experience examples that were entirely staged for our benefit.]
and they are written [These events were recorded in the Bible.] for our
admonition [For the admonition of every member of God’s family.], upon whom
the ends of the world are come [This last portion tells us that this is the
final dispensation of God’s reconciliation.].)
“Membership
in the visible Church is not only a great honour, it is a great advantage.
To the Church are committed the oracles of God.
It is the depository of that truth which is able to make men wise unto
salvation. It is the divinely
appointed instrumentality for preserving and communicating that truth.
Every one admits that it is a blessing to be born in a Christian,
instead of in a heathen land. It
is no less obviously true that it is a blessing to be within the pale of the
Church and not cast out into the world. It
is good to have the vows of God upon us.
It is good to be under the watch and care of the people of God...”
p.590
Professor Hodge takes a step back and makes this summary statement:
“It does not follow from
this that the benefits of redemption may not be conferred on infants at the time
of their baptism. That is in the
hands of God. What is to hinder the
imputation to them of the righteousness of Christ, of their receiving the
renewing of the Holy Ghost, so that their whole nature may be developed in a
state of reconciliation with God? Doubtless
this often occurs; but whether it does or not, their baptism stands good; it
assures them of salvation if they do not renounce their baptismal covenant.”
(aaron-This is generally a good summary statement.
Yet, here again, we can notice that this difficulty in reaching an
absolute understanding concerning the efficacy of baptism, is the result of
combining the visible and the invisible dispositions of God.
Remember, we cannot view the full expanse of God’s peoples who are
included within His Covenant of Grace, by looking through the narrow parameters that
God has established for His royal priestly line; That is, His invisible
Messianic Covenant line. God’s
Covenant of Grace must include both His visible dispositions and His invisible
dispositions together.)
Amen.