Looking to the parent-child relationship is a misdirected attempt to understand covenantal membership. Redirecting our attention to federal headship brings clarity and scriptural precision to the issue. We blame Adam, not our parents, for the curse. The Israelites looked to Abraham, not their parents, for a claim to Canaan and its blessings, and to the conduct of the king, not their parents, for tenure in the land. So also, children must look to Christ, not their parents, for a claim to his covenant. Consequently, there has never been a covenant wherein “believers and their children” constituted the paradigm for covenant membership. The promise (salvation in general, and the indwelling of the Spirit in particular) is proffered to them, just as it is to the whole world (Acts 2:16-41). We are born under Adam’s federal headship, and no one escapes the domain of darkness until God transfers them “to the kingdom of the beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Colossians 1:12-14).I highly recommend his article as one of the best brief summaries that I have read of how Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology underpins Credobaptism. In addition, I would also recommend his excellent paper written jointly with Micah Renihan entitled Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology and Biblical Theology.
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
"The Case for Credobaptism" by Samuel Renihan
A Place for Truth, a blog of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, Samuel Renihan has written a very helpful article entitled The Case for Credobaptism. He offers a succinct but helpful summary of the Reformed Baptist position in fourteen concise, yet theologically packed, paragraphs. Here is the seventh paragraph, which highlights the heart of his covenantal argument for Credobaptism: