The children of believers, even before they have the sign placed on them are in the Covenant of Grace. The sign is actually a ratification of the faith of the parents in the promises of God and in their obedience to that command. The question to ask is, are they in the external side of the covenant of internal? Well only God knows that. The infant cannot confess, nor has no real fruit per se. We know that the Westminster Confession tells us that at baptism, some of the elect are actually regenerated during the rite; it is God’s prerogative to do as He wills, when He wills. He is not bound by nature. Having said this, the question I pose, in light of the holiness spoken of in 1 Cor 7:14 attributed to our baptized children, rearing them in the way they should go, giving them the right to call God their father and actually praying to Him, knowing that He hears their prayers (in John, it tells us that God does not hear the prayers of the sinner), what would be more consistent? Telling them they are at enmity with God or God IS their Father? Should one presume up until the time that the child shows no fruit, based on the promise of God or should one act as if the child is separated and at enmity and if so, will this not affect the way you rear the child?
by Scott Bushey | Mar 15, 2016 | miscellaneous | 0 comments