Christ Our Hope PCA blog - Tony Phelps, pastor

Hot off the press! Covenant Baptism booklet!

Hey...

For anyone who may be interested, the "finished product" of the covenant baptism booklet is available here in MS Word:  The What & Why of Covenant Baptism

A Brief Covenant Baptism Catechism Q/A 7-8 (with the supporting scriptural basis)

7. What is signified by covenant baptism? 

Covenant baptism signifies the promises of the Gospel of Christ, the covenant of grace, including regeneration, a saving union with Christ, cleansing from sin, the gift of the Holy Spirit, justification, adoption, etc.  God extends these promises signified in baptism to the children of believers.

8. To whom are the promises signified by covenant baptism applied (sealed)?

The promises signified by covenant baptism are applied (sealed) only to those who embrace them with genuine faith.  Adults who were previously outsiders to a formal, covenant relationship with God are baptized upon a credible profession of faith in the promises of the Gospel.  The children of professing believers are baptized in view of God's Gospel promises extended to them.  They are also exhorted throughout childhood, by their parents and the church, to own and publicly profess their personal faith in these promises, which are "Yes and Amen" in Christ.

Scriptural Basis:

The main thrust of the case for covenantal infant baptism has already been made. These last two Q/A’s hopefully help to tie up any “loose ends.” Having established that covenant infant baptism is legitimately inferred from God’s Word, and is therefore His will for us to practice, Q/A’s 7 and 8 address a) what covenant baptism signifies, b) to whom these promises are actually applied, and c) how this relates to the baptism of those professing faith and to covenant children.

We’ve already established from Colossians 2:11-12 that both circumcision and baptism are Christ-centered in their meaning, signifying the promises of the Gospel in physical, symbolic form. Circumcision always pointed to an inner, spiritual reality. God calls His covenant people to “circumcise their hearts” (Deuteronomy 10:16). This is the imagery of regeneration.  In Deuteronomy 30:6, He also promises to circumcise the hearts of His people in the period of restoration (the hope of which develops through the OT prophets into the expectation of the kingdom of God, the Messianic age).   

Our hearts are sinfully corrupt, unclean. Our natural human tendency is that of sinful rebellion against God’s rule – thus placing us under the just condemnation of God. Physical circumcision did not change that. However, it pointed to God’s promise to circumcise, that is, regenerate, our hearts. The apostle Paul picks up on this theme, as already noted, in Romans 2:28-29: “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.”

As discussed under Q/A 2, Romans 4:11 explains that Abraham “…received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised…” Circumcision, therefore, even signified the very heart of the Gospel – justification by faith alone.

So what about baptism? What does that signify? Since according to Colossians 2:11-12, we find in Christ the basic continuity between circumcision and baptism, all of the Gospel / spiritual realities represented in circumcision would also apply to baptism. Though we won’t take the time to exhaust all the symbolism of circumcision, which now carries over to baptism, we have established two of the most vital things represented: regeneration and justification by faith alone. We also learn in the NT what else baptism signifies: spiritual union with Christ in His death to the judicial claims of sin, and His resurrection to new life (Romans 6); the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon God’s people (1 Corinthians 12:13); the grace of adoption (Galatians 3:26-29); cleansing from sin (Acts 22:16), etc. Like circumcision, baptism is richly symbolic – and again, we won’t take the time to give a full theological exposition of its symbolism. In short, baptism represents all the promises of what the Westminster Confession of Faith calls the covenant of grace – another way of saying “the Gospel.”

We’ve already labored the point that God wills for us to apply the Gospel-sign of baptism to the children of professing believers. But the sign does not automatically apply what it promises. God requires us to appropriate the promises represented in baptism by faith. So in the case of a professing believer, who was not baptized as an infant, he receives the sign of baptism exactly as Abraham received the sign of circumcision – as a seal of the righteousness of faith (assuming that faith is genuine). The promises signified are already embraced by the professing believer - and baptism is a confirmatory act.

In the case of covenant infant baptism, the promises signified are of a prospective, forward-looking nature. God has set the child apart, and promises to be a God to his parents and to him – and calls him to embrace the signified promises by faith. All of those promises are centered on Christ - on who He is and what He has done to redeem His people - and are Yes and Amen through Him for all who believe. Covenant parents, with the support of the covenant community, are to disciple their covenant children to believe and obey all the things that Jesus promises and commands through His Gospel.

My aim for this brief covenant baptism catechism, with its scriptural basis, has been to help clarify and defend the reasons why Presbyterians baptize infants. I also hope that this helps covenant parents with questions about infant baptism to doubt no more, but to present their covenant children for baptism with faith in their covenant Lord – who promises through Christ to be God to us, and to our children after us.

A Brief Covenant Baptism Catechism Q/A's 4-6 (with the supporting scriptural basis)

4. How are the members of this visible church distinguished from the rest of the world?

God distinguishes those who are members of the visible church, the covenant community, from the rest of the world, by applying a covenant sign of entrance to them.

5. What is that covenant sign of entrance?

In the Old Testament, the covenant sign of entrance is circumcision; in the New Testament, the covenant sign of entrance is baptism.

6. To whom is that covenant sign of entrance applied?

The covenant sign of entrance is applied to those who profess to embrace the covenant promises of the Gospel by faith, together with their children. 

Scriptural Basis:

So far, we’ve established from the Scriptures the following: 1) there is a basic continuity between the Old and New Testament covenant community, the church; 2) the Abrahamic covenant is the foundational redemptive covenant in the Scriptures, the promises of which are summarized by the NT as the Gospel; 3) circumcision is not a legalistic or ethnic sign, but a sign of God’s Gospel promise, which He commanded through Abraham to be applied to the infants of covenant members; 4) the special status of  children as members of the visible covenant community is not set aside in the NT, but reaffirmed; and 5) a formal, covenant relationship with God, and membership in the covenant community, is outward and legal in both the OT and the NT; it’s based on a credible profession of covenant faith; and includes the children of professing believers.

Next in our catechism, Q/A’s 4 through 6 address a) how God distinguishes those who belong to His covenant community from the rest of the world by applying a covenant entrance sign to them; b) what that covenant entrance sign is in the OT and the NT; and c) to whom that covenant entrance sign should be applied. We’ve already referenced Gen 17 several times. The covenant promise sign of circumcision (cf. Rom 4:11) was applied to believing Abraham, and to every male child – confirming God’s everlasting covenant promise to be a God “to you and your descendants after you” (Gen 17:7-14). We also alluded to the provisions in Exod 12, for the “stranger/foreigner” to be allowed to participate in the Passover. He must submit to circumcision, and thereby would be joined to the covenant community. He would no longer be a covenant “outsider,” but would become a covenant “insider” – with all the rights and privileges of a member of the covenant community. Clearly, circumcision is the covenant sign of entrance in the OT. Those who were circumcised were formally joined to God’s covenant community.

In the Great Commission of Matt 28:18-20, the risen and soon ascending Christ commands the apostles (and the subsequent apostolic church) to make disciples from all the nations by means of baptizing them in the Triune name, and by means of teaching them to obey all things Jesus has commanded. Immediately, we should note that the Great Commission is the means by which the Gospel promises given to Abraham are conveyed to the nations – especially that through his Seed, all the nations would be blessed (i.e., Gen 12:1-3, 22:18, et al, with Gal 3:6-9, 14, etc.). (As a side note, “nations” in both the OT and the NT is not a reference primarily to geo-political nation-states, but to all the non-Jewish “people groups” of the world. In the biblical world view, "Jew and Gentile" is a phrase that denotes the entirety of the world - Jews and the goyem, i.e., every other people group.) In the Great Commission, there is only one imperative / commandment: “make disciples.” “Baptizing” and “teaching” are adverbial participles which explain the means by which we make disciples. Christ commands not circumcision, but baptism as the means of “making disciples.” He thereby changes the sign of entrance into the covenant community from circumcision to baptism. This is also confirmed in both the practice of the NT church, and the apostolic doctrine of baptism (cf. Acts 2:41; 1 Cor 12:13, Eph 4:4-5).

Our Baptist friends might object here that Matt 28:19 is one of the proofs that only professing believers – i.e., disciples – are to be baptized. But that begs the question of the identity of who a disciple is. Baptists tend to assume that the identity of a “disciple” is self-evident from the Gospel accounts – those bearded Jewish guys who followed Jesus around for some three years. But of course our brothers would immediately agree that while all apostles are disciples, not all disciples are apostles. “Disciple” is clearly a broader term that describes a follower of Christ, a Christian – a member of the church, the visible covenant community (cf. Acts 11:26). A quick check of any Greek lexicon would further demonstrate that a “disciple” is a pupil, a student – and in the context of the NT, a student / follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ. Can such a term be applied to an infant / child? As scandalous as this might sound to Baptist ears – absolutely!

In light of our previous arguments for a basic continuity between the OT and NT covenant communities, the visible church – and the recognition of the children of professing believers as members of the visible church – this idea is not as radical as it might first sound. Consider Deut 6:4-9. Moses is preaching a series of “covenant renewal” sermons to the covenant community, as God prepares them for two significant transitions: 1) the passing of the “mantle” of covenant leadership from Moses to Joshua; and most importantly, 2) their subsequent conquest of the land of promise. Moses declares the covenant confession of faith (the “Shema” – “Hear [Heb., shema], O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one!"). And then he calls for the response of faithful, loving covenant obedience from the people (to wholly love the LORD their covenant God). Next, he exhorts covenant parents to practice a kind of covenantal catechesis in 6:7: “And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up” (i.e., in the entire course of your ordinary, daily lives as a family). Would it be fair and accurate to call these covenant children “disciples” – i.e., pupils, students of God’s covenant ways? Clearly.  Does the NT require something similar of Christian parents with their own children? Without a doubt. “And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and the admonition of the Lord” (Eph 6:4). Therefore, it is legitimate to view a child of a professing Christian as a “disciple” – and even to "make" them such by baptizing them and teaching them to obey everything Jesus has commanded! 

Col 2:11-12 shows a Christ-centered relationship between circumcision (the sign of initiation into the OT church) and baptism (the sign of initiation into the NT church): “In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.” This is a theologically rich and complex text. Rather than an in-depth exegesis, however, a couple of observations will suffice to make our point. Notice circumcision, like baptism, implicitly represents Gospel promises / Christ-centered blessings (more on this later, especially as we consider what is signified in baptism, and the parallel symbolism of circumcision as declared in Rom 2:28-29). We also noted this Gospel symbolism of circumcision in our previous discussion of Rom 4:11.

And this passage points to something more – that Christ and His Gospel are the key to understanding both circumcision and baptism. Paul explicitly relates circumcision to baptism here. As discussed earlier, circumcision, though a sign of Gospel-promise, is applied not only to those professing faith in the covenant promises of the Gospel, but also to their children. And so it follows:  if circumcision and baptism are signs of entrance into the respective covenant communities of the OT and the NT; and if the covenant entrance sign of circumcision applied to children and professing believers in the OT has been changed to baptism in the NT; and if both circumcision and baptism are representative of Gospel promises fulfilled in Christ; and if children of one or more professing believers are considered to be members of the covenant communities of both the OT and the NT; then, by necessary inference, infants not only may receive baptism, but they should receive baptism! 

Sometimes our Baptist brothers will express frustration with our doctrine of covenantal infant baptism. “That all seems so complicated! If God wanted us to baptize our children, why didn’t He just give us a direct commandment?” But I would challenge my Baptist friends to exchange their Western, American, democratic, individualistic, 21^st century glasses for a pair of Hebraic, covenantal, OT glasses. With the biblically-informed, covenantal assumptions of Jewish culture; and even the corporate rather than individualistic emphases of Greco-Roman culture; I dare say that infant baptism would have been both readily inferred from the apostolic scriptures of the NT, and readily practiced in the apostolic church. It appears that post-apostolic church history bears out that claim. But because we tend to read the NT through our cultural lenses, these things seem less "obvious" to us.

What’s more, vital doctrines like the Trinity and the two natures of Christ are stated in their fullness by faithfully working out the clear implications of Scripture. Nowhere does the Bible explicitly say, in these exact words, “God is one in essence, and three in person.” Nowhere does the Scripture explicitly declare the exact proposition “Christ is fully human and fully divine.” Yet anyone who rejects these doctrines is rightly viewed as a heretic.  Why?  Because they reject biblical teaching. Both doctrines are accurately summarized in the quotations above, because these doctrines are the clear implications of God’s Word. So to say, as some Baptists do, “Nowhere does the Bible command us to baptize infants,” is to say nothing more than a Jehovah’s Witness, who objects that the word "Trinity" isn't found in the Bible. God binds us to believe and to do certain things - not only in the explicit statements of Scripture, but also in what is legitimately inferred from the Scriptures. Covenant infant baptism is legitimately inferred from the Scriptures; therefore, it is God's will for us to practice it!     

A Brief Covenant Baptism Catechism Q/ A 3 (with the supporting scriptural basis)

3. What is meant by a "formal covenant relationship with God"?

A formal covenant relationship with God is that which is outward and legal, based on a person's credible profession of faith in God's covenant promises in Christ, which covenant relationship is in turn extended to their children. However, the eternal blessings of God's covenant of grace belong only to those with true faith in Christ; unbelieving covenant hypocrites invoke God's eternal curse.

Scriptural Basis:

This also relates to the previous discussion of the visible church under Q/A 1, especially on Rom 9:1-6. There are those of “visible” Israel, who are circumcised, and are in what we could call a “formal covenant relationship with God;” yet they are not part of elect Israel. A further demonstration of this idea of a formal covenant relationship with God is seen in the OT regulations surrounding the Passover. Covenant outsiders, “strangers,” were not permitted to participate. However, if they expressed a desire to participate in the Passover (issuing, presumably, from faith in God’s covenant promises), and submitted to the covenant entrance sign of circumcision, they were allowed to participate (Ex 12:48). What is the LORD’s stated reason? “One law shall be for the native-born and for the stranger who dwells among you” (Ex 12:49). Clearly, the “stranger” who was once a covenant outsider is now a covenant insider. How is that displayed? By entering into a formal, covenant relationship with God, initiated with the covenant sign of circumcision. He is now free to participate (“legally,” if you will) in the Passover and every other aspect of covenant life.

Ruth the Moabitess’ confession of covenant faith is another example: “Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God” (Ruth 1:16b). Upon that profession of faith, Ruth was joined to God’s covenant people – and “legally entitled” to be treated as a covenant person. Thus, the faithful Jew, Boaz, recognizes her covenant status (2:10-12) and ultimately takes her to be his wife (chapter 4).

This idea of a formal covenant relationship is also alluded to by Paul in Romans 3:1-2. After arguing in 2:28-29 that the true Jew is not the one circumcised in the flesh, but the one who is circumcised of heart, he anticipates an objection: “What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God.” So while Paul rejects a false confidence in outward circumcision (just as any good Baptist would do in reference to water baptism), he argues that there are still advantages to being circumcised, and placed in a formal covenant relationship with God – preeminently, because of the presence of the Word of God in that covenant community.

And so covenant children in the NT are given this distinct advantage, as well. They are where the Word of grace is preached and taught. They have supreme advantages, in God’s good providence, over pagan, un-churched kids (who have their pagan, un-churched parents to thank for their disadvantages!). Further, even the unbelief of those in a formal covenant relationship with God (whether circumcised / baptized as a child or an adult) does not nullify God’s faithfulness (3:3-4). Those in the covenant community also hear the threatened curses of the Law for all unbelievers – including covenant hypocrites. God’s Word – whether of blessing or of curse – will not return to Him void, but accomplish the purpose for which He sends it (Is 55:11). The warning against covenant hypocrisy and unbelief is real: God is not mocked, and will deal severely with all unbelieving covenant hypocrites (Heb 3:12-13, Gal 5:4, Mt 7:21-23).

Our Baptist friends sometimes make much of the supposedly greater purity that is to characterize the new covenant church, since they only baptize professing believers. But Romans 9 still stands. Some who profess belief and are baptized are not elect. This is the unavoidable reality for the church, whether Presbyterian or Baptist, who can only examine the professed faith and the life of a person claiming to be converted, but never the heart. Anyway, the answer to the problem is not to strip children of their covenant status, but to faithfully exercise church discipline when apparent unbelief / hypocrisy is revealed. “Let God be true but every man a liar” (Rom.3:4).

In the NT, we clearly see that a credible profession of faith in the Gospel results in admittance to the covenant community. For example, Acts 2:41 says that “those who gladly received his word [Peter’s sermon] were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them [i.e., the church].” But what about the children? Later in Acts, we see on a couple of different occasions households baptized (i.e., two examples in chapter 16 – Lydia and the Philippian jailer). With the previously mentioned covenant background of Gen 17, etc., the same “promise” being extended to “your children” in Acts 2:42, and the cultural “norm” of households including infants, it is reasonable to assume at least the likelihood that little ones were included among those baptized. Again, God has promised to be not only a God to believing adults, but also to their children. And the covenant community in both the Old and New Testaments, as we have already established, addresses children as part of that community.  We will yet demonstrate that children, who are treated in the NT as members of the covenant community, legitimately receive the NT covenant sign of entrance into that community - baptism.

A Brief Covenant Baptism Catechism Q/ A 2 (with the supporting scriptural basis)

2. Who are the members of this visible church, who have entered into a formal covenant relationship with God?

All those who profess to embrace the covenant promises of the Gospel by faith in Christ are members of the visible church, and enter into a formal covenant relationship with God; together with their children, to whom God also offers these covenant promises.

Scriptural basis:

Of all the historical, OT covenants, the Abrahamic covenant is the foundational redemptive covenant in the Bible. This point is essential to understand how God views children as He deals covenantally with His people. The apostle Paul labors to show the foundational nature of the Abrahamic covenant in his writings, especially in Galatians. The Gospel is preached to Abraham in Gen 12, according to Gal 3:8, when God promises to bless all the nations through him.  Ultimately, this blessing is the salvation that comes in Abraham's Seed, Jesus Christ, to God's elect from all nations (Gal 3:16).

Just as the Gospel is preached to Abraham in Gen 12, so salvation in the OT is by grace alone, through faith alone, in the promised Seed (Christ) alone. Paul also labors this point in Romans 4. His Gospel of justification by faith alone is not some brand new thing.  Granted, the Gospel is now in its state of glorious fulfillment in Christ, rather than in its state of expectation, which looked forward in faith to the Promised Seed.  Yet the two key “covenant of promise" men of the OT, Abraham & David, both know and believe the good news that God justifies the ungodly.  He does so by not imputing their sin to them; and by graciously imputing righteousness to them, through faith alone (Rom 4:1-8).

It is in this context that Paul makes an important statement about the nature of the Gospel, and how God signifies and seals its promises. In Romans 4:11, Paul argues that Abraham “…received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised…” OT circumcision is not an ethnic thing, or a legalistic thing, though misguided Jews were guilty of both distortions.  Instead, circumcision is a covenant thing, even a Gospel thing. Circumcision is a covenant sign – of what? – of righteousness by faith alone. Yet God commands this very Gospel sign to be applied to infants in Gen 17! Why? “And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you” (Gen 17:7).

The covenant sign of circumcision “sealed” that Abraham was justified by faith alone. He is converted as an adult, as one who has no prior covenant claim upon God. Circumcision represented the spiritual reality that Abraham’s sinful uncleanness/guilt before God is taken away, because He has believed God’s promise. So what does the sign mean when it is applied to an infant? That God’s Gospel promises are extended also to the children of believers. The sign is a declaration of God’s promise – “I will be a God to you, and to your own children after you, if you believe My promise of salvation. Trust in Me, and I will take away your sinful uncleanness/guilt.” Now, obviously, an infant who receives this sign does not know the meaning or the promise of it when it is applied. But his parents are charged to teach him God’s covenant ways (Deut 6). He will learn about the meaning and promise of this sign, from his parents and the "church." And through these means, he will be called to believe God’s promise, and so be saved.

God deals with households, with families – even in the context of the Gospel. He did so with Abraham, who heard & believed the Gospel; and He still does so today. Believing adults, and their children, receive the covenant sign, and enter the covenant community (more on the NT covenant sign of entrance below). It is in this OT, covenantal context that we must hear verses like 1 Cor 7:14, which describe the children of one believing spouse as “holy.” To be holy is to be set apart for God’s purposes. The children of believers are not unclean – like the children of unbelievers! – but they are holy, set apart in a special way for God.

In Mark 10:13-16, Jesus rebukes His disciples who were trying to prevent parents from bringing children to Him for blessing (even infants, according to Luke 18:15). He takes the children in His arms and blesses them, after declaring, “for of such is the kingdom of God."  Now the children’s song that sentimentally declares, “Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world,” expresses a sweet notion, but an inaccurate understanding of this passage. Jesus is taking up little covenant children  in His arms. He is reaffirming Gen 17, that God’s saving promises are extended to covenant children – even the promise of the kingdom (which is, properly understood, God’s sovereign, saving rule through Jesus Christ; thus, the Gospel is called the "Gospel of the kingdom" in places like Mark 1:14 and Mt 24:14).

How else does the NT affirm that children are members of the visible church, to whom God extends His covenant promises?  Peter concludes his Pentecost sermon with these words:  "For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call"  (Acts 2:39).  How would his believing Jewish listeners have understood these words?  Without a doubt, they would have heard these words in the context of the Abrahamic covenant.  "Of course this promise is for us - Peter is announcing that the Promised Seed has come in the person of Jesus of Nazareth!"  (As a side note, the Promised Seed is something that progressively develops into the hope of Messiah throughout the OT, and especially with the Davidic Covenant - another covenant of promise.  This Seed of Abraham would also be the Son of David - the special focus of Peter's sermon.)  "Of course this promise is for our children - Gen 17 still stands!  And of course this promise is for those who are 'far off' - the Promised Seed will bless all the nations with salvation!" 

Yet another NT affirmation that children are members of the visible church is found in Paul’s epistle to the Ephesians.  The letter would have been publicly read to assembled congregations – not circulated privately. His writings are Scripture (cf. 2 Pet 3:15-16), intended to be read at public worship (Col 4:16). Paul addresses the letter “to the saints who are in Ephesus, and faithful in Jesus Christ” (Eph 1:1b.). This letter, addressed to the assembled church, addressed to “the saints,” also addresses children directly. “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. ‘Honor your father and mother,’ which is the first commandment with promise: ‘that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth’” (Eph 6:1-2). Children are addressed just as they were in the OT, as members of the covenant community (cf. Deut 31:10-13, Josh 8:35, etc.), to whom God extends His promises (even by way of His commandments). As we expected above in our comments on Q/A 1, the covenant status of children is not only not set aside in the NT, but clearly reaffirmed.

A Brief Covenant Baptism Catechism, Q/A 1 (with the supporting scriptural basis)

1. What is the "visible church" of the Old and New Testaments?

The "visible church" is God's covenant community of the Old and New Testaments, made up of those who have entered into a formal covenant relationship with God.

Scriptural basis:

The visible church is God’s covenant community in both the Old and New Testaments. The word “church” [Gr., ecclesia] is legitimately applied to the OT covenant community of Israel, as Stephen does so in Acts 7:38: “the congregation [or church] in the wilderness.” Also, the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the OT (which the apostles were conversant with and would cite from), uses ecclesia to speak of Israel in covenant assembly (i.e., see Deut 4:10, 9:10, 23:3, 31:30, 1 Kings 8:14, Neh 8:2, Joel 2:16, etc.).

The classic protestant distinction between a “visible church” (made up of those we “see” who profess faith, together with their children) and the “invisible church” (made up of those known to God, those who are truly elect/saved) is a solidly biblical doctrine. In Romans 9:6, Paul makes this very distinction: “For they are not all Israel [i.e., the true Israel, the elect of God, with saving faith] who are of Israel [i.e., the visible Israel, the formal covenant community].” If this is not the implied distinction, then Paul is speaking nonsense. See also 2 Tim 2:19, where Paul says, “The Lord knows those who are His.” This statement is made in view of false teachers, who claimed to hold legitimate authority in the church.  They moved among those in the "visible church," but they did not belong to the "invisible church." Whatever their claims, God's knowledge of those who are His, i.e., the elect, is what counts.

In the NT, the church is identified as the new Israel, both directly and indirectly, as OT terms used for Israel are applied to the NT church. In Gal 6:15-16, Paul concludes his letter with a benediction upon the “Israel of God,” in view of the fact that “what counts is a new creation.” Since the church is God’s assembly of those who participate in this new creation, and since Paul’s benedictions are never directed to those outside of the church, the “Israel of God” is an unambiguous reference to the NT church. Paul, against the Judaizers, declares in Phil 3:3, “we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit,” etc. 1 Peter 2:9 calls the NT church a “royal priesthood, a holy nation,” etc., clearly applying terms for Israel to the church (compare with Ex 19:6).

The church of the OT and the NT are covenant communities. The foundational covenant for the OT church is the Abrahamic covenant, which is the common Gospel foundation for the church of all ages (Gal 3:6-9; 3:15-4:7; Rom 4:1-8). The church is clearly the “new covenant” community (Mt 26:28, 1 Cor 11:25, Heb 8), but the nature of the new covenant is that in Christ, it is organically connected to, and the consummation of, all of the previous OT covenants. It is incorrect to conceive of the new covenant as radically discontinuous with the previous covenants. Heb 8 speaks of the failure of the Mosaic covenant in its national administration. However, the entire letter shows how Christ is the consummation of its typological aspects (covenant mediator, priesthood, sacrifices, etc).

Often, Baptists will make much of the discontinuity language of Heb 8 (and its direct citation of Jer 31), to say that it is illegitimate to assume continuity between the OT and NT churches, especially pertaining to the status of children in the NT church. Yet the status of children in the OT church is established not in the Mosaic covenant, but in the Abrahamic covenant. Circumcision as a sign of the covenant is given to believing Abraham to apply to his household, including infants, in Gen 17.

The thrust of the NT is that the church is in continuity with the OT church. The “national” Israel of the first century is an apostate, covenant-breaking people, especially in view of their rejection of Christ. The church is the legitimate, continuing covenant community, the new Israel, made up of believing Jews & Gentiles, together with their children (more on this assertion below).

This idea of continuity is important for understanding the biblical basis of covenantal, infant baptism. The NT church is the genuine covenant community, in continuity with the OT church. The OT church, on the commandment of God in Gen 17, gave special, covenant status to the children of adult members of the covenant community. Unless the NT clearly overturns the status of children in the NT church, we are compelled to assume that this special status continues. As we shall see, the NT not only does not set aside the covenant status of children, but directly affirms it.

A Brief Catechism Regarding Covenant, Infant Baptism

I've written this catechism in an effort to briefly explain covenantal, infant baptism.  It's intended for a couple different kinds of folks: 

1) those who have already presented their children for baptism, but want some help in how to briefly communicate why they've done so to their inquiring friends and family (i.e., their baptist friends who are scratching their heads in consternation!);

2) those who have come from a baptist background, who are perhaps considering presenting their children for baptism, and would be helped by a summary presentation of the biblical/theological reasons for covenantal, infant baptism.

This is intended to be a simple explanation of the position, rather than a full apologetic for infant baptism.  This is a "first draft" (written just this morning!), which I hope to continue to refine.  I'll also add the relevant Scripture texts at some point in the (hopefully, near) future.

A Brief Covenant Baptism Catechism

What is the "visible church" of the Old and New Testaments?

The "visible church" is God's covenant community of the Old and New Testaments, made up of those who have entered into a formal covenant relationship with God. 

Who are the members of this visible church, who have entered into a formal covenant relationship with God?

All those who profess to embrace the covenant promises of the Gospel by faith in Christ are members of the visible church, and enter into a formal covenant relationship with God; together with their children, to whom God also offers these covenant promises.

What is meant by a "formal covenant relationship with God"?

A formal covenant relationship with God is that which is outward and legal, based on a person's credible profession of faith in God's covenant promises in Christ, which covenant relationship is in turn extended to their children.  However, the eternal blessings of God's covenant of grace belong only to those with true faith in Christ; unbelieving covenant hypocrites invoke God's eternal curse.

How are the members of this visible church distinguished from the rest of the world?

God distinguishes those who are members of the visible church, the covenant community, from the rest of the world, by applying a covenant sign of entrance to them.

What is that covenant sign of entrance?

In the Old Testament, the covenant sign of entrance is circumcision; in the New Testament, the covenant sign of entrance is baptism. 

To whom is that covenant sign of entrance applied?

The covenant sign of entrance is applied to those who credibly profess to embrace God's covenant promises in Christ by faith, together with their children.

What is signified by covenant baptism?

Covenant baptism signifies the promises of the Gospel of Christ, the covenant of grace, including regeneration, a saving union with Christ, cleansing from sin, the gift of the Holy Spirit, justification, adoption, etc.  God extends these promises signified in baptism to the children of believers.

To whom are the promises signified by covenant baptism applied (sealed)?

The promises signified by covenant baptism are applied only to those who embrace them with genuine faith.  Adults who were previously outsiders to a formal, covenant relationship with God are baptized upon a credible profession of faith in the promises of the Gospel.  The children of professing believers are baptized in view of God's Gospel promises extended to them.  They are also  exhorted throughout childhood, by their parents and the church, to own and publicly profess their personal faith in these promises, which are "Yes and Amen" in Christ.