Subscribe
Notify of
guest
18 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Steven Ward
5 years ago

Much appreciated.

Mike Bull
5 years ago

Doug has blogged the same thing previously, and it boils down to treating baptism as souped-up circumcision – that is, a hereditary obligation to a legal code (http://bit.ly/1GVj9Jj). This is more obvious in Doug’s version of FV because he rightly stands for personal regeneration before corporate regeneration. But that just means he has to make more of a case for why paedobaptism isn’t redundant. That leaves a supposed entry into “Covenant membership” but such a demarcation only existed in the divide between Jew and Gentile. It never existed before Abraham, which is why the entire world was judged in the… Read more »

Jim
Jim
5 years ago
Reply to  Mike Bull

Totally agree! I have never understood infant baptism and can find no scriptural basis for it.