Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 239 Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 Deprecated: strripos(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($needle) of type string is deprecated in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 Covenant Theology - Search - The Staunch Calvinist Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 239 Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 Deprecated: strripos(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($needle) of type string is deprecated in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251
The Staunch Calvinist

"Absolute sovereignty is what I love to ascribe to God." - Jonathan Edwards

Search


You searched for 'Covenant Theology'

I've found 14 results!


A Review of O. Palmer Robertson's The Israel of God

...the biblical home of the people of Israel, continue for ever and ever.” So spoke the President of the United States in a speech delivered before the Israeli Knesset assembled in Jerusalem. He was recalling with apparent approval the words of his desperately ill pastor. He concluded the speech by saying, “Your journey is our journey, and America will stand with you now and always.” (p. 1)

It seems that this and such mindset was the driving force behind writing this book. The book is not polemic, but rather, it simply presents what the Bible as a whole teaches on some topics related to the Israel of God. It is obviously against Dispensationalism by its adherence to Covenant Theology, but it does not attack Dispensationalism directly. Its purpose is to set a positive case on what the Bible says without really engaging with the other side.

Its Land

The first chapter is dedicated to the Land of Israel. This is a hot issue nowadays. I will be the first to tell you that I hate politics and I don’t want to do anything with it and there is a lot of politics involved with Israel in the Middle East. I am not interested in political discussions. I am a theology nerd. I am interested in the theological claim of the land and God’s plan with the Jews.

Dr. Robertson argues that the “concept of a land that belongs to God’s people originated in Paradise” (p. 4). Adam was told to work the land and multiply. That was the original ideal plan if the Fall had not taken place. Then the whole earth would have been God’s land and God’s temple. The land being a sanctuary is another aspect. This is why the Lord God tells Israel that “I will make my dwelling among you, and my soul shall not abhor you. 12 And I will walk among you and will be your God, and you shall be my people” (Lev 26:11-12). God places His sanctuary among His people like He did with the Tabernacle and Temple. This concept of the sanctuary of God among His people had its fulfillment in Jesus Christ of Whom it is written that He “tabernacled” among us (John 1:14). But it will also have its ultimate fulfillment on the New Heavens and New Earth (Rev 21:1-5).

An important aspect which Dr. Robertson highlights is the fact that the land actually belongs to the Lord. As Leviticus 25:23 puts it, “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me.” The land is the Lord’s and the people of Israel are merely strangers and sojourners in the land with Yahweh. He gives the land to whomever He wills and does with it as He pleases.

An important aspect which Dr. Robertson highlights and the New Testament emphasizes is that the land is typological of the New Heavens and New Earth. Hebrews 11 says that although Abraham was the one who received the promise of the land of Canaan in which he sojourned, yet he was actually looking and desiring “a better country, that is, a heavenly one” (Heb 11:16). The saints of old were “seeking a homeland” which is not of this world (Heb 11:14). Although Abraham lived in the “the land of promise”, says Hebrews 11:9-10, yet in actuality he understood the typology of the land and therefore “he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (v. 11). This is clearly the New Heavens and New Earth, and not the land of Canaan.

In Romans 4:13 we have the promise of the land expanded. It is no longer the small land of Canaan, but now it is the whole cosmos—the New H...


1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 10: Of Effectual Calling - Commentary

...ents of the child. But I have not found any biblical evidence which would lead me to believe this. This is a view common among Reformed paedobaptists. The Canons of Dort 1:17 says, “Since we must make judgments about God’s will from his Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature but by virtue of the gracious covenant in which they together with their parents are included, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy.” As Reformed Baptists, we have a different Covenant Theology and our issue would be with the idea that the natural offspring of believers are included in someway in their parents’ covenant. See chapter 7 on the covenants and chapter 29 on baptism.

Children of believers are not sent to heaven or specially favored by God because they’re children of believers. It is no doubt a great blessing to have faithful parent(s). But it does not place one in a Covenant of Grace with God or grant special covenantal privileges. John 1:13 says that the children of God “were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” They are reborn by the will of God. It is the children of promise, not of the flesh who are heirs of salvation (Rom. 9:8). Therefore, if God has decided to choose between infants who would go to hell and those who would go to heaven, I don’t see any reason for believing parents to have confidence that their child is with God just because they’re believers. Plus, God does not punish the sin of the parents (e.g., unbelief) on the children (Ezek. 18:20; Deut. 24:16), rather, everyone pays for their own sins. Therefore, in this case, unbelieving parents could also have confidence (but unbelievers want nothing to do with the true God) that their children may be with God. The consequences of sin may come upon more generations, but the sin of the father is not imputed to the son. Therefore, I believe that God will not consider the sin of the parents in making His choice, otherwise, it would not be free in the highest sense as in Romans 9:11 (see above).

The Lord was angry with the generation of the Israelites in the wilderness who continually tempted Him. He promised that they shall not enter into His rest (Heb. 3:16-19). The Lord promised that “Not one of these men of this evil generation shall see the good land that I swore to give to your fathers” (Deut. 1:35). The Lord waited 40 years until that generation completely died out (Num. 32:13). Yet, in Deuteronomy 1, the Lord answers the concern of this “evil generation” about their children. The Lord said, “And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it” (Deut. 1:39). The Lord denied the blessings to the fathers, yet granted them to the children. They are described as those who “have no knowledge of good or evil”. This means that they are not mature enough to understand and act upon that understanding as their parents were. Notice also that the description of “have no knowledge of good or evil” is directly attached to “your children” and “your little ones”. It is not spoken of those who are of age and understanding. Dr. Albert Mohler writes:

We believe that this passage bears directly on the issue of infant salvation, and that the accomplished work of Christ has removed ...


A Short Review of Sam Waldron's Modern Exposition of 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith

...v/t1.0-9/p180x540/969197_624405707571866_615878345_n.jpg?oh=5646757fc46bc07957be1c8cfee7c7a8&oe=554B10D0&__gda__=1434816445_1adfc208991a5c319091fd03eefef936">Here is a picture of my baptism back when my hair was long. 

 

...

Benjamin Keach's Gold Refined, or Baptism in its Primitive Puirty (1689) transcribed and formatted

I’ve found myself lately to be diving into the subject of baptism again and especially searching old resources. Some great books were transcribed and available at Reformed Baptist Disk, but many more are not yet transcribed or properly formatted. But there are a lot of works which are available in scanned form (especially on Google Books) and image-to-text form on Early English Books. I first came across these sites and resources thanks to Samuel Renihan’s blog post. Tip: use the Wayback Machine to access some (currently) dead links. I’ve also formatted Isaac Backus’ A Short Description of the Difference between the Bond-Woman and the Free, but it still needs a proof read. But I will post it here soon, Lord willing. But for now:

Benjamin Keach – Gold Refin’d, or Baptism in its Primitive Purity (1689)

See the book here.

If you find any mistakes and would like to report them, then feel free to respond back to this message or message me at admin@thecalvinist.net.