Quote
Joe, I agree that a proper hermeneutical principal is vital in discussing this matter. Where I think paedo-baptists err is in believing that the Covenants start with Abraham. They do not. They start with Christ. He is the 'Author and Finisher of our faith.'
And where did Christ desire for our understanding of the covenant (one) to begin? Did God first say here is Christ? No, Christ the author, began with Adam, Noah, and then Abraham, didn’t He? God does everything for a reason! God chose to relate to us in one covenant dispersed in stages for our clarity. God is not a haphazard God. God desired for our understanding of the covenants to be in the order He has revealed them to us in His Word. Look at the hermeneutic Paul uses in Galatians: he argued from Abraham to Christ…..The Scripture demands proper interpretation not inflipatation to suit our theological luggage. God gave us His hermeneutic in Gen 1:1 In the beginning.....to lead us to the One of the beginning (Jn 1:1, 14).

Quote
So when we read Gen 17:7, 'And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants for ever....', we must look to the NT for the correct interpretation. The Pharisees certainly held to a physical interpretation of the covenant. 'They answered and said to Him, "Abraham is our father.".....Jesus said to them, "....You are of your father, the devil!"' (John 8:39,42,44).
Of course, Jesus and Paul speak about the "real" members of the covenant that are apart of the invisble Church (Rom 2:28-29). But, did you notice that your quote included the members of the visible church, that of course where lost? They were circumcised also!!! The covenant of the OT included both circumcised visible and invisible church members. The New Testament is the fulfillment of the Old, but it is not a totally new covenant. It is a better covenant, for it has its completion in Christ, et. al., but it still bares the marks of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, all of whom are mentioned to one degree or another in the New Testament…. The covenant is like a scroll that continues to be rolled out—and when our glorification appears it will be finished rolling….

Quote
'Therefore know that [only] those who are of faith are sons of Abraham'( Gal 3:7). I had long debates with Matt McMahon on the Puritan Board on this subject. He boasts of having abandoned his 'Christ hemeneutic' for a 'Covenant' one. I say that if Christ is not the dead centre of all our theolgy, we are in error. We must look back from Him to see the working of the covenants in the OT, and forward from Him to see that working in the NT.
Well, I am not sure you (1) are quoting MM in context (while MM and I have had or differences on Baptism, I know he was not taught that, nor held to it before) (2) or if is your lack of understanding Covenant theology.

In brief, Covenants were established by kings to others in the ANE (Ancient Near East). Kings of one kingdom established covenants with kings or vassals of other kingdoms. There were basically two types of covenants in the ANE: (1) Parity, where both sides speak about the conditions—bilateral (2) Suzeran-Vassal, where the relationship is between the Greater and the lesser. Covenants were carried out for the eternity of the king’s kingdom, unless otherwise stipulated. God chose to basically relate to man in the later form of covenant. God took an oath to honor this covenant with Abraham and others. (please read: Covenants, Christ of the Covenants by Robertson and He Gave Us Stories by Pratt, as I do not have the time or space here to write a fuller explanation).

Christ has a Kingdom. He is the King of that Kingdom. Christ the eternal King relates to His Kingdom in eternal covenants. Thus, a proper Covenant hermeneutic has Christ as its King. Consequentially, we do not abandon Christ, but we rather embrace Him with the fuller understanding of (1) who He is, and (2) how He relates to us as the King of His Kingdom. In the New Testament, we see that God merely rolled out the scroll of the covenant a little further for our understanding now in Christ …

You do realize, using Gal 3:7 as your proof text for whom to baptize mounts to very huge problems for you. It entails you knowing for sure who is and who is not a son of Abraham. Since, there is NO WAY you could ever fully know then you would never be able to baptize a single soul. So, if you baptize you do so against your own hermeneutic!

Its been real nice visiting again, but now the grind returns. See you in a few weeks…

Reformed and Always Reforming,