Are you quite sure that 18 year-olds were not under the jurisdiction of their parents in the 1st Century Roman Empire?

No, but I'm not the one forcing the definition. For the baptist definition of OIKOS to be true, every single usage in the NT must mean only believing adults, something that requires the definition be taken solely from the NT alone, is indefensible by Biblical definition, as shown here


The change you prescribe to it is not found in scripture, nor historical understanding. Surely this change in administration would have been mentioned? Especially to the Jewish audience?

You then wrote: 'So please list who is in this Covenant?'

Er.....Only those who know the Lord.

But this isn't the criteria for baptism, because you cannot judge who is trully elect. We have covered this, and Pilgrim has even seen fit to address it here

Pilgrim's suggestion

He may well have some special arrangements for those dying as infants, or imbeciles; indeed, I'm sure He has ('Will not the Judge of all the Earth do right?').

Hmmm.......not sure what special arrangements means, but that would seem odd since you keep putting forth that those within the true covenant are the proper subjects. Are there children within this covenant?

But for the rest of us, 'unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God' (John 3:5).

And again, we see baptism tied to election.

God bless,