27 Mar 561 BC: A Skunked Nation & Covenant Preservation

27 March 561 B.C. Jehoiachin is released from prison, given prominence in the Babylonian court and is sustained for his remaining days on earth—sustained by King Evil-Merodach, the son and successor of King Nebuchadnezzar. 2 Kings 25.27-30.  Skunking and humbling a proud nation, kings, false prophets, incompetent and accommodating priests, an indifferentist populace, yet preserving His covenant children and His gracious covenant.  Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezra and God's elect maintain faith, fidelity, learning, and more.


Jehoiachin Released from Prison

2 Kings 25:27-30
1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)


27 Notwithstanding in the seven and thirtieth year after [a]Jehoiachin King of Judah was carried away, in the twelfth month and the seven and twentieth day of the month, Evil-Merodach king of Babylon in the year that he began to reign, did lift up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah out of the prison,
28 And spake kindly to him, and set his throne above the throne of the kings that were with him in Babylon,
29 And changed his prison garments: and he did continually eat bread before him, all the days of his life.
30 And his [b]portion was a continual portion given him by the king, every day a certain, all the days of his life.


Footnotes:


a. 2 Kings 25:27 Thus long was he, his wife and his children in Babylon, whom Nebuchadnezzar’s son, after his father’s death preferred to honor: thus by God’s providence the seed of David was preserved even unto Christ.
b. 2 Kings 25:30 Meaning, that he had an ordinary in the court.


----------------------------
 
Jeremiah 29
1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)

(Intro notes: 29 1 Jeremiah writeth unto them that were in captivity in Babylon.10 He prophesieth their return after seventy years.16 He prophesieth the destruction of the King and of the people that remain in Jerusalem.21 He threateneth the prophets that seduce the people.25 The death of Shemaiah is prophesied.)

1 Now these are the words of the [a]book that Jeremiah the Prophet sent from Jerusalem unto [b]the residue of the Elders, which were carried away captives, and to the Priests, and to the Prophets, and to all the people, whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away captive from Jerusalem to Babel:

2 (After that Jeconiah the King, and the [c]Queen, and the eunuchs, the princes of Judah, and of Jerusalem, and the workmen, and cunning men were departed from Jerusalem)

3 By the hand of Elasah the son of Shaphan and Gemariah the son of Hilkiah, (whom Zedekiah king of Judah [d]sent unto Babel to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babel) saying,

4 Thus hath the Lord of hosts the God of Israel spoken unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have [e]caused to be carried away captives from Jerusalem unto Babel:

5 Build you houses to dwell in, and plant you gardens, and eat the fruits of them.

6 Take you wives, and beget sons and daughters, and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters, that ye may be increased there, and not diminished.

7 And seek the prosperity of the city, whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and [f]pray unto the Lord for it: for in the peace thereof shall you have peace.

8 ¶ For thus saith the Lord of hosts the God of Israel, Let not your prophets, and your soothsayers that be among you, deceive you, neither give ear to your dreams, which you dream.

9 For they prophesy you a lie in my Name: I have not sent them, saith the Lord.

10 But thus saith the Lord, that after seventy years be accomplished at Babel, I will visit you, and perform my good promise toward you, and cause you to return to this place.

11 For I know the thoughts, that I have thought towards you, saith the Lord, even the thoughts of peace, and not of trouble, to give you an end, and your hope.

12 Then shall you cry unto me, and ye shall go and pray unto me, and I will hear you,

13 And ye shall seek me, and find me, because ye shall seek me with all [g]your heart.

14 And I will be found of you, saith the Lord, and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places, whither I have cast you, saith the Lord, and will bring you again unto the place, whence I caused you to be carried away captive.

15 Because ye have said, The Lord hath raised us up [h]Prophets in Babel.

16 Therefore thus saith the Lord of the King, that sitteth upon the throne of David, and of all the people that dwell in this city, your brethren that are not gone forth with you into captivity:

17 Even thus saith the Lord of hosts, Behold, I will send upon them the [i]sword, the famine, and the pestilence, and will make them like vile [j]figs, that cannot be eaten, they are so naughty.

18 And I will persecute them with the sword, with the famine, and with the pestilence: and I will make them a terror to all kingdoms of the earth, and [k]a curse, and astonishment, and an hissing and a reproach among all the nations whither I have cast them,

19 Because they have not heard my words saith the Lord, which I sent unto them by my servants the Prophets, [l]rising up early, and sending them, but ye would not hear, saith the Lord.

20 ¶ Hear ye therefore the word of the Lord, all ye of the captivity, whom I have sent from Jerusalem to Babel.

21 Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, of Ahab the son of Kolaiah, and of Zedekiah the son of Maaseiah, which prophesy lies unto you in my Name, Behold, I will deliver them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar King of Babel, and he shall slay them before your eyes.

22 And all they of the captivity of Judah, that are in Babel, shall take up this curse against them, and say, The Lord make thee like Zedekiah, and like Ahab, whom the King of Babel burnt [m]in the fire,

23 Because they have committed [n]villainy in Israel, and have committed adultery with their neighbor’s wives, and have spoken lying words in my Name, which I have not commanded them, even I know it, and testify it, saith the Lord.

24 ¶ Thou shalt also speak to Shemaiah the [o]Nehelamite, saying,

25 Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, saying, Because thou hast sent letters in thy name unto all the people, that are at Jerusalem, and to Zephaniah the son of Maaseiah the Priest, and to all the Priests, saying,

26 The Lord hath made thee Priest, for [p]Jehoiada the Priest, that ye should be officers in the House of the Lord, for every man that raveth and maketh himself a Prophet, to put him in prison and in the stocks.

27 Now therefore why hast not thou reproved Jeremiah of Anathoth, which prophesieth unto you?

28 For, for this cause he sent unto us in Babel, saying, This captivity is long: build houses to dwell in, and plant gardens, and eat the fruits of them.

29 And Zephaniah the Priest read this letter in the ears of Jeremiah the Prophet.

30 Then came the word of the Lord unto Jeremiah, saying,

31 Send to all them of the captivity, saying, Thus saith the Lord of Shemaiah the Nehelamite, Because that Shemaiah hath prophesied unto you, and I sent him not, and he caused you to trust in a lie,

32 Therefore thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will visit Shemaiah the Nehelamite, and his seed: he shall not have a man [q]to dwell among this people, neither shall he behold the good, that I will do for my people, saith the Lord, because he hath spoken rebelliously against the Lord.

Footnotes:

a. Jeremiah 29:1 Or, letter.
b. Jeremiah 29:1 For some died in the way.
c. Jeremiah 29:2 Meaning, Jeconiah’s mother.
d. Jeremiah 29:3 To entreat of some equal conditions.
e. Jeremiah 29:4 To wit, the Lord, whose work this was.
f. Jeremiah 29:7 The Prophet speaketh not this for the affection that he bare to the tyrant, but that they should pray for the common rest and quietness, that their troubles might not be increased, and that they might with more patience and less grief wait for the time of their deliverance, which God had appointed most certain: for else not only the Israelites, but all the world, yea, and the insensible creatures should rejoice when these tyrants should be destroyed, as Isa. 14:4.
g. Jeremiah 29:13 When your oppression shall be great, and your afflictions cause you to repent your disobedience, and also when the seventy years of your captivity shall be expired, 2 Chron. 36:22; Ezra 1:1; Jer. 25:12; Dan. 9:2.
h. Jeremiah 29:15 As Ahab, Zedekiah and Shemaiah.
i. Jeremiah 29:17 Whereby he assureth them, that there shall be no hope of returning before the time appointed.
j. Jeremiah 29:17 According to the comparison, Jer. 24:1, 2.
k. Jeremiah 29:18 Read Jer. 26:6.
l. Jeremiah 29:19 Read Jer. 7:13, 25:3 and 26:5.
m. Jeremiah 29:22 Because they gave the people hope of speedy returning.
n. Jeremiah 29:23 Which was adultery, and falsifying the word of God.
o. Jeremiah 29:24 Or, dreamer.
p. Jeremiah 29:26 Shemaiah the false prophet flattereth Zephaniah the chief Priest, as though God had given him the spirit and zeal of Jehoiada to punish whosoever trespassed against the word of God, of the which he would have made Jeremiah one, calling him a raver and a false prophet.
q. Jeremiah 29:32 He and his seeds shall be destroyed, so that none of them should see the benefit of this deliverance.

1 & 2 Samuel: Miscellaneous Musings

David
Poet-Warrior
King of Judah and Israel
Father of Solomon
Forbear of Israel's Final David--Jesus

A few reflections on 1 and 2 Samuel.

I Samuel: notes and musings, notably, in connection with the covenant of grace and the Davidic institution.

Author. The author is not identified. The name Samuel is invoked because of his connection and mediation of the royal monarch in Israel, specifically, Israel’s first two kings, Saul and David. Samuel is an old man in 8.1 and has died by 25.1. In fact, he probably died before many narrated events occurred. 1 Chon. 29.29 attaches Samuel’s name with successors, Nathan and Gad, and written portions may have come from Samuel’s speeches and work.

Date and occasion. Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings narrate events contemporaneous to the writer.

The latter half of the 11th century B.C., ancient Near East nations were involved in their own internal matters; in this context, Israel’s monarchy emerges. Israel had been a loosely confederated band of tribes; Mr. (Rev. Dr. Prof.) John Bright frequently uses the term amphichtyonic league. A monarchy was a new stage in Israel’s national, religious and covenantal life. Kingship had been known to Israelites before Saul (Jg. 3.12; 4.2; 8.5). Why had they resisted kingship for so long? Judges 8.23 expresses the sentiment of resistance: “ But Gideon told them, `I will not rule over you, nor will my son rule over you. The LORD will rule over you.’” A fundamental tenet of Israel’s theology was Jehovah’s Kingship (8.7; 12.12; Num. 23.21; Ps. 5.2; Mal. 1.14). Yet, the Kingship idea predated Israel’s monarchy (Gen. 49.10; Num. 24.7, 17-19; cf. Gen. 17.6, 16; 35.11). Moses anticipated it also (Dt. 17.14-20). As an aside, Moses decreed that Israel’s future kings were to be men of the “book,” reading from it all the days of their lives.

By the opening of 1 Samuel, the day of the kingship had arrived.

The reigns of David and Saul are worked by backdating from Kings. There is a broad consensus that David consolidated his rule over Judah and Israel by 1000 BC; or, over Judah by 1010 B.C. and Israel by 1003 B.C. David’s life: 1040—970 B.C. Samuel may have been born about 1100 B.C.

Some characteristics and themes.

• Historical emergence of the Israelite monarchy under Saul and David

• Kingship mediated through a Prophet

• Kingship itself is a Prophetic moment

• Saul’s rise and fall in this innovative period for Israel

• At bar: how does Kingship work in the covenantal arrangement between God and His people? Also, what is the relationship of the Davidic kingship and covenant with the gracious covenant with Adam, Abraham and Moses (said to include the Sinaitic covenant)?

• Hannah’s prayer: wonderful themes of God’s sovereignty, holiness, reversal of reverses, deliverance and futility of reliance on human strength. We’ve long pondered this wonderful piece. Did she write it? Did she have an amanuensis? How did Samuel get this piece? Or, the author of 1 Samuel?

• The Ark narrative (4.1—7.1). This may have addressed Israel’s tendency to view the Ark as a talisman, the perennial temptation to control God. But, the Ark makes a tour de force exhibit in a devastating tour through the pagan cities of Philistia. The pagans are all too happy to be done with the Ark.

• Saul the disappointment. Initially, he was impressive; initially, Samuel said Saul would rule Israel in the name of the LORD (9.26—10.1). He led a victory over the Ammonites. But, he failed: (1) to wait for Saul and proceeded to offer an unauthorized sacrifice on his own (13.8-14) and (2) failed to totally annihilate the Amalekites. Rather, again, on his own, he spared the Amalekite king and took animals. Samuel killed the Amalekite king. The kingdom would be transferred to another King (15.28; 28.17).

• The fall of Saul was co-incident with the rise of David. David had his own vices and wickednesses, but God mercifully established the Davidic covenant with him (2 Sam. 7). Jealousy and fear gripped Saul because David was a “taller blade of grass,” the usual signs of a leader with an inferiority complex (e.g. REC’s Laud Leo). Saul falls in a disastrous battle with the pagan Philistines at Gilboa.

2 Samuel: additional musings

• Like 1 Samuel, an anonymous author, but warrantably, with materials from Samuel. 2 Samuel contains events that post-date Samuel’s life (the poor chap who, himself, like Eli, had corrupted sons)

• 1 Samuel conjoined with 2 Samuel. Many suppose, without proof to our satisfaction, that the edition was issued during the Exile

• Saul has died, falling on his sword in a bloody scene at Mt. Gilboa (1 Sam. 31)

• David’s ascendancy to the throne in 2 stages: (1) First, the south, Judah and (2) Second, all of Israel. The first was bloodless while the second involved bloodshed, although David is viewed as guiltless with respect to the deaths of Saul, Jonathan (Saul’s son), Abner (Saul’s General) and Ishboseth (Saul’s surviving son)

• There are political and theological developments. Politically, David captures Jerusalem and roundly defeats the Philistines. Further, he transfers the sign, symbol and seal of the gracious covenant, the ark that is, to Jerusalem. The sign and seal of God’s everlasting promises to his covenant children and their children…as many as the LORD God shall call (Acts 2.38-40). David offers to build His Majesty a Temple; instead, God promises David an everlasting throne, a Lamp or Light in Israel forever; this would be a challenged and troubled promise, but would receive it’s final, formal, official and everlasting fulfillment in the birth of David’s ultimate Offspring, that is, Jesus, Son of David, the Saviour, and Emmanuel. The “Seed-theology” of Gen. 3.15; 12.1ff; 15; 17; 18; 22; Num.23; Dt. 18 through many more prophets, down to Gal. 3.16, inter alia, is given further clarification with the Messianic hope pinned to the house of David.

Psalm 89. 1-4 (among many, many others): 

I will sing of the mercies of the Lord for ever:
with my mouth will I make known thy faithfulness to all generations. For I have said, Mercy shall be built up for ever:
thy faithfulness shalt thou establish in the very heavens.
I have made a covenant with my chosen,
I have sworn unto David my servant,
thy seed will I establish for ever,
and build up thy throne to all generations. Selah

• Then, David becomes a scalawag-dawg and scumbag with Bathsheba. Felonious and criminal actions: corrupted heart and mind, formation of the intent to commit adultery, adultery, efforts at a cover-up, conspiracy to commit murder as a principle, homicide 1, theft and false witness. In short, David was an idolater of himself. This wickedness was as the sin of witchcraft and rebellion, to use Samuel’s words for Saul. 2 rebellions occur in the Davidic house: Absalom’s and Sheba. This wicked scalawag-dawg repents, Psalm 51, over the earnest confrontation with a prophet, Nathan. Nevertheless, the Davidic promise will stand although, as promised, chastisements will befall this manifold and wicked sinner. Jesus alone will be the sinless and perfect Davidide establishing the everlasting kingdom (Daniel 7 and 9).

• 2 Samuel 21-24 forms an epilogue of sorts: (1) a wonderful Psalm of praise (22), (2) David’s final words (23.1-7), (3) further developments of Davidic agents who’ll be foundational for Solomon’s accession (23.8-39) and the (4) stopping of a further plague.

1 Samuel: Desultory Notes & Musings

Samuel and Saul

I Samuel: notes and musings, notably, in connection with the covenant of grace and the Davidic institution.

Author. The author is not identified. The name Samuel is invoked because of his connection and mediation of the royal monarchy in Israel, specifically, Israel’s first two kings, Saul and David. Samuel is an old man in 8.1 and has died by 25.1. In fact, he probably died before many of the narrated events in 1 Samuel occurred. 1 Chon. 29.29 attaches Samuel’s name with successors, Nathan and Gad, and written portions may have come from Samuel’s speeches and work with students in the college of prophets.

Date and occasion. Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings narrate events contemporaneous to the writer.

In the latter half of the 11th century B.C., ancient Near East nations were involved in their own internal matters; in this context, Israel’s monarchy emerges. Israel had been a loosely confederated band of tribes; Mr. (Rev. Dr. Prof.) John Bright frequently uses the term amphichtyonic league. A royal monarchy was a new stage in Israel’s national, religious and covenantal life. Kingship had been known to Israelites before Saul (Jg. 3.12; 4.2; 8.5). Why had they resisted kingship for so long? Judges 8.23 expresses the sentiment of resistance: “ But Gideon told them, `I will not rule over you, nor will my son rule over you. The LORD will rule over you.’” A fundamental tenet of Israel’s theology was Jehovah’s Kingship (8.7; 12.12; Num. 23.21; Ps. 5.2; Mal. 1.14). Yet, the Kingship idea predated Israel’s monarchy (Gen. 49.10; Num. 24.7, 17-19; cf. Gen. 17.6, 16; 35.11). Moses anticipated it also (Dt. 17.14-20). As an aside, Moses decreed that Israel’s future kings were to be men of the “book,” reading from it all the days of their lives (a standing order for all leaders, really, to "be men of the book"). The Davidic Sonship and Kingship is essential to NT doctrine, worship, hymns and prayers. (We are reminded of Mr. Hengstenberg's injunction, to wit, "If you want to be a NT theologian, you must be an OT theologian.) The advent of the royal monarchy is a big deal in OT history.

By the opening of 1 Samuel, the day of the kingship had arrived.

The reigns of David and Saul are worked by backdating from Kings (more on that later). There is a broad consensus that David consolidated his rule over Judah and Israel by 1000 BC; or, over Judah by 1010 B.C. and Israel by 1003 B.C. David’s life: 1040—970 B.C. Samuel may have been born about 1100 B.C.

Some characteristics and themes.

• Historical emergence of the Israelite monarchy under Saul and David

• Kingship mediated through a Prophet

• Kingship itself is a Prophetic moment

• Saul’s rise and fall in this innovative period for Israel

• At bar: how does Kingship work in the covenantal arrangement between God and His people? Also, what is the relationship of the Davidic kingship and covenant with the gracious covenant with Adam, Abraham and Moses (said to include the Sinaitic covenant)?

• Hannah’s prayer: wonderful themes of God’s sovereignty, holiness, reversal of reverses, deliverance and futility of reliance on human strength. We’ve long pondered this wonderful piece. Did she write it? Did she have an amanuensis? How did Samuel get this piece? Or, the author of 1 Samuel?

• The Ark narrative (4.1—7.1). This may have addressed Israel’s tendency to view the Ark as a talisman, the perennial temptation to control God (e.g. gimmicks, amulets, and more). But, the Ark makes a tour de force exhibit in a devastating tour through the pagan cities of Philistia. The pagans are all too happy to be done with the Ark.

• Saul the disappointment. Initially, he was impressive; initially, Samuel said Saul would rule Israel in the name of the LORD (9.26—10.1). He led a victory over the Ammonites. But, he failed: (1) to wait for Saul and proceeded to offer an unauthorized sacrifice on his own (13.8-14) and (2) failed to totally annihilate the Amalekites. Rather, again, on his own, he spared the Amalekite king and took animals. Samuel killed the Amalekite king. The kingdom would be transferred to another King (15.28; 28.17).

• The fall of Saul was co-incident with the rise of David. David had his own vices and wickednesses, but God mercifully established the Davidic covenant with him (2 Sam. 7). Jealousy and fear gripped Saul because David was a “taller blade of grass,” the usual signs of a leader with an inferiority complex (e.g. REC’s Laud Leo doffing "Doctored and Reformed Professors" in his weakness, fear and jealousy). Saul falls in a disastrous battle with the pagan Philistines at Gilboa.

Ruth: Desultory Notes

Ruth

Authorship. This is an anonymous short story named after the primary character, Ruth.  Rabbinic tradition ascribes Judges, Samuel and Ruth to Samuel.  (Some, of course, as usual, as needed, as driven, postulate an exilic period. )

Date/occasion.  Under the traditional view of Samuel’s authorship, it then falls between his time (1050 B.C.) and the Davidic monarchy (1040-1010 B.C.).  The Davidic genealogy is found at Ruth 4.17-22.

Various themes are noted:

1.      Proselytes, like this Moabitic woman, Ruth can gain covenant membership.

2.      This covenant loyalty serves as a model for entry to the covenant community.

3.      Divine providence

4.      On our view, without denying the first three elements, this is a ratification and affirmation of the Davidic and Messianic covenant integral to the gracious covenant with Adam, Abraham and Moses.

Characteristics/theme.

1.      Dramatic

2.      Moves quickly

3.      Covenant faithfulness

4.      Divine providence

5.      Joining the Israelite community from outside

6.      Covenant of grace (again)

Infant Baptism by Professor John Murray

H/T to Andy Underhile on the sacrament impugned and oppugned by Anabaptists, Pentecostals, and the vast array of American evangelicals.  Andy brings us a reminder from Professor John’s Murray, the old Scots divine from Westminster Seminary, Philadelphia, in its better days.

http://andycontramundum.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-we-baptize-infants-by-john-murray.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FDofecr+%28Contra+Mundum%29

Why We Baptize Infants,

by John Murray

          Baptism is one of the two ordinances of the New Testament that we call sacraments. Baptism is administered in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.  Baptism “in the name of” means “into union with” or “into the discipleship of.”  Baptism in the one name of the triune God means baptism into subjection and devotion to the one living and true God. It means that the mark of the triune God is placed upon the recipients of it. The placing of the mark of God upon us in baptism does not, however, mean that it is the authentication or seal of an ownership on the part of God or of discipleship on our part that is naturally and natively a fact. It is true that there is a natural ownership on the part of God and an inalienable devotion that we as His creatures owe to Him. But baptism is not the mark of an ownership that is natively and properly God’s nor of the devotion on our part that we naturally owe to Him. It is the mark of an ownership that is constituted, and of a devotion that is created, by redemptive action and relation. In other words, it is the mark of the Covenant of Grace. In it, and bearing it, we profess to renounce every other lordship but that of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost in all the manifold relations that we come to sustain to each Person in the terms of the Covenant of Grace.

          More specifically, baptism signifies washing or purification, washing from the defilement or pollution of sin by regeneration of the Holy Spirit, and washing from the guilt of sin by the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. Manifestly, it is only in and through Christ and His work that these blessings can be enjoyed. Union with Christ, therefore, is the bond that unites us to the participation of these blessings. Our Shorter Catechism gives a rather succinct and comprehensive definition when it says that “Baptism is a Sacrament, wherein the washing with water, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, doth signify and seal our engrafting into Christ, and partaking of the benefits of the covenant of grace, and our engagement to be the Lord’s.” We believe that Scripture warrants the dispensing of this ordinance of baptism to infants. Just as infants were circumcised under the Old Testament – and circumcision meant fundamentally the same thing as baptism, namely, the removal of the filth of sin and the imputation of the righteousness which is by faith – so children who stand in a similar covenant relation with God should be baptized under the New Testament. What, we may ask, does this precisely mean? It means that children, even newly-born infants, stand in need of cleansing from sin both in its defilement and in its guilt. Children do not become sinful after they grow up or in the process of growing up. They are sinful from the very outset. They are conceived in sin and brought forth in iniquity. They go astray from the very womb. No one who is truly convinced of sin remembers when he became sinful. He knows that it was not by some deliberate decision or act on his part that he became sinful. He knows that he was always sinful. Truly he recognizes that that innate and inherent sinfulness has been aggravated, and has repeatedly come to expression, in his voluntary acts of sin. But it was sinfulness already inherent that was aggravated, and came to expression, in his voluntary acts of sin. Furthermore, no one who is truly observant of the growth and development of others from infancy to adulthood remembers any point when sin first began to take possession of their heart and interest and purpose. The disposition is always with us, and is at the present time particularly prevalent, to minimize the seriousness of this fact. There is the tendency to think and act in terms of the innocency of little children. The consequences of such an attitude are disastrous to all true nurture and instruction. For to eliminate from our attitude and conduct so basic and far-reaching a fact as the innate pollution of fallen human nature is to eliminate a fact without which nurture and direction must lead on to a perversion and falsehood manifoldly more desperate than that with which it began. Infant baptism is a perpetual reminder that infants need what baptism represents and there can be no escape from, or amelioration of, that awful fact.

          But baptism is after all a sacrament of grace. And therefore it means more than the fact of need. It means that by the grace of God infants may enjoy precisely and fully what baptism represents. They may be regenerated by the Spirit and justified in the blood of Christ. They may be united to Christ in all the perfection of His mediatorial offices and in all the efficacy of His finished work. We should pause to consider the preciousness of these truths. Truly we shall have no appreciation of their preciousness unless we are persuaded of that awful fact to which we have already made reference, namely, that of original sin. But if we sincerely face the fact of the dismal pollution of human nature in its present state, no human words can adequately express the joy we experience in the contemplation of that which baptism means for infants. We may briefly reflect on the preciousness of these truths for two considerations. First, children may and often do die at a very early age. If they should die without regeneration and justification, they would be lost just as surely as others dying in an unregenerate state are finally lost. The baptism of children, then, means that the grace of God takes hold of children at a very early age, even from the very womb. That is to say, in other words, we must not exclude the operations of God’s efficacious and saving grace from the sphere or realm of earliest infanthood. It is to this truth our Lord gave His most insistent and emphatic testimony when He said, “Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of God.”

          We would not, of course, be misunderstood when we assert this principle. We do not say that the operations of God’s saving grace are present in the heart of every infant. The fact is only too apparent that multitudes grow up to years of discretion and intelligence and show that the saving grace of God did not take hold of their hearts and minds in the days of their infancy. Neither are we taking the position necessarily that all who die in infancy are the recipients of the saving grace of God. For ourselves we must leave that question in the realm to which it belongs, namely, the unrevealed counsel of God. But it is nevertheless true – and that is the point we are now interested in stressing – that the grace of God is operative in the realm of the infant heart and mind. “Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise.” What a blessed thought and hope and confidence is extended to believing parents when in baptism they commit their children to the regenerating and sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit and to the purging efficacy of the blood of Christ, so that, if perchance the Lord is pleased to remove them in infancy, they – believing parents – can plead and rest upon the promises of the Covenant of Grace on their behalf. It can surely be said of them that they have no need to mourn as those that have no hope. But secondly we should appreciate the preciousness of these truths for the reason that children do not need to grow up to the years of discretion and intelligence before they become the Lord’s. Just as children are sinful before they come to the years of discretion and understanding, so by the sovereign grace of God they do not need to grow up before they become partakers of saving grace. They may grow up not only in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, but also in His favor and sanctifying grace. They may in their tenderest years be introduced into the family and household of the heavenly father. When believing parents present their children for baptism they are confessing that their children are innately sinful, they are confessing their need of regeneration and justification, but they are also pleading on the behalf of their children the regenerating and justifying grace of God. In reliance upon the promise that “the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children’s children; to such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them,” they are entertaining the encouragement and the hope that “those that be planted in the house of the Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God. They shall still bring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing; to shew that the Lord is upright; he is my rock and there is no unrighteousness in him.” Baptism is the ordinance that initiates into the fellowship of the visible church. The visible church is a divine institution. It is the house and family of God. It is a divine sanctuary where God’s glory is made known. It is the channel along which normally the current of God’s saving grace flows. What a privilege it is for parents by divine authority in the reception of the ordinance of baptism to introduce their children into this blessed fellowship.

          If infant baptism has the divine warrant, then what dishonor is offered to Christ and what irretrievable damage is done to the church and to the souls of children by refusing to introduce children into this glorious fellowship. No argument from apparent expediency, no seeming evangelistic fervor will counteract that dishonor to our Lord and that damage done to the souls of men. In concluding this brief study of the meaning and privilege of infant baptism, there are two warnings that must be given. The first is that against the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. We must not look upon baptism as having some semi-magical effect. Baptism derives all its efficacy from the sovereign grace of the Holy Spirit. We do well to remind ourselves of the words of our Shorter Catechism, “The Sacraments become effectual means of salvation, not from any virtue in them, or in him that doth administer them; but only by the blessing of Christ, and the working of his Spirit in them that by faith receive them.” We must never take for granted that the infant who is baptized is by that mere fact assured of eternal life. Baptism is certainly a means of grace which God has, in accordance with His appointment, abundantly honored and blessed throughout the whole history of the Christian church. But we must ever preserve the true evangelicalism of our Christian faith that, in the last analysis, we are not saved by any external rite or ordinance, but by the sovereign grace of God that works mysteriously, directly and efficaciously in the heart and soul of each individual whom He has appointed to salvation. The second is that infant baptism does not relieve parents or guardians, as the case may be, of that solemn responsibility to instruct, warn, exhort, direct and protect the infant members of the Christian church committed to their care. We must repeat again the text we have already quoted, “The mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him and his righteousness unto children’s children, to such as keep his covenant and to those that remember his commandments to do them.” The encouragement derived from a divine promise must never be divorced from the discharge of the obligations involved. It is only in the atmosphere of obligation discharged, in a word, in the atmosphere of obedience to divine commandments, that faith in the divine promise can live and grow. Faith divorced from obedience is mockery and presumption.

Originally published in The Presbyterian Guardian, Vol. 5, 1938.