James White's Closing Statement

The New Covenant Requires Faith and Repentance for Baptism

We were just told that in the majority of instances of household baptisms, there is only one professing person. That is simply untrue. I gave you the list. There were only two possibilities where that was the case, where household baptisms took place.

All the rest of them, very clear, you had repentance and faith on the part of all those who were baptized. And those other two, there is no reference, no positive reference to the establishment of a baptism of an unrepentant or unbelieving person.

And so we have here, once again, going from the Old Testament, taking a presupposition, and then reading it into the New Testament, saying you have this 2 ,000 years of households. But we start off asking a question, that's not what you had from Adam to Abraham.

Where was the furor then? There was no furor then. Where was the furor when Jesus and John are baptizing people who are repentant only? There was no furor then. The essence of the New Covenant is not excluding children.

The essence of the New Covenant is the perfection of that covenant, whereas the Old Covenant did not perfect anyone. That's the difference between the two, and that's why the signs differ. You gave the Old Covenant sign to wretched, reprobates, and you did it purposefully.

You had to, to keep the nation of Israel and the land in the proper order, and who was to possess it, and everything else. That does not come through into baptism. And therefore, that equative element, which is absolutely necessary, simply disappears.

Household Baptisms Do Not Establish Infant Inclusion

Why are families mentioned? I've answered this three or four times already. The places they're mentioned are illustrations of the grace of God, because that was not the normative experience of the early church.

It was not the normative experience of the early church for everyone in a family to respond positively to the gospel. That's what Jesus himself said. And I'm not sure what the argument is that, well, doesn't grace join families together?

Well, that depends on whether God is blessing a nation or he isn't. Right now, as we look around our nation, I'd like to suggest to you that true faith normally divides, not the other way around. And so, when we talk about children, this debate should not be about children.

This debate should be about Jesus Christ's authority to define the ordinances for his own people in the clarity of the writings of the New Testament, and not take the writings of the New Testament and overshadow them with a demand of fulfillment of old covenant promises.

And that's what I've said over and over again, is a violation of a consistent reformed hermeneutic. If we were to follow this methodology in any other area of theology, it would lead us to conclusions very different than the ones that we share.

The New Covenant Is Not About Excluding Infants

And so, who's being consistent this evening? It is not a matter of excluding infants. The new covenant does not have infants who are included in it, who will not ever experience the blessing of God in eternal life.

I don't mind excluding an infant from a covenant that doesn't perfect them in the trust that God will in fact be gracious to them in the new covenant. I pray that God will be gracious to my children, but I cannot force God to do so.

And I'm not sure exactly where, well, one parent in the Lord, where does that come from? What's the Old Testament parallel to having one of the two profess faith? Where did that come from? We weren't given any information like that.

How can I speak to the children at my church? I speak to the children of my church the same way I speak to the adults at my church. I don't have the ability to see into their hearts. That's why there are warnings in the book of Hebrews.

That's why you have in the same chapter where you have the perfection of the new covenant in Hebrews chapter 10, those by this will, they have been perfected, those for whom Christ died. You then have later on the warning.

So there's nothing more to go back to folks. If you go back to those things, there is no salvation for you. By the way, Hebrews 10, 29 is talking about Christ as the one sanctified by that blood, not the apostate.

That's a whole nother issue in regards to the new covenant. Here is what I'm saying. When I speak to my children, what does it mean obey your children in the Lord? Well, you know, when I talked to one of those, how many of you have ever had that, you know, purgatorial experience of talking to junior high schoolers?

That'll cleanse you real quick. And did you just cross yourself? Oh, okay, no. Would have scared me there if you'd done that. Didn't mean purgatory to become literal there. You've had that experience, right?

How many of you have done that? Ever tried to talk to those folks, they don't want to listen to a word you're saying? Am I not going to speak as Paul spoke? When I say obey your parents in the Lord, am I sitting there going, oh, well, you know, I need to try to look into every one of these little hearts.

I can't see anything in their hearts. Maybe the younger ones you might have a little bit, but the junior high schoolers, man, they're impossible. They put that thing on, they do that to their parents too, you know, you ain't going to look into me.

Oh no, I'm not going to give you any indication I'm listening to a word you're saying. They're pretty good at it. What does it mean to obey their parents in the Lord? Well, when you do, and I remember this as a junior high schooler, by the way, I was taught to obey my parents in the Lord, and that's how I knew what my service to the Lord was to be.

I knew that if I was in Christ, that in the Lord, I was to obey my parents. That is in my role as a Christian. Now, do I know when I speak to my adults, when I preach from the pulpit, am I assuming that every single person sitting in front of me is regenerate?

No, I can't do that. I wish God gave me that insight, but he doesn't. And so there have to be warnings. There has to be a recognition of the fact that while we live in this world, every church faces this, but the difference between the two sides is this.

I seek to protect the ordinances of the church by asking that those who receive those ordinances, which are signs of the new covenant, profess faith and repentance. That's what the apostles asked. That is what is necessary to discern the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I'm simply being consistent that in both ordinances, I am seeking to protect them. I do not give those ordinances hoping that someday they may be fulfilled. That was old covenant. That was before the cross.

In the new covenant, the ordinances are given to those who are saying, yes, I've been united with Christ. Yes, I have died. Yes, I've been buried and raised together with him. So those who experience it, recognize their union with Christ.

And that's why it's a testimony to others when they see that take place. That's the difference between us. Do we give the ordinances purposefully to unbelievers or do we follow the apostolic example and ask for repentance and faith?

Thank you very much.