Well, I have several confessional lessons I want to read this evening. First from chapter 25, which you can find on page 935 in the back of your hymnal. Chapter 25 of the church on page 935. And I'm going to read the first three paragraphs. Page 935, the Catholic or universal church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect and have been, are, or shall be gathered into one under Christ, the head thereof, and is the spouse, the body, the fullness of him that fills all in all. The visible church, which is Catholic or universal under the gospel, not confined to one nation as before under the law, consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion and of their children and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there's no ordinary possibility of salvation. Unto this Catholic visible church Christ has given the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God for the gathering and perfecting of the saints in this life to the end of the world, and does by his own presence and spirit according to his promise make them effectual there unto. Then I wanna read a few paragraphs from chapter 28. I wanna read paragraphs one and then four through six on page 936. Paragraph one and then paragraphs four through six. Paragraph one, baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament. ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible church, but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his engrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God through Jesus Christ to walk in newness of life, which sacrament is by Christ's own appointment be continued in his church until the end of the world. And then paragraph four, not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one or both believing parents are to be baptized. Although it's a great sin to neglect this ordinance, yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it as that no person can be regenerated or saved without it, or that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated. The efficacy of baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it's administered, yet notwithstanding by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited and conferred by the Holy Ghost to such, whether of age or infants, as that grace belongs unto, according to the counsel of God's own will in His appointed time. Well, this is a bit more of the confessions than we ordinarily read, but this evening we're gonna begin a short series on infant baptism. I think it's gonna be a sermon series of three. It's something we haven't really looked at from a doctrinal perspective for quite a long time, and there are a couple good reasons to do it now. First, Presley Minor will be baptized sometime in the near future, depending on the impact of the pandemic. And hopefully this study will help us understand why Presbyterian and Reformed folks do this and what we'll be doing on that blessed day. Second, this is a good time to do it because our study in 2 Samuel is at a good place for a break. There's a major transition in the book we might describe as B.B. and A.B. B.B. is before Bathsheba and A.B. is after Bathsheba. B.B. or before Bathsheba represented the ascendancy of Israel's great King David and A.B. or after Bathsheba represents a need for a king that's infinitely greater. than David. So it's a good time to help us all be better grounded in why we Presbyterians believe it's right to wet our babies, not the other way around. Now we'll be referring to these parts of the confession over the next several weeks, and I'm going to come back to them, but only as summary statements of what I hope I can show you is clearly taught in the Bible. So what I want to do is just point out a few things that will help sort of set the course for us. The first has to do with the church. Chapter 25 speaks of an invisible invisible church. You might think of it this way, the invisible church is the elect of God, those who have been born again, those who have a genuine saving faith in Christ. The invisible church is made up of believers at all times and in all spaces and in all locations, and it's called invisible because you and I can't see into a person's heart. Only God can do that. It's invisible to us, not to God. The visible church is made up of Christians who have a legitimate profession of faith, as well as their children. And this is a really important part of our discussion on baptism, because the visible church, the visible church has been entrusted with the ministry oracles and ordinances of God. And that of course includes baptism. And then if you were following along, as I know you were in chapter 28, we're told that baptism is a New Testament sacrament that admits the party baptized into the visible church. Now I'm going to explore this later on in the study. This will be more next week. But this is one of the areas of disagreement with our Reformed Baptist brothers and sisters. They don't have this same distinction of visible and invisible church. Again, I'll touch on that next week. But the confession reminds us that baptism ultimately is a sign and a seal of our union with Christ. And as such, it's a great sin to neglect it. But don't miss what we read there in paragraph five. A person can certainly be regenerated without being baptized, and being baptized in no way says that that person is undoubtedly regenerated. If you've always wondered about Presbyterian baptism of little ones, you gotta get this, because one of the things that's often charged is the idea that you baptize a little one and you just assume they're regenerated. That's just not true. confessions teach, and frankly that's because it's not what the Bible teaches. And we baptize into the visible church people who profess faith in and obedience to Christ as well as their children. And while this is surely a means of grace, the application of it as a means of grace rests wholly upon the work of the Holy Spirit according to the counsel of God's own will. talking fast, and just so you know, I just packed in about a half a semester of systematic theology into four minutes. But not to worry, those are some of the things we're going to be unpacking over the next three weeks. For now, let me just say this is sort of baby baptizing Presbyterianism 101, and if you agree that the Bible teaches those things that I just laid out, I think you'll find that this reminds you and or convinces you why it's right for us to wet our babies. And just a heads up, just so you know something of the direction we're going in and how I'm going to deal with this, I will attempt to interact with some of the objections you hear because they're important. But it's more important to understand what the Bible sets before us. And so to that end, I'm mostly going to be concerned with the differences we would have with primarily our Reformed Baptist brothers and sisters. The reason I say that is I'm not going to take the time to distinguish covenant theology from dispensationalism, right? Rather, I'm going to work under the premise that we all agree there's one plan of redemption in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. So that's sort of a quick, broad overview. With that in mind, let's now stand to sing number 195. Well, as I said, this evening we're going to take up the issue of infant baptism. And what I want to do this evening is look at the Abrahamic covenant and then sort of work out the doctrine from there. How circumcision was a sign and a seal of the covenant. and what that means for us as New Testament believers. And there's nothing controversial in that per se. But then specifically, I want us to see the continuity of the Abrahamic covenant in the New Testament. And then I want to wrap up with something that gets at one of the core disagreements between Presbyterians and Reformed Baptists. We're going to look at Jeremiah 31 and the New Covenant and how that impacts the continuity of the Abrahamic covenant as it relates to the New Testament. And then in future studies, I wanna tell you some of the things we're gonna look at. We're gonna look in future studies more specifically at the distinction between the visible and visible church. We're gonna look at how unbelievers and believers alike receive spiritual blessings by virtue of being in the covenant community, spiritual blessings by being in the covenant community. And I'm just telling you what's coming up so that if I don't answer a question you might have this evening, you'll know that maybe that particular issue is a coming attraction. So let's ask for the Lord's blessing and then we'll get to work. Please pray with me once more. Our great God, we thank you that your word is true. It is true truth, settled in the heavens. And how sweet it is to us, even sweeter than a honeycomb. And we pray that you give us a wonderful appetite for it this evening. And the Spirit would indeed dispense this sweet word to each one of us here. We ask all this in Jesus' name. Amen. Well, I'm going to ask you to open up your copy of scripture to Genesis 17, and we're going to read Genesis 17 verses 1 through 17. And rather than read some of the other passages, just keep your Bible open. For time reasons, I think it'll be a little better to go that route. But I do want to read Genesis 17. And the first 17 verses, this is the true word of the living God. When Abram was 99 years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, I am almighty God, walk before me and be blameless. And I'll make my covenant between me and you and will multiply you exceedingly. Then Abram fell on his face and God talked with him saying, as for me, behold, My covenant is with you, and you shall be a father of many nations. No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham. For I've made you a father of many nations, and I will make you exceedingly fruitful. And I'll make nations of you, and kings shall come from you. and I'll establish my covenant between me and you and your descendants after you in their generations for an everlasting covenant to be God to you and your descendants after you. Also, I give to you and your descendants after you the land in which you're stranger, all the land of Canaan as an everlasting possession, and I will be their God. And God said to Abraham, as for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep between me and you and your descendants after you. Every male child among you shall be circumcised, and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male child in your generations, he who was born in your house or bought with money from any foreigner who's not your descendant, he was born in your house and he who was bought with your money must be circumcised. And my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. and the uncircumcised male child who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people. He has broken my covenant." Well, let's stop there. The grass withers and the flowers fade, but the word of our God endures forever. Excuse me. dearest congregation of our Lord Jesus Christ in our passage. Abrams 99, which would make Sarah 88. It was at least 14 years earlier that the Lord had appeared to Abraham because the patriarch was concerned that he'd have no son to leave an inheritance to. And the Lord promised him a son, and in fact the Lord promised Abraham descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky. despite the Lord's gracious promise, Abraham and Sarah lacked patience, and Sarah concocted a plan that at the time probably seemed logical. Perhaps she even thought she was helping God out. She decided to give her servant Hagar to Abram so that through her Egyptian servant, Abram could have a son and this promise would be fulfilled. But the whole scheme was contrary to God's plan, and if you can remember how this unfolds, it turns out to be a disaster. Hagar did have a son, but instead of it being a blessing, it caused massive problems within the family. And Sarah ended up treating Hagar so badly that she ran away, and God had to go to Hagar and say, look, you're gonna have a son, and I'm gonna bless him, and I'm gonna bless you. But I want you to understand that the bleakness of Abram and Sarah's shortcut, the bleakness of their shortcut, sort of forms the backdrop for this story of covenant renewal, where the Lord is gonna give Abraham the sign of covenant circumcision. And this is not a small point, so to store it away, Abraham was having a faith crisis, right? That's clear from the fact that he went along with Sarah's cockamamie idea. And in the first verse, Yahweh appears to Abraham, and here's how he reveals himself to Abraham. I am the Lord Almighty. It's El Shaddai. And despite the fact that the Lord's come to him again, and the Lord's revealed himself to him as El Shaddai, in verse 17, did you see how Abraham responds? He laughs. Right? No way. I'm 99. That isn't happening. So it's not a high point for his faith. Let me point out a couple of things. First, this passage is just filled with the remarkable grace of God. He's the one renewing this covenant of grace at a time when Abraham is clearly struggling. And it's in this context that he's going to give them this covenant sign. Second, one of the things we want to see right up front is that these promises are all very forward-looking. in the sense that the promises that are going to extend beyond Abraham. We see in verse 2, God promises to multiply Abraham's seed exceedingly. In verse 5, Abraham will be the father of many nations. Also in verse 5, kings will come from this line. Think of two of the most prominent kings, King David and King Jesus. And then listen to verse 7, and I will establish my covenant between me and you and your descendants after you and their generations for an everlasting covenant to be God to you and your descendants after you. So don't miss this. The covenant is between the Lord and Abraham and Abraham's descendants and it's an everlasting covenant, everlasting. covenant. This verse in chapter 7, excuse me, in verse 7 also tells us or provides us a good summary statement of what a covenant is. It's the promise of God to be God to you and your descendants after you. And it's actually summarized a bit more in the last phrase of verse 8, and I will be their God. This is covenant language, covenant making ceremony. God's giving a covenant sign of an everlasting covenant. And the sign of the covenant, of course, is circumcision. And it's to be administered to every baby who's eight days old. And look there at verse 10. This is my covenant, which you shall keep between me and your descendants after you, every male child among you shall be circumcised." So every male child in Abram's house is a part of the covenant by virtue of their relationship to Abraham. And this is not only true of the children who were born from Abraham, from his family line, but even those who were brought in by being purchased. Then I want you to look at verse 14. And the uncircumcised male child, who's not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people. He's broken my covenant. Now something I'll say over and over, and something you know, I have the utmost respect for our Reformed Baptist brothers and sisters. I'm so thankful for them. I'm thankful they see one covenant of grace that spans the whole of redemptive history. But let this seriousness of verse 14 get fixed in your mind. children who do not get the sign of the covenant, a covenant that's been told is an everlasting covenant, they're cut off. Now this doesn't really prove anything about whether or not we should baptize infants, but it does say Boy, we better think very carefully about this, about whether little ones receive the sign of the covenant of grace in our time, which is, of course, after Christ. It's a fearful thing to contemplate what the Lord says to Abraham, that those who don't get the sign of the covenant are cut off from it. So it's not an insignificant matter. Now at this point, one of the questions we need to ask is this, just how much continuity exists in the covenant of grace from the time of Abraham to the time of Christ's earthly ministry and thereafter? And we live in the thereafter. Because one of the things our Reformed Baptist brothers and sisters would say is that in the New Testament, there's no instance of an infant being baptized. The New Testament is silent on little ones being included in the covenant. And to sort of borrow a little bit from Princess Bride, that's mostly true. But that argument of silence cuts both ways, equally sharp. There's no injunction in the New Testament against baptizing infants. And that silence needs to be addressed because what we read in verse 14 hangs in the air. If our little ones are not part of the covenant community, we have to ask the question, when did the everlasting covenant stop being everlasting? So what becomes essential for us is how we see or don't see the continuity of the covenant of grace from Abraham in Genesis 17 all the way to the New Testament. Now, there are countless ways we can make those connections. And I'm going to look at a couple of them. I can't look at all of them, obviously. The first one would be Galatians 3. So please turn there in your Bibles. Galatians 3. I want to look at verses 7 and 8. Galatians 3, verse 7. Know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, in you all the nations shall be blessed. So then, those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. Now, did you hear that? The gospel was preached to Abraham. The gospel. Now skip down to verses 16 and 17. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He does not say unto seeds as of many but as of one and to your seed who is Christ and this I say that the law which was four hundred and thirty years later cannot annul the covenant of that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. One of the things that happens when we talk about the sign of baptism, and whether or not infants should get the sign, is the problem that we leave out the truth that the new covenant, and what Paul's talking about here, is an administration of the same covenant God made with Abraham. Not a different covenant, the same covenant. And there's one other thing I want you to store away for a couple minutes, and this is important. The covenant that God made with Abraham wasn't abrogated, it wasn't set aside by the covenant God made with Moses 430 years later, right? It wasn't set aside. Keep that in the back of your mind. The covenant with Abraham, look there at the end of verse 17, is the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ. This is before the covenant as it was administered under the time of Moses. It was a covenant that was confirmed to Abraham by God in Christ. So there's a fairly straight line from the promise made in Genesis 17 to the New Covenant Gospel Christ. So again, one of the things we have to ask is, in New Testament times, would the Jews, to include Jews like the Apostle Paul, somehow imagine that little ones didn't inherit the promises of the covenant of grace? Would that even enter their mind? I mean, if in the Old Testament there's an emphasis of God working through families and in the New Testament doesn't signal that there's any kind of change in that policy, wouldn't it be extremely odd that the new covenant sacrament that we know includes women and includes Gentiles, includes all sorts of new people except the children of believers? That would mean in regards to the covenant, God's actually less generous to us on this side of Christ than he was on the other side. Again, we get back to this argument from silence, and I picked that up because that's how the debate is often framed. There's no New Testament verse that says, baptize little Johnny. But the silence that's deafening to me is when did the everlasting covenant with Abraham stop being everlasting? Wouldn't there have been some word, especially to the Jews, that this covenant no longer includes your children? Keep that in mind. Let me ask you to turn your Bibles to Acts 2. Acts 2. Just take a quick gander at the first sermon that was preached after Pentecost, Acts 2. Of course, Peter had stood up, he preached this powerful sermon, Acts 2, and he concluded with these very convicting words in Acts 2.36. Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." And this was the response of those who were there, verse 37. Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? Now listen to what Peter commands. Peter said to them, verse 38, repent and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sin and you'll receive the gift of the Holy Spirit for the promise is to you and to your children and to all who are far off as many as the Lord our God will call. Now we know when Peter preached this sermon there were people in the crowd from all over the known world, but who did the Apostle Peter address in the most specific way? Look there in verse 22. Men of Israel, hear these words. Verse 29, men in Brethren, let me speak freely to you. Who were Peter's brethren? The men of Israel. And in verse 36 we read, therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ. So Peter's focusing this sermon on whom? The Jews, the Old Testament covenant community, those who would have been circumcised. And when they cried out, what do we do now that God's word has confronted us with our sin? Repent. let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit for the promise is to you and to your children and to all who are far off as many as the Lord our God will call. As they listened to Peter and they heard echoes here of Genesis 17 7 Do you think those Jews would have thought the covenant sign of baptism should be administered to all their family, even their infants? Of course they would. Notice what verse 39 says, the promise is to you. The promise is to you. That's what baptism and circumcision was based on. not faith, the promise. Surely faith is essential for salvation in the Old and the New Testament, but the promise and the promise to your children is why the little ones were circumcised in the Old Testament and why we believe the little ones should be baptized in the New Testament. And in regards to the sign of the covenant being based on the promise and not faith, again, you get this distinction, the sign of the covenant being based on the promise and not faith. I want us to look just quickly at Romans 4. Romans chapter 4. We're going to read verses 9 through 12 and sort of zero in for a few minutes on verse 11. Romans 4. verses 9 to 12. Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised. but while uncircumcised. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith, which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they're uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also, and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had, while still uncircumcised. So I want to try to dissect this. First off, this passage uses the language of a sign and a seal. So what's a sign? Well, a sign's a visual object that points to something else. That's what a sign is. The best example, and the one I've used in the past, and don't know a better one so I'm going to keep using it, is this. Imagine you're taking a trip to Chicago and you see a sign that says Chicago, 69 miles. The sign's not Chicago. The sign's pointing to Chicago. The reality of Chicago. That's still 69 miles away. But that in no way affects the meaning of the sign. The sign is true, and it still points to a definitive reality. So the sign of circumcision was a sign that pointed to a reality, but wasn't the reality itself. In the Old Testament, circumcision was the cutting away of the flesh. And that was a sign that pointed to the need to have our guilt and the pollution of our sin thoroughly cut away. And ultimately, and this is something we'll look at next week, circumcision was a sign that pointed to Christ who underwent a divine circumcision on the cross. But the sign also seals something to us. So we have to ask then, what is the seal? Well, a seal is a mark of authentication. A seal validates something. In the case of circumcision, it validated God's covenant promise to Abraham. A good example of a seal and what it represents can be seen in our passports. Lisa and I got the first passports we've ever had, I think, just before we went to Israel. And here's what you have to do. You send two photos to the U.S. government. They put one of those photos on your passport right along with a seal. of the United States of America on your passport. And they go to incredible lengths to make sure it's nearly impossible to tamper with your passport. And the purpose of the U.S. seal on the passport next to your picture is to say that the government is authenticating that this is who we are. We're U.S. citizens and because of that we should be treated as such. God gave Abraham circumcision, it was a sign, and it was a seal. A sign that pointed to something, and a seal that authenticated something. And here's what it authenticated, God's righteousness to him, which Abraham received by faith. And let me just say, God has given his people signs and seals throughout redemptive history because he knows weakness. He's ordained sacraments to be pledges to us that he keeps his promises. And what Paul teaches us about sacraments in Romans 4 is incredibly important in this whole discussion and we have to see this. Because what's being taught in Romans 4 about sacraments is true of all the sacraments in the Bible, in the Old Testament, in the New Testament. And that is, sacraments are not in the first instance about our faith. They're about God's promises. Look again what Paul wrote there in verse 11. Abraham received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness the faith, a seal of the righteousness on account of faith, which he had while still uncircumcised. Don't miss this. Circumcision is not a sign and seal of Abraham's faith. In fact, that's why I made that point when we were looking at Genesis 17, at the point when he got this sign, Abraham's faith was in shambles, it was weak. Circumcision is a sign and seal of the righteousness of that's his by faith. In other words, and this is what you want to get, circumcision did not point Abraham to his faith. It pointed Abraham to the object of his faith, the righteousness of Christ. You see, circumcision was given to Abraham to draw out his faith, to strengthen his faith, and not in the first instance because Abraham had faith, although he did have faith. One of the reasons we know that to be true is that Abraham was to place that sign on every little boy who was eight days older or older, and that wasn't an indication of their faith, but an inclusion and the covenant promise. And here's the thing, when that sign was placed on those little boys, do you know what it meant? Exactly the same thing it meant for Abraham. Sacraments are never first and foremost about our faith. They're signs and seals of God's gracious promises. that's true of all the sacraments in scripture. Think of the rainbow that God provided Noah. Did God give Noah that sign because of Noah's faith? No. The rainbow was a sign that God would keep his covenant promise, and it was meant to strengthen his faith. It was a way that God could draw out faith from Noah. Let me borrow few sporadic points here from Sinclair Ferguson. Every time that Abraham or one of those little boys looked at the sign of circumcision, he was meant to look beyond circumcision, not to his faith, but to the promise God had given, that God would provide righteousness all who believed as Father Abraham believed. And Paul says that quite explicitly, doesn't he? And you can sit back and work this out with all the covenant signs that you find in the Bible, and what you see is that they all function in this same way. The direction in which they point us is not first to our response to the gospel, but to the gospel to which we respond. And this is really one of the great differences we have with our Reformed Baptist brothers and sisters in regard to the sacraments and particularly baptism. Here's how they see them. And I know I'm being charitable because I actually copied this from a brother, Jeff Riddle, who's a dear Reformed Baptist pastor in Virginia. You believe, you profess faith, and you get the sign, on the basis of faith. That's different than the way Presbyterians, and I believe Paul, is teaching us to see sacraments. The sign of baptism isn't chiefly about faith. It's about God's promise. Our baptism doesn't say, look at my faith. Our baptism always and necessarily points us to the object of our faith, which is Jesus Christ. Think of it this way. The gospel says, look to Christ, flee to Christ, fix your eyes on Christ, look away from yourself. That's what the signs and seal of the covenant do. They don't say, look at yourself and see if you've had faith. They say, look away from yourself and trust the promises. Let me try to make this practical. Let's say there's a little one who's four, five years old, been baptized and saying, mom, dad, what's my baptism mean? Here's what you tell them. It means that you're included in the covenant community and all the promises of the gospel are your birthright. And what your baptism means is that you need to look away from yourself and look to Jesus for the forgiveness of sins. Your baptism tells you that God's faithful to his promises. And so you look to those promises and you embrace them. And here's the thing, the Old Testament sadly reminds us that those who were circumcised and never embraced the promises, How does Paul describe them? They were as those who were uncircumcised. And the same thing could be said true of a person who's been baptized, regardless of their age, three-year-old or 90 years old. If they never have faith, it means they've become as unbaptismed. In other words, if baptism doesn't cause you to look at God's promises, then it has no saving effect. But if it reminds you to look to Christ and to understand its purpose, its saving purpose, then it has saving effect. That's one of the reasons we baptize little babies. The promises are theirs, just like ours. Abraham believed and underwent adult circumcision. Adult circumcision, that's a painful thought. We can call it believing circumcision. And God told Abraham, put that sign on the little ones too. And Abraham's the father of all who believe. And there's just simply no evidence in the Bible, as far as I can see, that the little ones should be excluded from the covenant, from the promise. Now here's where The rubber meets the road. There are a lot of Reformed Baptists, again, whom I love dearly, who can pretty much say amen to just about everything I've said at this point. And if you say, well, what's your hangup? Probably seven out of eight times, they're going to say, Jeremiah 31. Jeremiah 31. So let's look there real quick. And I'll try to be quick. Jeremiah 31, this is the great promise of the new covenant. Jeremiah 31. Just gonna read verses 31 through 34. Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I'll make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. But this is the covenant that I'll make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord. I'll put my law in their minds, and I'll write it on their hearts, and I'll be their God, and they shall be my people. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord, for they all shall know me from the least to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I'll forgive their iniquity, and their sin I'll remember no more." This is the promise of the New Covenant. Now let me say something you may or may not realize, or just maybe you've never thought of it. This is not the promise of the New Testament. Not the promise of the New Testament. A promise of a new covenant. And this is important. Because when our Reformed Baptist friends read this, and I do want to be as charitable as I can, they believe that in the New Testament, based on these verses, the church will be made up of regenerate believers. And they base that on verse 34. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, knowing the Lord, for they all shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. So they believe that the church ought to be made up, as best we can discern, of regenerate believers. And there's certainly some truth to that. But in the end, I believe that that view is what we would call an over-realized eschatology, which is a fancy way of saying, this actually can't be fulfilled until we get to heaven. That's when it'll be fulfilled. That will be the time when we don't need teachers to say, know the Lord, because everyone will know them from the least to the greatest. We won't need them. Everyone will know Yahweh. That's not gonna happen on this side of glory. I think about this. If we were living in a time when no one would need a teaching office, why is such an emphasis in the New Testament on the presence and validity of the teaching office, right? We got whole books of the New Testament to work out the implications of a teaching office. Why would we need men who labor in word and doctrine if everyone can simply say, know the Lord? It seems to me to be speaking of a reality that won't exist till we get to heaven. See, one of the main differences that exists is I don't see the new covenant. The new covenant that's promised in Jeremiah 31 is fundamentally different than the one God made with Abraham. They're the same in substance, just slightly different. They're just different in the way they're administered. And what Jeremiah is talking about, look at this, is that in the New Covenant era, which we are in now, we're already in it, although not yet in perfection. The New Covenant era that Jeremiah is speaking about now is not synonymous with the New Testament. But under the new covenant, the administration of the covenant of grace is gonna be completely different than it was, and listen, than it was when the covenant was administered unto Moses. In other words, Jeremiah is not saying the new covenant is a break from old to new. He's saying the new covenant is a break from the Mosaic administration. the covenant. Now, how do I know that? Why do I say that? Well, because that's the covenant Jeremiah references in verse 32. It's not the covenant God made with Abraham, but the covenant that was administered under Moses. And that's not just here in Jeremiah 31, that's the way it's interpreted in every New Testament text. Look at Hebrews 8, Hebrews 10, where they quote Jeremiah 31 extensively, what are they saying? We don't need a tabernacle. We don't need priests. We don't need sacrifices. The administration of that, that kind of administration of the covenant of grace is obsolete. And none of those passages or any other time it's used in the New Testament Is Jeremiah 31 used to deal with anything other than the way the covenant was administered under Moses? Even when Jesus used this language to speak of, this is the new covenant in my blood. Where did that come from? From the Mosaic covenant, right? Exodus 24. All this to say, dear ones, the promise God made to Abraham was the promise of an everlasting covenant. And the New Testament shows the continuity between the promises made to Abraham and the gospel so clearly. If you go back and read through the way the biblical writers in the New Testament interact with the Old Testament, they all affirm the same thing. The New Covenant was essentially the same under Abraham as it is under Christ. It's just fulfilled. The administration of that covenant was radically different under Moses and that administration is obsolete. A circumcision that was given to Abraham for his little ones and that in a large part helps us understand why we put the sign of the covenant. on our little ones. Amen. I was telling Paul and Don, normally my sermons, I write out about 3,500 words. I had 10,000 words on this this morning. So I was seriously cropping, and that doesn't even include next week. So I was talking fast, trying to get a lot covered here. So I'll give you a minute to ask any questions, and yeah. And if it's something that I'm going to cover next week, I'll tell you that. So but. One question I had was, for any reason, baptized mom and dad want to have the child baptized at a Christian school. I baptize my mom and dad that are part of a church. Is there any reason why they have a child that they would bring into the church to have baptized? The question Frank asked, is there a reason why, first off let me say I think based on like 2 Corinthians 7 we would say if at least one parent is believing, you can bring the child to be baptized, because by virtue of being in that family, Paul says they're holy, they're set apart. And with that getting into the weeds, the question he asked is, is there any reason the church would say no? I'm just gonna sound a little glib, but I don't mean it this way. If they're Baptists, but not a Presbyterian or Reformed person. I mean, that really is the gist of it. You know, again, I don't mean to sound glib, but that's really, you're dealing with what is the difference between that. And by the way, something I try to emphasize, I'm not saying they're not strong, wonderful, Bible-believing, da-da-da-da-da, but that's the difference. And it's a substantial difference. But there's no reason, no. Yeah. I believe it's one of the most misunderstood doctrine in many of us, period, of life changes. What I mean by that is, you asked an athlete, Joe Bowen, about the baptism, why they were baptized as angels. And I'm sincerely one of those people. And the answer would be, because God made certain promises to people in the covenant community, people in the visible church, and those promises tell me every day of my life, I've got to look outside myself to Christ. Chris, you were going to? Yeah, I may have told this a long time ago, but I wondered if you could give a comment on the significance of the term ordinates, the circles, and why they don't want to use the term sacrament. What Chris asked is, in some Baptist churches, they don't like to use the word sacrament. I think that's only in sort of American kind of evangelical dispensational Baptist. I do think Reform Baptists speak of baptism as a sacrament. So I don't think they have the same aversion. Again, as I said, I'm not interacting with all the different issues. Like what Paul said about Presbyterians and them not knowing often what this means is equally true of Baptists. They're all over the place. There are some Baptists who they hear of baptizing infants and all they think of, man, you're going to follow the Pope. That's what Catholics do. That's all they hear. I'm not going to deal with that. Then there are other Baptists who are very biblical. But they sort of have a soft dispensationalism. They see such a radical divide between the Old and New Testament. And then the group where you have more in common are going to be the Reformed Baptists. And as far as I know, they definitely use it in terms of the Lord's Supper. I'm pretty sure they use it in terms of baptism. You can look it up in the London Baptist Commission. That guy right here. It actually does say ordinance. It's talking about the Lord's Supper uses the word ordinance. Yeah. Well, I didn't know either, but Jeff just said it's ordinance. It's interesting. There's a wonderful group of Baptists that I absolutely love. They promote what's called 1689 federalism, and what's interesting is There are a number of things that are not in the London Baptist Confession that they're trying to sort of sneak in, one of which is the Covenant of Works. Another is, if you ask them, do you make the distinction between a visible and invisible church? It's not in there. If you look at chapter 26, because I did look at that in the London Baptist Confession, they don't make that distinction. The reason that the 1689 Federalist guys actually do this, and this is not meant as a dig, but they have to. Because if they don't do that, then ultimately I could convince all of them to baptize babies. Right? They need that. I mean, I don't say that to be critical. And again, you know, there are so many people who have such have such a superficial kind of faith and understanding of the Bible. I don't like picking on people that I take as serious, but I disagree. Any other questions, comments? By the way, Jeremiah 31, do you understand it that way in terms of the Mosaic implications? Okay, I didn't remember if I, I know we had talked about it, so. But that's a big deal. There seems to be this picture that the New Covenant is New Testament. I just don't see it that way. It's specifically new in relationship to the Mosaic Covenant, not new in relationship to the Old Testament. And again, that fits the context of Hebrews 8 and Hebrews 10 and even when Jesus used the language. Yeah, yeah, what Vinny asked, it's hard for me to hear with the mask muffled, but is, am I going to get into what baptism actually means? And yes, I am. And one of the places I'll be looking at that is from Colossians 2. But yeah, that will be one of the things we look at next week. Can you define the difference between a sacrament and ordinance? Can I define the difference between a sacrament and ordinance? I don't know. Yeah, I can define it the way I understand it, but I'm not sure if that's how they mean it. A sacrament, there are two sacraments, baptism and the Lord's Supper. That's under the umbrella of an ordinance, but the preaching of the word is an ordinance as well, right? So there are a number of ordinances Church discipline, I think, is typically understood as an ordinance, isn't it, Chris? So, I mean, those are ordinances. Think about what ordinary means. It's the orderliness, think of it that way, of what functions in the church and the ministry of the church. Yeah. Anyway, any other questions? Well, let's pray. Father, how we thank you and bless you for your word and we are thankful for your covenant, a covenant that you've made with your people. And we thank you that those who live in that covenant are always called to look away from themselves and to look to the object of the covenant, the object of the promise, the Lord Jesus Christ. And we pray that we look to him and believe on him and trust wholly in him as we go from here. And we ask all this in his precious name. Amen.