Ehud said:
I will be honest and admit that I have come to have some FV sympathies and I understand the guidelines and purpose of this forum and will graciously take my leave if I ever cross over the boundary in discussing such issues.

Let me first say that when I read this, although it wasn't so much of a surprise since NPP/FV is taking many captive lately, but rather it made my heart heavy. When the soul of someone I know is in danger, it hurts me deeply.

Galatians 1:6-9; 3:1-3 (ASV) "I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a different gospel; 7 which is not another [gospel] only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema. 9 As we have said before, so say I now again, if any man preacheth unto you any gospel other than that which ye received, let him be anathema. . . . 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly set forth crucified? 2 This only would I learn from you. Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now perfected in the flesh?

Ehud asks about paedocommunion:

1) The Lord's Table is a sacrament which the Lord Christ instituted for believers wherein He communes with them by His Spirit. Without possession of a true saving faith, which is the fruit of regeneration, there can be no Communion.

2) The Elders are given the "keys of the kingdom" and rule over the Church which includes examining those who would desire to join a church. One of the prerequisites is a valid profession of faith. Thus at bare minimum, one must be able to answer questions concerning God, Christ, sin, salvation, exhibit a spirit of repentance and articulate their faith. Infants and most children are unable to meet those requirements.

3) A second requirement for one who would take of the Lord's Table is that they be able to "discern the body", i.e., they are capable of examining themselves. Again, the ability to do this requires that one be in possession of some knowledge both of sound doctrine and of themselves; the latter being restricted to those who are indwelt by the Spirit (regenerate). Again, infants and most children are not capable of examining themselves.

4) Although no man is able to infallibly judge the spiritual state of another's soul, it is still given to the Elders of the Church to discern whether or not, as best as they are able, if one is a believer in Christ and thus qualified to partake of the Lord's Table. Zwingli was in error when he determined that the Table is nothing more than a "memorial". Likewise, the Roman State Church is mistaken as to the "Real Presence", aka: transubstantiation and assigning to the Table a salvific element.

Ehud then writes:
I'd have to ask you to define hyper-covenantalism to understand your first point.
Broadly speaking, I define "hyper-covenantalism" as anything that assigns a salvific element to the Covenant of Grace, i.e., salvation is owned, totally or in part, on the basis of belonging to the covenant community. The Scriptures teach that one is a bona fide covenant member in a spiritual sense, because they are saved; not vice versa. True believers are de facto covenant members. Thus those who embrace "hyper-covenantalism" invariably hold that infants of believers are to be assumed regenerate or belong to some quasi-saved/potentially saved state because they are "in the covenant" via a parental relationship. I've expressed how this view is not biblical and antithetical to the doctrines of grace on numerous occasions here and thus I will not repeat it. In summary, one does not possess salvation to any degree because they are members of the covenant community, aka: a church, whether by making a profession of faith or by proxy, being a child of believing parents. There simply is no biblical warrant to support this view.

To return just briefly to the matter of NPP/FV, the entire foundation of this heresy is based upon the erroneous formulation of "Second Temple Judaism" (N.T. Wright, Saunders, et al). Although there are few at the present time who have published thorough critiques and refutations of this heresy, the ones that are available are worth reading. One I particularly recommend is The Gospel of free Acceptance in Christ, by Cornelis P. Venema and published by Banner of Truth.

Genesis 3:6 (ASV) "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat."

Matthew 16:6 (ASV) "And Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees."

[Linked Image]

In His grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]