Covenant Theology

How our children come to faith

(A helpful article which illustrates some of the principles below is the interview with Margaret McPhail in the most recent issue of Good News, pp 5-7)

How our children come to faith
Stephen Smallman
P&R, 2006

P&R publishing have a helpful series of booklets entitled ‘Basics of the Reformed faith’. This booklet is particularly helpful for giving a covenantal understanding of how we should expect our children come to faith. It’s written by a grandfather who by God’s grace has seen all four of his children come to faith and marry Christian spouses.

Here are some highlights:

  • “In my pastoral experience, too many Christian parents are so focused on their responsibility for their children’s spiritual lives that their prayers are essentially, “Lord, help me do my job and fulfill my calling to raise my children in the faith.” They don’t stop and listen first to what God has told them about his commitment to our children” (p. 6)

  • “When we pray for our children and work with them in our homes and churches, God’s covenant-making and covenant-keeping should give us confidence that it is his purpose and plan to pass his salvation from generation to generation. In the Presbyterian tradition, we use the expression covenant children to describe their unique standing before God. That is a very helpful and biblical way to think of our children. Having this confidence in God’s faithfulness to his covenant promises is the most important single thing we can do for the salvation of our children. We should pray for them with earnestness, but pray with confidence because God has clearly revealed his will for our children and he keeps his promises” (p. 15)

  • …Once we understand that regeneration is a hidden work of God, then we can pray and believe that the Spirit would begin that work very early in our children’s lives. It will probably be several years before our children express that faith in a public confession. But that doesn’t mean the Spirit hasn’t been at work from a very early point in their lives. I think many parents are particularly zealous to press their children to make some sort of “decision for Jesus” because they think that such a point marks the beginning of their spiritual lives. Actually, the beginning is the mysterious work that only the Spirit can do.” (p. 17)

  • “Do our children need to be converted? The answer to that is yes, as long as we don’t define conversion in terms of a particular kind of experience. In a companion booklet in this series, I have defined conversion in the words of the Westminster Shorter Catechism as “embracing Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel.” Based on this definition, our children most certainly need to be converted—but that conversion could be so much a part of their lives that they grow up never knowing a time when they weren’t embracing Jesus Christ freely offered in the gospel.” (pp 20-21).

  • “The matter of how to make sure that our children are “saved” is a source of real anxiety for many conscientious Christian parents. Concerned parents begin to “evangelize” their children as soon as they are able to talk...Then they proudly announce that Mary, at age three or four, has “received Christ as her Lord” because she prayed some variation of the sinner’s prayer or answered the call at a vacation Bible school or Sunday school meeting. Loving teachers or youth leaders ask our children over and over whether they are “really sure” they have accepted Jesus. After a while they aren’t sure—because they don’t know which time they prayed the prayer was the “real” time. One of my children tells about making up a “testimony” to finally satisfy his youth leaders that he was a believer.

    That is all well-intentioned, but I wonder if it is the best approach. How much of this way of dealing with children is a consequence of feeling that their salvation hangs on how effective we are in evangelizing them? I want to encourage you instead to start with an awareness of God’s wonderful promises and to rest in those promises. Of course we have great responsibilities, but that can’t be our starting place.

    If we build on the foundation of God’s promises and Jesus’ statement about our children, then we can view the salvation of our children from the perspective of faith rather than anxiety. And by faith, we then set about the privilege of raising our children “in the training and instruction of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4). The word that better fits this admonition is discipleship rather than evangelism. The earliest disciples were following Jesus even while they were learning what it meant to believe in him. Can’t it be said that our children are part of a family of Jesus’ disciples and that in that sense, they themselves are also disciples? As the family serves the Lord, led by the head of the household, the members of the family learn together what it means to embrace Jesus personally.” (pp 21-22)

  • “The term used in earlier generations to describe this more discipleship-oriented way of passing along the faith was Christian nurture. The question of how children come to faith received a great deal of attention in the Presbyterian church with the rise of revivalism in the nineteenth century. So much attention was given to dramatic conversion stories that the “boring” examples of people growing up and receiving the faith passed along to them by their families were considered invalid. In some ways it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because such ordinary means as family prayers, catechizing children, and faithful church attendance were being set aside to wait for the next great season of revival, many children were leaving the faith of their fathers” (p. 23)

  • In previous generations: “Christian nurture was, then, the appointed, the natural, the normal, and ordinary means by which the children of believers were made truly the children of God. Consequently it was the method which these leaders believed should be principally relied upon and employed for the salvation of their children.” (p. 23)

The Promise-Driven Family: how our covenant theology shapes our daily lives

“Fear for the next generation is not profound or enlightened, it’s disbelieving and a lack of faith”

89505310_2863619153704016_8827381764470079488_o.jpg

Last month, two families from Stranraer attended the RPCI’s Family Day Conference, held in Cullybackey RPC. The talk, by Rev. Mark Loughridge, addressed the question of how our covenant theology should affect our parenting. It was a really helpful talk and you can listen to it below:

You can view the accompanying powerpoint here.

Jerusalem, the Bible and Donald Trump

On Sunday morning we began worship by singing from Psalm 122. Given the events of the past week, it's very important to be clear on what it means for us to 'Pray for the peace of Jerusalem' in 2017.

The city has been in the news after US President Donald Trump's highly controversial decision to recognise it as Israel's capital, in fulfilment of a campaign promise. As PBS reported:

"For Trump, the proclamation was an important way to make good on a pledge to his political base, which includes evangelical Christians and pro-Israel Republicans eager for such a move."

And while it can't be denied that many evangelical Christians see this as a positive move, the fact that they do is due to a misunderstanding of the Bible.

As a church, we take the Jewish roots of Christianity seriously. We sing the psalms, we read from the Old Testament, and have sermons from it as often as we have ones from the New - things that aren't true of many churches.

But, at the same time, by taking the Old Testament language of Israel and the temple and applying it to Christians, the New Testament makes it clear that the it's those who have faith in the Messiah (whether Jew or Gentile) who are the true 'Israel of God'.

That isn’t to say that the church has replaced Israel (as some would claim we teach). There is one church of God in both the Old and New Testaments. In the Old Testament it was largely Jewish. However the prophets foretold that the gospel would go out to the nations of the world, which is exactly what we see happening after the resurrection of Jesus.

In Romans 11, the Apostle Paul describes the church as an olive tree. The natural branches of that tree are Jewish, and we as Gentiles have been added on - but there only ever has been one olive tree. The book of Revelation describes 24 elders which represent the 12 tribes of Israel and Jesus’ 12 Apostles. The church is made up of all who have believed in Jesus, both Jew and Gentile.

god_satan_and_the_jews_1024x1024.jpg

However the Judaism of today is the religion of those who rejected and killed their own Messiah. It’s not the Judaism of the Old Testament, which as we’ve seen from Galatians was a religion of faith in God’s promised Messiah. The Judaism of today is a works religion. Jews today don’t worship the God of the Bible ('No one who denies the Son has the Father' - 1 John 2:23). The book of Revelation even refuses to apply the name ‘Jew’ to the first century Jews (2:9; 3:9). It describes them as: ‘those who say they are Jews but are not, but are a synagogue of Satan’. If they really were Jews, they would have accepted the Jewish Messiah.

Nor is there still an earthly promised land today. The earthly promised land was always a picture of Heaven. Hebrews 11:10 tells us that even Abraham, who received the promise of the land, was looking for something better - something beyond this world.

The Promised Land of Israel has served its purpose. The Modern Day state of Israel is a human creation and not the fulfilment of any Biblical prophecy. So whatever our take on the politics of the Middle East today, we can’t claim the Bible supports one side or the other. Being a Christian and believing the Bible doesn’t obligate you to support the State of Israel today, any more than it obligates you to support Palestine.

Donald Trump declaring Jerusalem as the capital of Israel has no more Biblical significance than it would if he declared that the 2013 UK City of Culture was called Londonderry rather than Derry.

None of this should be controversial in a church of the Reformation - it's what the Reformers taught. So, when Paul describes the church as 'the Israel of God' in Galatians (6:16), Luther comments: ‘The Israel of God are not the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel but those who, with Abraham the believer (3:9), believe in the promises of God now disclosed in Christ, whether they are Jews or Gentiles.’

And so, to bring it back to Psalm 122: When we pray for the peace of Jerusalem today, we’re not to think of the city in the Middle East. Yes we should pray for peace there, just as we should pray for peace in Lebanon and Pyongyang. However as the second half of verse 6 explains, this is a call to pray for 'those who love you'. Psalm 122, then, is calling us to pray for peace among those who are the spiritual descendants of Abraham, who believe in the promises of God and who trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, whether they are Jew or Gentile. 

Some helpful books and resources by RP ministers:

Fred Leahy (former principal of Reformed Theological College) - God, Satan and the Jews: the place of the Jews in prophecy and history (Cameron Press, 2015)

'Appendix: Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism' in David McKay (Shaftesbury Square RPCThe Bond of Love: Covenant Theology and the Contemporary World (Christian Focus,  2001)

Jonny McCollum (Milford RPC) - Replacement Theology? (Reformed Theological Journal, 2016)

Some other helpful resources:

R. Scott Clark - Covenant Theology is not Replacement Theology

Keith Mathison - Dispensationalism: Rightly dividing the people of God?