Misrepresentations Corrected and Truth Vindicated in Vol I of the Works - Edwards - VII - Part III continued

Required readingMisrepresentations Corrected and Truth Vindicated in Vol I of the Works by Jonathan Edwards (Available from Amazon or free here) - Continue Part III by reading Sections X to XIV.

My summary.

Today Edwards gives examples of Mr William's inconsistencies with himself - the tenth point of Edwards' critique.

The examples include the discussion of:

(i) the parable of the man without wedding garment;

(ii) the wicked Israelites still being referred to as the people of God;

(iii) the Jewish Passover and circumcision;

(iv) Judas taking the Lord's Supper;

(v) the children being born into the covenant.

What grabbed me

The final section today about the discussion of children being born into 'the covenant' interested me greatly, as a Baptist.

I really do think infant baptism is a big part of the reason why the trouble arose in Edwards' church regarding the Lord's Supper.  

Due to infant baptism, Edwards is forced to make statements like the following: 

'The pretended argument, so far as I can find it out, is this; The children of visible saints are born in covenant; and being already in covenant, they must have a right to the privileges of the covenant, without any more ado: such therefore have a right to come to the Lord's supper, whether they are truly godly or not.

But the show of argument there is here, depends on the ambiguity of the phrase, being in covenant; which signifies two distinct things: either, (1.) Being under the obligation and bond of the covenant; or, (2.) Being conformed to the covenant, and complying with the terms of it. Being the subject of the obligations and engagements of the covenant, is a thing quite distinct from being conformed to these obligations, and so being the subject of the conditions of the covenant.

Now it is not being in covenant in the former, but the latter sense, that gives a right to the privileges of the covenant. The reason is plain, because compliance and conformity to the terms of a covenant, is the thing which gives right to all the benefits; and not merely being under ties to that compliance and conformity. Privileges are not annexed merely to obligations, but to compliance with obligations.'

To me, it looks like splitting hairs to avoid the question: 'If you start giving children one sign of the covenant, why not the other?'

If Edwards wasn't a paedobaptist, I think a fair bit of ink regarding the Lord's Supper might have been put to better use.

Next week's reading

Conclude Part III.

Now it's your turn
Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.