The dangerous error of Covenant Succession Part 4

III. The Fallacy of Covenant Succession Ejected

Not only do the passages of Scriptures often referred to by the exponents of covenant succession, offer no support to the concept, there are also a whole raft of other issues, doctrines and passages of Scripture that this fallacy contradicts:

1. This fallacy involves a time division of the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation where there ought to be none. While there is a logical order that can be attributed to the work of the Holy Spirit in effectual calling, regeneration, conversion, justification, adoption and the beginning of sanctification, there is actually no time difference. The division made in these matters is never a time related one, it is a logical one to help our understanding.

This work of the Holy Spirit cannot in this circumstance be separated by a period of time, long or short. Once a sinner is effectually called and regenerated, that new life immediately expresses itself in faith and repentance, which brings about justification, adoption and the beginnings of sanctification. It is not possible for new life to be in the soul of a sinner, by virtue of regeneration, and that new life not express itself in faith and repentance. These are the first acts of a newborn soul. They follow on immediately from regeneration.

The dangerous error of Covenant Succession Part 3

II. The Fallacy of Covenant Succession Examined cont'd

Another area where support for 'Covenant Succession' is drawn from is that of Scriptural testimonies. The lives and the language that surrounds a number of individuals is employed to bolster this fallacy. However, instead of providing support for the concept of 'Covenant Succession', each one of these Scriptural testimonies argue against this fallacy in different ways:

1. Psalm 22:9,10: But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother’s breasts. I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother’s belly. These words are taken to refer to David and are viewed as supporting the premise that children can be regenerated from infancy and even when they are in their mother's womb.

However, these words do not refer to David at all but to the person of the mediator Jesus Christ. The whole Psalm in a messianic prophecy from beginning to the end. It commences with a subsequent cry from the cross, it concludes with another cry from the cross. This Psalm is prophetic of the sufferings of the Messiah. Verses 9,10 can no more apply to the personal experience of David than the words of v16: For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. Did David also then have his hands and his feet pierced? This would have to be the consistent interpretation if vv 9,10 are going to be applied to David.

The dangerous error of Covenant Succession Part 2

II. The Fallacy of Covenant Succession Examined

Any considered examination of the Scriptural evidence upon which this fallacy is based will require us to seriously question this thesis.

It is surely a most foolish practice to draw a distinction between how we treat and view our children before God and how they actually are in reality before God. How great is the folly of treating our children as being in the covenant when they may not be? It surely must be crystal clear that a person is either in the covenant or they are not. If it is claimed that the children of believers are in the covenant then it must emphatically follow that they will be converted and will persevere unto the end. Not one of them will fall out of the covenant and be lost if they are really and truly in the covenant! This is the infallible terms of the covenant of grace. They cannot be in the covenant and not eventually be saved.

Even the holders of 'Covenant Succession' have to admit the obvious reality that not all children of believers are in Christ. So where is 'Covenant Succession' here? Some go as far as to assert that those who do not persevere are not really their true children after all. A scandalous assertion!

If it has to be acknowledged that sadly many children of believers are not in the covenant because they end up dying out of Christ, then where is the reality of 'Covenant Succession'? The reality makes a mockery out of the claim! All the children of believers are not in the Covenant! Therefore they should not be treated as such.

The dangerous error of Covenant Succession Part 1

There is a belief, professed among some ultra-Reformed, and hyper-Calvinistic circles, that the children of believers do not need to be evangelised and certainly do not need to be converted in the conventional sense of the term. It is 'nurture' and 'discipline' that they need, not 'evangelism' is their mantra!

These 'covenant children', as they are described, are to be looked upon and treated as being 'the children of God'. They must therefore be treated, not as the enemies of God, but as members of, and brothers and sisters in, the kingdom of God. They are even to be welcomed to the Lord's Table in many instances from an early age and encouraged to be partakers of the bread and wine.

This view goes under a number of different titles such as: 'Covenant Succession', 'Presumptive Regeneration', 'Presupposed Regeneration', 'Dormant Regeneration' or 'Covenantal Regeneration'. All with slight variations of meaning in each term, and maybe in some cases no difference of meaning at all. Some adherents certainly engage in semantics where they deny they believe in or hold to 'Presupposed Regeneration' but rather describe their view as 'believing covenant promises' or 'trusting in covenantal election'. Same thing only different words!