Comments on: Genesis 2 – The Covenant of Works http://reformedforum.org/podcasts/pc12/ Reformed Theological Resources Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:37:32 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.2 By: ct http://reformedforum.org/podcasts/pc12/#comment-1465762 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:37:32 +0000 http://reformedforum.wpengine.com/?post_type=podcast&p=2820#comment-1465762 How can you be a Pauline two-Adams Federal Theology adherent and not hold to republication? Jesus came to fulfill what the first Adam failed to fulfill. So was Jesus suppose to not eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Or was that command republished in obviously elaborated form on Sinai, and thus it was that that Jesus was to be *born under* and to fulfill to a ‘t’?

Perhaps you think Jesus’ encounter with Satan in the desert mirrored Adam’s encounter with Satan in the Garden enough to be what Jesus came to fulfill? But did that involve fulfilling a covenant?

Let us be honest: hiding behind this rejection of the republication of the Covenant of Works on Sinai is a concern for the doctrine of infant baptism. However one is seeing republication as cutting the legs out from under infant baptism (and I don’t it is supposed to do this currently, I sometimes do, but it’s like the Theory of Relativity, I forget it after I learn it) we can’t make Covenant Theology the servant of infant baptism.

I know, perhaps when a believer holds to republication it then leads them into seeing types too clearly which is the enemy of the doctrine of infant baptism.

]]>