Children are Included in the Covenant

Since this is the case, it is not surprising that God’s covenant would include the children of believers. Children are the tangible evidence of the one-flesh relationship that exists between a husband and wife. They are the gifts of God to His people and thus, we would not expect them to be excluded from His covenant. And, indeed that is precisely what we find.

The covenant made with Adam included his children. The covenant was made not only with Adam but with all his posterity. This is evidenced by the fact that when he sinned, all mankind, all his children, fell with him (Romans 5:18: "Therefore, as through one man’s offense {judgment} came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act {the free gift came} to all men, resulting in justification of life."). What happened to Adam had consequences for all his posterity since they were included in the covenant.

This same principle of the inclusion of children is illustrated through the Bible:

1. The Covenant with Noah. The fact that God saved the family/household of Noah from the flood, indicates the covenant principle. But this is expressly laid out when God renews His covenant with Noah the children are included (Genesis 9:9: "And as for Me, behold, I establish My covenant with you and with your descendants after you,").

2. The Covenant with Abraham (Genesis 17:7 "And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you."). The covenant is established not only with Abraham, but with his children (his household) as well. Not only was Abraham now required faithfully to keep God's covenant, but his children were as well (Genesis 17:9: "And God said to Abraham: As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations."). For this reason, they were to be given the sign and seal of the covenant (Genesis 17:10 "This {is} My covenant which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you shall be circumcised;")

3. Isaac (Genesis 26:3-4), Jacob (Genesis 28:13-15), and Moses are all given the same promise. Thus, when the covenant is made with the nation at Sinai, God does not exclude the children. In fact, they figure so prominently in His covenant, that one of the ten commandments is addressed to them with a covenant promise attached (Exodus 20:12: "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you."). They are members of that body God delivered from Egypt and thus, are bound to be faithful to Him. The household of those who believe are included in God's covenant and obligated to honor Him.

4. When God gathers the congregation of His people together for those frequent times of covenant renewal, He is careful to lay out who is to be considered as part of the congregation. Who are the members of His covenant body? Look at Deuteronomy 29:10-13 -- The "little ones" i.e., the babes are as much a part of that body as the leaders and the men.

We find the same thing when Joel calls the congregation to repent, he calls everyone to gather and note who is included (Joel 2:16 "gather the people, sanctify the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the children and nursing babes; let the bridegroom go out from his chamber, and the bride from her dressing room.")

5. Therefore, we are not surprised to hear our Savior affirming the legitimate right of the children of the covenant to the blessings of the covenant (Matthew 19:13-15). The word "children" in Matthew could refer to both young and older children. But Luke (18:15) uses the term "brophe" -- "babes in arms, nursing infants." The point is that even those babies incapable of making conscious, intelligent choices, were members of the covenant by virtue of God’s sovereign claim.

The coming of the Messiah did not change this basic element of God’s covenant, children are included.

6. Thus, on that momentous day of Pentecost, when the New Covenant is formally inaugurated -- the perfect time to announce any major changes in the nature of God’s covenant relationship with His people -- Peter stands before the gathered people and repeats the promise made to Abraham (Acts 2:39: "For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.").

The children are still recipients of the covenant promise and the blessings and benefits that come with it. The covenant includes the believer and His household, just as it included believing Abraham and his household.

This also explains the significance of the "household baptisms" we find in the New Testament (Acts 16:15 -- Lydia believes and she and her household were baptized; Acts 16:33 -- The Philippian jailor believes and he and his house are baptized; I Corinthians 1:16 -- Paul mentions that he baptized the household of Stephanas).

This is nothing more than the application of the covenant structure that the believer and his family is included in the covenant. As Jesus said to Zacchaeus upon his conversion (Luke 19:9), "Today has salvation come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham." When Zacchaeus believed, his household was incorporated into the covenant.

7. Paul thus, addresses children as legitimate members of the church, and therefore under covenant obligation to be faithful to God (Ephesians 6:1-3; Colossians 3:20). If they are faithful, they will receive the covenant blessings promised.

8. Perhaps the most striking evidence that children are members of the covenant is found in I Corinthians 7:14. Here, Paul is dealing with the situation of a Christian being married to an unbeliever. The specific question arose apparently because of the overwhelming covenant consciousness which pervaded the early church.

Here’s the concern: Since a believer is in covenant with God and an unbeliever isn’t, should a Christian divorce the unbeliever for the sake of covenantal purity? Isn’t this especially the case in regard to the children of such a union? If children of believers are included in the covenant, what is the status of children of "mixed" marriages? Do they have a right to covenant privileges?

Note what Paul says (vv. 12-13). The marriage is not illegitimate even under these circumstances. If the husband is willing to live with his Christian wife (i.e., willing to live in terms of God’s covenant demands) she should not desert him. Why? (v. 14) The unbeliever is sanctified by the believer -- i.e., the marriage is a legitimate one and should not be broken unnecessarily.

But he goes on, "and the children" (who otherwise would be "unclean") are now "holy." What can this possibly mean?

Does it mean that the children are automatically saved and made holy by virtue of having one believing parent? That cannot be so, no one is saved by virtue of the faith of another.

The only way this statement can be understood Biblically is if we interpret it in a covenantal sense. The word "holy" means basically "set apart unto God." Israel was a "holy" nation because she was set apart from the other nations of the earth and privileged to be in covenant with God. This distinguished her from the other nations which were "unclean."

The point Paul is making is that the children of a believing parent are in the covenant. Whereas otherwise, given unbelieving parents, children would be "unclean" (cut off from God's covenant), now however, they are "holy" (included in the covenant of God).

What is amazing in all this is the fact that such a concern would ever arise at all. If the children of believers were normally not viewed as members of the covenant -- no one would have raised this question in the first place! The status of children in regard to God’s covenant, would never have been a concern!

But to the contrary, it was such a problem in the minds of Christians that they were even considering divorce in order to protect the covenant privileges of their children. The thought that the children might lose the privileges of the covenant made them consider breaking up their marriages in order to preserve the blessings of covenant membership for the children.

There is not one single word in the New Testament which indicates that children are to be excluded from the covenant. And to the contrary, there are many places where the indication is that they continue to be members of the covenant as they always had been. Those who say the New Testament is silent in regard to membership of children in God's covenant and thus assume that God does not permit it under the New Covenant, forget the fact that there is no need to repeat a teaching or to enforce a practice that has always been in place.

The very fact that the New Testament contains no direct instruction concerning children indicates that the Old Covenant practice continues. Who can imagine this kind of silence if in fact, after 4000 years of acknowledging the legitimate membership of children in the covenant, this had all changed? Francis Schaeffer makes this point powerfully commenting on the significance of Acts 2:38-39:

Remember, Peter said this to Jews, Jews who were used to having the outward sign of their faith applied to their children. With all these things in his mind, he would expect his child to be baptized. If it were refused, what would you have done in his place? You would have asked the Apostles the reason why. So would the thousands of Christian Jews in that day. The question would have been asked in a hundred meetings; and Peter, John, Paul, and the others would have sat down and written in their Epistles to clear up the matter, just as they answered other questions that arose. The New Testament would have contained the clear answer as to why in the Old Testament the Covenant sign was applied to the infants of believers, but in the New Testament it was to be withheld from them.

The only reason possible for the New Testament not dealing with this problem is that the problem did not exist. The only possible reason that there was no problem in the Jews' minds was that the believing Jews did apply the covenant sign to their children. They baptized their babies as they had circumcised them in the Old Testament dispensation. (Baptism, pp. 18-19)