Sunday, 3 February 2019

I Corinthians 7:14—“… else were your children unclean; but now are they holy”


But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife? But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches (I Cor. 7:12-17).


BAPTIST ARGUMENT:
“How does this text teach or imply that infants are to be baptized?”


(I)

Rev. Angus Stewart

[Source: “Holy Children,” in Covenant Reformed News, vol. 11, no. 2 (June, 2006)]

I Corinthians 7:14 asserts that the children of one believer (or the children of two believers) are not “unclean” but “holy” (Greek: hagios). But what is meant by the holiness of the children of believers here?

Some argue that this means that these children are not illegitimate (i.e. since their parents were validly married), while others reckon that holiness here means only that the children of believers are formally, externally, outwardly and legally in the instituted church and so have access to Christian teaching and influences.

We believe that the holiness of the children of believers is real, inward, infused, spiritual holiness or sanctification (also from hagios) whereby they are cleansed from sin and consecrated to God by the Holy Ghost. Thus adult believers and their elect seed share in a creaturely way in the holiness of God (I Pet. 1:15-16). Our “holy” children (I Cor. 7:14) are sanctified by the Triune God (Jude 1), in Christ (I Cor. 1:230Heb. 2:11) and through the Holy Spirit (Rom. 15:16I Pet. 1:2). Like us, our spiritual seed were chosen in Christ to holiness before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4) and sanctified through Christ’s offering Himself for us on the cross (Heb. 10:1014). As members of the church, Christ loved and gave Himself for our elect children in order to “sanctify and cleanse” them and, at the last day, to present them “holy and without blemish” to Himself as part of His one, holy, catholic and apostolic church (Eph. 5:25-27). Thus by God’s sovereign, irresistible grace in regeneration, our “holy” children are “created in righteousness and true holiness” (Eph. 4:24).

But why do we believe that the holiness of the children of believers (I Cor. 7:14) is real, inward, infused, spiritual holiness? First, this is the usual meaning of “holy” (hagios), as the previous paragraph indicates. Second, and conclusively, this fits with the Bible’s teaching concerning the children of believers. Consider: (1) They are in the kingdom of God and under the saving rule and blessing of Christ (Mark 10:13-16). (2) They are saints (or holy ones) and members of the church of Christ who are called to keep the fifth commandment, as a rule of gratitude (Eph. 1:1; cf. 6:1-4Col. 1:1-2; cf. 3:20-21). (3) They are in the covenant of grace and so the Triune God is their God and they are His people—in all that this entails (Gen. 17:7). (4) God promises that His covenant, Holy Spirit and words are with them (Isa. 59:21)—a promise that clearly obtains in the New Testament (Isa. 59:20; cf. Rom. 11:26). (5) God’s promised Holy Spirit (and the blessings of Messianic salvation which He brings) is not only to believers but also to their children (Acts 2:39). (6) Thus we read of the infant regeneration of Jeremiah (Jer. 1:5), John the Baptist (Luke 1:154144) and the “children,” “babes” and “sucklings” in the temple on the day of Christ’s triumphal entry—for how else could God perfect praise from them but through regenerating them (Matt. 21:15-16Ps. 8:2)?

But some may object that since I Corinthians 7:14 says that the unbelieving spouse is (externally and positionally) sanctified by the believing spouse (see News X:24 [April, 2006]), the sanctification of the children can not be real, inward, infused, spiritual holiness. First, whereas the text states twice that the unconverted spouse is “unbelieving,” nothing prejudicial is said regarding the spiritual condition of the children. Second, the (external, positional) sanctification of the unbelieving spouse and the holiness of the children are not placed on a par. Instead, the latter is the ground or basis for the former. Two believers in marriage have holy children; two unbelievers produce unholy children; but what about the children of a believer and an unbeliever? Our text explains that they are holy and since this is so the unbelieving spouse must be (externally and positionally) sanctified. Third, whereas the (external, positional) sanctification of the unbelieving spouse must be proved, the holiness of the children is assumed. Why would it be assumed in this inspired epistle and by God’s people, unless the holiness of the children of believers is something clearly taught in the Word of God. For, as I have shown above, they are members of God’s kingdom, church and covenant who are saved and blessed by Christ and regenerated and sanctified by His Spirit.

This inner, spiritual holiness of our elect children is taught in the Canons of Dordt 1:17 (as part of the truth of unconditional election), the Heidelberg Catechism, Q. & A. 74 and “The Form for the Administration of Baptism” (cf. the many quotes on infant baptism).

This is vital for our understanding of Christian marriage (the subject of I Cor. 7). How are believers in mixed marriages (or believing couples) to view their children? Not as unholy, little vipers but as “holy by supernatural grace” possessing “the new spiritual life” (Calvin, Institutes 4.16.31). For God sovereignly makes a difference between the children of believers and the children of unbelievers by His eternal covenant of grace (Gen. 17:7Acts 2:39). Yet unconditional election and reprobation even effect the physical children of believers. Some are the elect “children of the promise;” others are the reprobate “children of the flesh.” “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated” (Rom. 9:6-13). 


--------------------------------------------------

(II)

Prof. David J. Engelsma


With these words, Paul deals with the fear of the believing member of the marriage that he will be defiled by the fellowship with his unbelieving wife. This fear is understandable. Ordinarily, friendship between a believer and an unbeliever results in the corrupting of the believer. Therefore, God has always warned His people against friendship with the world. It is not surprising that the believer married to an unbeliever anxiously wondered whether he should not break up the marriage, lest he be contaminated. But Paul lays that fear to rest. Although ordinarily it is true that fellowship of a believer and an unbeliever corrupts the believer, in the marriage of a believer and an unbeliever the opposite will be true: the unbeliever will be sanctified by the believer. This cannot mean that the unbeliever is cleansed from sin and consecrated to God in heartfelt love, for he is and remains an unbeliever. The unbeliever is sanctified only as regards his position as marriage partner of the believer. The prevailing principle in the marriage of a believer and an unbeliever is not the impurity of the unbeliever, but the holiness of the believer. Of course, this presupposes that the believer walks in holiness in the marriage. This peculiar sanctification of the unbeliever in his association with his believing wife is not for his benefit, but for the benefit of the believer who is married to him. The purpose of the Holy Spirit is to safeguard the believer from being defiled by the unbeliever, both as regards her person and as regards her marriage in all its aspects.

The proof of this unique holiness of the fellowship of a believer and an unbeliever in marriage is the holiness of the children who result from such a union: “… else where your children unclean; but now are they holy” (I Cor. 7:14). The holiness of the children is evidence that the holiness of the believer, not the wickedness of the unbeliever, determines the spiritual character of the marriage. Just as is the case with the children of two believing parents, the children of one believing parent are also included in God’s covenant. Redemption from sin by the blood of Christ, and the Holy Spirit, the Author of faith, are promised to them (Heidelberg Catechism, Q. 74). They are sanctified in Christ. Therefore, they must be baptized and reared in the fear of the Lord.

Holiness does not necessarily characterize every child of one believing parent any more than it characterizes every child of two believing parents. When Scripture calls our children holy and promises salvation to them, it speaks organically, with reference to the elect children of believers. “The children of the promise are counted for the seed” (Rom. 9:8). But God does establish His covenant in the line of the generations of a believer married to an unbeliever and promises to save that believer’s children, even though one of the parents is an unbeliever. This is encouragement to the believer to maintain her marriage to an unbeliever.


--------------------------------------------------

(II)

Rev. Nathan J. Langerak

[Source: Walking in the Way of Love: A Practical Commentary on 1 Corinthians for the Believer (RFPA, 2017), chapter 21: “Maintaining a Mixed Marriage”]

The apostle gives the ground [for maintaining this mixed marriage] in verse 14: “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.” This verse is familiar to any Reformed person, because it is closely connected with the Reformed doctrine of baptism. In the questions to the parents in the Reformed baptism form there is a footnote referencing the statement that the children of believers are sanctified in Christ. That footnote grounds the baptism form’s statement about the children’s sanctification in 1 Corinthians 7:14. That is a mistake. The original form does not have that footnote.

No matter what role this verse may have played in the controversy surrounding the issue of sanctification of the baptized infant children of believers, this is not the main scriptural proof for that statement in the baptism form about the sanctification of the children of believers in Christ.[2] Better proof is a phrase found in 1 Corinthians 1:2, which says that we are sanctified in Christ Jesus, which refers also to the children of believers. It is not even the purpose of 1 Corinthians 7:14 to prove that the children of believers are members of Christ and his covenant and ought to be baptized, although this verse has important implications for the baptism of infant children of believers.

To understand the phrase “else were your children unclean; but now are they holy,” one must start with the first phrase stating that the unbelieving spouse is sanctified by the believing spouse. The translation “by” in that phrase is a mistake. A literal rendering is better in this case: “The unbelieving spouse is sanctified in the believing spouse.” There is no sanctifying activity of God on the unbeliever. There is no sanctifying activity of the believing spouse on the unbelieving spouse. There is an antithesis between them.

The passage teaches that there is a sanctifying activity of God by his grace and Holy Spirit in that mixed marriage on the believing spouse and his or her children born into that mixed marriage. Sanctification is the work of God to cleanse his people from sin, consecrate them to himself in devoted love, and establish an antithesis between church and world and between believer and unbeliever. There is an activity of God in that mixed marriage so that God powerfully strains out the contagion, the sin and the wickedness, that would otherwise infect the believing spouse and the children. God protects them. Ordinarily, it would be spiritual suicide for a believer to come into that kind of close contact with an unbeliever and to live so close to the world. In this mixed marriage by his grace God causes the believing spouse to maintain the marriage and to maintain it in such a way that there is the closest bond possible between two humans and yet there remains a spiritual separation between the two.

The apostle proves that from the effect: “Else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.” What explains that holy children can be born from such a marriage? God’s activity explains that. It is God’s activity alone that the believing spouse hears this word and maintains the mixed marriage. There is a promise to that believing spouse from God, “I will be active in that marriage for your sake and for the sake of your covenantal children to sanctify you and your children and to maintain my covenant.” The apostle in the statement “else were your children unclean; but now are they holy” is not contradicting the teaching of scripture that only the elect children of believers are holy. He does not say that all the children born of a mixed marriage are holy, but he proves the promise of God by its effect, that even a mixed marriage can issue in holy children because God sanctifies and preserves the holiness of the believing spouse and the believing spouse’s children.

The purpose is to give the believing spouse encouragement and assurance. God takes away the anxiety of the believer at the thought of maintaining a mixed marriage, especially this thought: What will happen to my children? Will the unbelieving spouse influence those children?

God says maintain the marriage, and he grounds his command in his own sanctifying work and covenantal promise to the believer spouse. He turns even that extraordinarily difficult situation for the profit of his people. It seems so contrary to the word of God that there is an antithesis between believers and unbelievers, and then that God commands the believer to maintain the marriage to an unbeliever. It is not contrary but is based on the truth of the unbreakable bond of marriage that he spoke in the beginning, so that what God joined together let no man put asunder. So unbreakable is the bond that even the spouse’s unbelief or abandonment of the believer cannot destroy the bond. In faithfulness to marriage, in obedience to the word of God, believing his calling us to peace, and trusting his promise in such a situation, the believer maintains a mixed marriage. If the unbelieving spouse abandons, the believer lets the spouse go, for God has called the believer to peace. The believer maintains the marriage also by not remarrying.


=========
FOOTNOTE:

[2] Every Reformed parent must answer this question at the baptism of their children: “Whether you acknowledge that although our children are conceived and born in sin, and therefore are subject to all miseries, yea to condemnation itself, yet that they are sanctified in Christ, and therefore, as members of his church, ought to be baptized?” The English translation then references 1 Corinthians 7:14 (Confessions and Church Order, 260). This reference is not found in the Dutch text as found in the liturgy of the Dutch Reformed churches (GKN, Dr. A. Kuyper’s churches). See F. L. Rutgers, H. Bavinck, and A. Kuyper, De Berijmde Psalmen Met Eenige Gezangen, in Gebruik Bij De Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland (Maasluis: Uitgevers-Genootschap, 1913), 68. Furthermore, in his excellent commentary on the baptism form, Dutch Reformed minister Bastiaan Wielenga shows that this text was frequently quoted by the opponents of the phrase “sanctified in Christ” in the baptism form to show that it meant merely an external setting apart of baptized children, an interpretation he later points out leads to a doctrine of the covenant “held by Socinians and Anabaptists and later by the Remonstrants and rationalists” (B. Wielenga, The Reformed Baptism Form: A Commentary, trans. Annemie Godbehere, ed. David J. Engelsma [Jenison, MI: Reformed Free Publishing Association, 2016], 317).


--------------------------------------------------

(III)

More to come! (DV)






No comments:

Post a Comment