Can the Faith of Parents Save Their Children?

[atpollard]

The question of this thread is whether the faith/obedience of the parent can result in their CHILD being blessed (regardless of whether the child personally - at that moment in our chronological time - has faith/obedience.

I'm thinking of the last of the plagues of Egypt..... circumcision in the Old Covenant.... for two examples.

It's a question.

Your Title of the topic asks if the faith of parents can “save” their children, which is a word with special meaning in Christianity that goes far beyond a simple ‘blessing’. The difference between the Title and the Opening Post is a source of confusion regarding your intent.

 

[Lamb]

Your Title of the topic asks if the faith of parents can “save” their children, which is a word with special meaning in Christianity that goes far beyond a simple ‘blessing’. The difference between the Title and the Opening Post is a source of confusion regarding your intent.

That's my confusion too. I thought the title meant "save" as in their faith took care of everything necessary, not lead to salvation as in they were used by God to be brought to salvation (by God).

 

[Josiah]

Your Title of the topic asks if the faith of parents can “save” their children, which is a word with special meaning in Christianity that goes far beyond a simple ‘blessing’. The difference between the Title and the Opening Post is a source of confusion regarding your intent.

My intent is to discuss the question.


No, I didn't say "justify". Nor did I state I was specifically addressing justification (narrow) - although I didn't exclude that blessing, either (it's just the question is broad).


In the OP, I note that I personally reject that the faith of anyone "transfers" in some automatic sense to another - as if one can sneak into heaven with a friend. I think I specifically rejected that.


But I still think of that last of the plagues of Egypt, the issue of circumcision (which also seems to be God blessing CHILDREN via the faith and obedience of their PARENTS), etc. No, this seems to be MORE than the parent's faith meaning that they take the children to church and EVENTUALLY the child thus may come to faith; the blessings recieved by the CHILD via the blood of the lamb AND via circumcision was IMMEDIATE and did NOT depend on the child having faith (at least previous in our chronological time to the blessing).




- Josiah



.

 

[MennoSota]

My intent is to discuss the question.


No, I didn't say "justify". Nor did I state I was specifically addressing justification (narrow) - although I didn't exclude that blessing, either (it's just the question is broad).


In the OP, I note that I personally reject that the faith of anyone "transfers" in some automatic sense to another - as if one can sneak into heaven with a friend. I think I specifically rejected that.


But I still think of that last of the plagues of Egypt, the issue of circumcision (which also seems to be God blessing CHILDREN via the faith and obedience of their PARENTS), etc. No, this seems to be MORE than the parent's faith meaning that they take the children to church and EVENTUALLY the child thus may come to faith; the blessings recieved by the CHILD via the blood of the lamb AND via circumcision was IMMEDIATE and did NOT depend on the child having faith (at least previous in our chronological time to the blessing).




- Josiah



.

So, this thread has NOTHING to do with salvation of a child through the faith of parents?
Can we get a change in the Topic title to alleviate the confusion?
I think most of Christianity will acknowledge that the faith of a mentor (i.e. parent(s)) gives guidance to unregenerate sinners as they observe the faith of their mentors. Many times it is their life that God uses to attract the little sinners to faith. I am a clear example in being granted faith at age 4. My parents, church and community all pointed me toward Christ. But...the reception of faith was between myself and God. The growing of this faith is between myself and God.

 

[Josiah]

My intent is to discuss the question.


No, I didn't say "justify". Nor did I state I was specifically addressing justification (narrow) - although I didn't exclude that blessing, either (it's just the question is broad).


In the OP, I note that I personally reject that the faith of anyone "transfers" in some automatic sense to another - as if one can sneak into heaven with a friend. I think I specifically rejected that.


But I still think of that last of the plagues of Egypt, the issue of circumcision (which also seems to be God blessing CHILDREN via the faith and obedience of their PARENTS), etc. No, this seems to be MORE than the parent's faith meaning that they take the children to church and EVENTUALLY the child thus may come to faith; the blessings recieved by the CHILD via the blood of the lamb AND via circumcision was IMMEDIATE and did NOT depend on the child having faith (at least previous in our chronological time to the blessing).


.

So, this thread has NOTHING to do with salvation of a child through the faith of parents?

So, you didn't read the post you claim to be responding to?

But I still think of that last of the plagues of Egypt, the issue of circumcision (which also seems to be God blessing CHILDREN via the faith and obedience of their PARENTS), etc. No, this seems to be MORE than the parent's faith meaning that they take the children to church and EVENTUALLY the child thus may come to faith; the blessings recieved by the CHILD via the blood of the lamb AND via circumcision was IMMEDIATE and did NOT depend on the child having faith (at least previous in our chronological time to the blessing).


.

I think most of Christianity will acknowledge that the faith of a mentor (i.e. parent(s)) gives guidance to unregenerate sinners as they observe the faith of their mentors.

Yes. IMO, it's more than that, as I noted in the post. In the last plague, did NOTHING happen vis-a-vis the child UNTIL the child first in our chronological time performed certain things? In circumcision in the OT, did NOTHING change vis-a-vis the relationship of the child to God UNTIL that child eventually in our chronological time did himself perform certain things? Ah.... it seems to ME, the blessing came IMMEDIATELY to the child - and the Bible gives no mention whatsoever of the child having faith and obedience, of the child first performing certain things and AFTER THAT some blessing coming to the child. But perhaps we disagree.





.

 

[MennoSota]

So, you didn't read the post you claim to be responding to?









Yes. IMO, it's more than that, as I noted in the post. In the last plague, did NOTHING happen vis-a-vis the child UNTIL the child first in our chronological time performed certain things? In circumcision in the OT, did NOTHING change vis-a-vis the relationship of the child to God UNTIL that child eventually in our chronological time did himself perform certain things? Ah.... it seems to ME, the blessing came IMMEDIATELY to the child - and the Bible gives no mention whatsoever of the child having faith and obedience, of the child first performing certain things and AFTER THAT some blessing coming to the child. But perhaps we disagree.





.

The child in Egypt was only spared physical death. There was no spiritual salvation and granting of faith unto redemption when their parents obeyed God's command. Truthfully, even the parents weren't saved unto eternity via the Passover. It was a temporary respite. Some were going to die by God's judgment in the wilderness as they rebelled.
To attempt a connection to salvation via an earlier experience within the nation of Israel seems to be a foolish task. There is no biblical allegory given to us. The one time we see an allegory being made in the New Testament is when Paul makes connections between Sarah and Hagar in his letter to the Galatians. Otherwise such allegory is merely human speculation by earlier Christians.

 

[RichWh1]

Perhaps the faith of the parents can save a child physically, as Scripture shows us however I don’t believe that the faith of the parents can save a child spiritually.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Josiah]

Perhaps the faith of the parents can save a child physically, as Scripture shows us however I don’t believe that the faith of the parents can save a child spiritually.

Do you think that in the old covenant, circumcision did anything spiritual for the child?

 

[MennoSota]

Do you think that in the old covenant, circumcision did anything spiritual for the child?

No. Esau was circumcised. He sold his birthright. God hated him.
God has always chosen by grace, with no merited favor needed. We see it at the fall and on throughout the ages. Circumcision marked the child as a part of Israel, but it did nothing spiritual for that child.

 

[RichWh1]

Do you think that in the old covenant, circumcision did anything spiritual for the child?

Circumcision doesn’t save a person either physically or spiritually. Circumcision was a sign of the covenant God made with Abraham and his seed, Israel.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[atpollard]

Do you think that in the old covenant, circumcision did anything spiritual for the child?

I think that the question misses the point of both the Old and New Covenants.

Neither Covenant is first and foremost about the “pot”.
Both Covenants are about the Glory of the Potter above all else.

 

[Josiah]

I think that the question misses the point of both the Old and New Covenants.

Neither Covenant is first and foremost about the “pot”.
Both Covenants are about the Glory of the Potter above all else.

So, in the old covenant, circumcision did nothing vis-a-vis the relationship of God and the child? It too was an inert, ineffectual ritual that meant nothing unless and until the child later accomplished certain things and THEREFORE was rewarded?

I agree with you, the issue is the "Potter" (the Father) and His work, His mercy, His grace, His blessings. Not the accomplishments of the "clay." So, in the old covenant, the" Potter" was rendered impotent to bless the "clay" because the "clay" had not yet achieved faith and obedience?

 

[atpollard]

So, in the old covenant, circumcision did nothing vis-a-vis the relationship of God and the child? It too was an inert, ineffectual ritual that meant nothing unless and until the child later accomplished certain things and THEREFORE was rewarded?

I agree with you, the issue is the "Potter" (the Father) and His work, His mercy, His grace, His blessings. Not the accomplishments of the "clay." So, in the old covenant, the" Potter" was rendered impotent to bless the "clay" because the "clay" had not yet achieved faith and obedience?

Those are neither my words nor my beliefs.

I am suggesting that the question that should be asked is:

What did Circumcision accomplish for the Glory of God?