#1 – Passover: Plain Inclusion in Exodus 10

#2 – Passover: All the Covenant Community Must Eat

#3 – 1 Corinthians 11: Proclamation Doesn’t Exclude

#4 – 1 Corinthians 11: Remembrance Doesn’t Exclude

#5 – 1 Corinthians 11: Examination/Worthiness Don’t Exclude

#6 – 1 Corinthians 10 and 12 Require All the Covenant Community to Eat

One of the more contentious pieces of the paedocommunion debate is whether the Passover included children in the Old Testament.  Over 4 posts, I will show that children were participants.

The argument against paedocommunion falls on Ex 12.26 for backing, assuming that the “What do you mean by this” means the children do not participate.  Here is the passage (a similar one is in Ex 13):

And when your children say to you, ‘What do you mean by this service?’ ²⁷you shall say, ’It is the sacrifice of the LORD’s Passover… (Exodus 12.26-27)

This moment is a pedagogic moment; the pericope with the question is not here in the text in order to demonstrate division in practice between young and old; rather, it is here to reinforce continuation of the practice through discipleship.  It is not establishing “confirmation” boundaries, but it is establishing succession expectations.

It seems clear that people (like Calvin) who use this line of argument, are happy to find some textual foothold to hang an argument on.  Unfortunately, this reveals a wishful reading of the passage that does not see its immediate context.  Let me show you the passage again in larger context:

²⁴You shall observe this rite as a statute for you and for your sons forever. ²⁵And when you come to the land that the LORD will give you, as he has promised, you shall keep this service. ²⁶And when your [sons] say to you, ‘What do you [intend] by this service?’ ²⁷you shall say, ’It is the sacrifice of the LORD’s Passover, for he passed over the houses of the [sons] of Israel in Egypt, when he struck the Egyptians but spared our houses.’” And the people bowed their heads and worshiped.  ²⁸Then the [sons] of Israel went and did so; as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so they did.  (Exodus 12.24-28)

1) Your SONS Observe the Statute that YOU observe.

What is very helpful is verse 24.  The restriction that Calvin relies on is destroyed by the grammar of the introductory clause to the passage.  Who observes the rite?  YOU do…as long as “you” means “you and your sons.”

By the way, “sons” is how you say “sons and daughters” in normal Hebrew shorthand.

2) Throughout the Torah, “your sons” has the connotation of “future generations.”

The passage (Ex 12) does not indicate that the young will be excluded until they get what is going on.  Quite the opposite, the passage explains just what truth must be attached in the future for people who were not here on the night when God acted.

There is no indication that the “sons” here are young.  Of course they will be young if they don’t know what the passover is for, but the point of the verse is not about age, but about succession and continuation of covenantal truth: “when future generations need to learn about this event, teach them in this way.”  Simply put, there is absolutely no restriction in the sentence about who is eating.

The passage does not say “Why do YOU GROWNUPS keep passover?”  It says, “What is YOUR INTENTION in the meal that ALL ISRAEL keeps?”  (for “All Israel”, see Ex 12.47).  This is not describing a necessary exact question, but the outline of the instruction to be given to future “sons of Israel.

It is a formulaic way of presenting succession material.  This is really no different that repeating the Lord’s Prayer: “Pray then like this” (Mt 6.9); or the institution of the Lord’s Supper, “For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread” (1 Cor 11.23).

This is liturgical, and liturgy is for paideia (childrearing) amongst other things.

In [Part 2], I will show other passages that use the same “you and your sons” language for UNITY.

In [Part 3], I will show other passages that use the same “What do you mean?” question for institutions that the asker is already involved in.

In [Part 4], I will show that the text explicitly expects young sons and daughters to participate, and that only uncircumcised Gentiles were excluded.

In Part 2, I want to show that the household unity is crucial to the whole idea of sacramental feasting in the Old Testamant.

Here are four verses out of two texts that are referring to the peace offerings (sh’lamim):

Deuteronomy 12.7

And there you shall eat before the LORD your God, and you shall rejoice, you and your households, in all that you undertake, in which the LORD your God has blessed you.

Deuteronomy 12.12

And you shall rejoice before the LORD your God, you and your sons and your daughters, your male servants and your female servants, and the Levite that is within your towns, since he has no portion or inheritance with you.

Deuteronomy 12.18-19

…but you shall eat them before the LORD your God in the place that the LORD your God will choose, you and your son and your daughter, your male servant and your female servant, and the Levite who is within your towns. And you shall rejoice before the LORD your God in all that you undertake. Take care that you do not neglect the Levite as long as you live in your land.

Deuteronomy 14.24-27

And if the way is too long for you, so that you are not able to carry the tithe, when the LORD your God blesses you, because the place is too far from you, which the LORD your God chooses, to set his name there, then you shall turn it into money and bind up the money in your hand and go to the place that the LORD your God chooses and spend the money for whatever you desire—oxen or sheep or wine or strong drink, whatever your appetite craves. And you shall eat there before the LORD your God and rejoice, you and your household. And you shall not neglect the Levite who is within your towns, for he has no portion or inheritance with you.

The Peace Offering was also called the fellowship offering, the free will offering, the vow offering, the votive offering, the Sacrifices, the sacrifice of thanksgiving, the sacrifice of praise.

The Levitical system only had one kind of sacrifice which was eaten by the laity, the sh’lamim, the Peace Offering.  The Passover was a type of Sh’lamim.

The Peace Offering was eaten INTENTIONALLY as a family unit.  Here these verses are very similar in idea to the declaration of the intended guests for the meal that became the Passover (Exodus 10.8-10)

Was the Better Covenant Made Worse?

If we do not allow children to the Lord’s table, then the New Testament has NO fulfillment and NO version of this very normal part of Old Testament.  Rather, it seems that people believe that the New and Better Covenant asks families to rejoice in a worse and lesser way.

For anyone to worship God in the Old Testament, your children had to eat and rejoice with you.

Ulterior Motives!

People who try to show that the children were not participants in the OT meals are plainly missing the thematic unity of union and communion which is demonstrated in family unity at sacramental meals.  No one would come up with the idea that the Passover didn’t include children unless he or she needed to find a way to say such a thing.  The only ones excluded in Ex 12 are uncircumcised Gentiles.  But that is for another post!

Reading about unity in circumcision in Genesis 17: unity in inheritance, and the unity in meals (Ex 10, 12; Dt 12), no one would think the Bible had excluded children.

1. Both initiation (baptism/circumcision) and covenant renewal meal (Passover/Lord’s Supper) show the BOUNDARIES of who is labeled as one of God’s covenant members.
2. Baptism AND Communion are labeled TOGETHER as makers of the the UNITY of the Body.

To say that one more time,  both sacraments express 1) Boundaries, and 2) Unity.  All who eat are in, all who are in eat.

Here is what I think is an efficient list of verses that say just this. Click here to read them at BibleGateway.

Exodus 10.8-10 (Note: this is the original prescription of the meal that ended up as Passover)

8So Moses and Aaron were brought back to Pharaoh. And he said to them, ”Go, serve the LORD your God. But which ones are to go?” 9Moses said, “We will go with our young and our old. We will go with our sons and daughters and with our flocks and herds, for we must hold a feast to the LORD.” 10But he said to them, “The LORD be with you, if ever I let you and your little ones go! Look, you have some evil purpose in mind.

1 Corinthians 10.1-4 (Note: Here, Mana and Water from the Rock are the comparisons)

1For I want you to know, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, 2and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3and all ate the same spiritual food, 4and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ.

1 Corinthians 10.16-17 (ALL in the Body eat the bread)

16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

1 Corinthians 12.13 (Note: All the Baptized are ONE BODY, and all DRINK ONE SPIRIT)

13For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body— Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

———

As a friend and I have often discussed the Eucharist, We have mentioned that there is a good word to use for the meal, a word that gives us “Real” significance, real participation in a real spiritual action, a word that answers the need for real presence without magic, but also avoids mere memorialism:

The Meal is Covenantal.

Paul says as much here (1 Corinthians 10.16):

The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

He says that the bread and wine are a participation, not that the bread and wine are Jesus, but that for us they are participation in the altar of the cross, like the eaters of the (sh’lamim) peace/fellowship/thanksgiving offerings of the Levitical command were considered part of the altar’s blessing (1 Corinthians 10.18).

In a Levitical context, the food of the altar didn’t become something different, but it was a covenantal way of sharing in something which if it were merely abstract wouldn’t need anything more than words or thoughts said. Israel needed, and we need to enact and BE the unity of the altar.

Saying it is covenantal is to say that the participation is forensic, not magic, BUT is objective, and not mere memorialism.

Like any other covenant makes people REALLY be family (marriage, adoption), but those ceremonies do it by LAW and not by magic, and again, they REALLY do it, a wedding really made me my wife’s husband, rather than just symbolizing the idea of marriage.

We do baptize people who have no concept of what is happening – and that serves in great part to teach the congregation about both themselves and that young member. I would say that part of the BODY issue about sacraments is that it is WE who celebrate sacraments together, not I who celebrate the sacrament alone. So when a child in my church communes, (young or younger), we may ask what the benefit is to the child, but I think we shouldn’t forget that its benefit might in part be that benefit to all the other eyes that watch and to the hands that administer.

The gospel, in that context is telling ME that the covenant blesses when SOMEONE ELSE partakes.

Infants are called to keep the law; infants can break the law.

Cursory examples are:

Gen 17 – Circumcision

Positive: Infants required to recieve circumcision;

Negative: he who did not receive circumcision is considered “cut off from his people”

Jdg 13 – Nazarite Vow

Positive: Samson required to be a Nazarite “from the womb”;

Negative: Samson must not drink alcohol – so his MOTHER could not drink it while he was in the womb, because it would cause HIM to break the command.

GRANTED:

Ability to break the law does not necessarily imply ability to keep the law.

Ability to keep the law externally does not imply internal regeneration.

However, I do think the fact that the Law binds infants is important to the question.  At very least it implies that whenever we talk about the subject of covenant infants it must be through or with God’s law, and not apart from God ‘s law.

Unrepentant covenant breakers are supposed to be excommunicated.  One of the reasons that some paedobaptists refuse to commune children is because they are either unsure of their faith or are sure that they have no faith at such a stage.

IF we are sure they have NO FAITH, then the children are necessarily UNREPENTANT COVENANT BREAKERS.  This means we must not say of them:

Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life. Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world. (WCF XXVIII.1)

In other words, if we KNOW that children have no faith, then we CANNOT mean that baptism is an intentional sign of regeneration and faith.  BUT that is exactly what both the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Bible maintain.  Both Baptism and Circumcision are seals of the righteousness that comes through faith.  Baptism says “this one is in Christ and forgiven” (See the Bible):

[Abraham] received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. (Rom 4.11 ESV)

11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, ¹² having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. ¹³ And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, ¹⁴by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.  (Col 2.11-14 ESV)

3Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? ⁴We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.  (Rom 6.3-4 ESV)

²⁷For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.

Maybe, I’ll edit more into this later.