The particular view that raises a query in my mind is this, as fully detailed in my answer to this related question, According to Reformed Theology, how can one justify infant baptism?
After detailing why the sign of the Abrahamic covenant (circumcision) has its counterpart in the sign of Christians in the New Testament (water baptism), the author I quote (A Faith To Live By, p210, Donald Macleod, Christian Focus, Mentor) says:
“The children of believers continue to have the same special relationship to the covenant as their Old Testament counterparts had; and, consequently, the same right to the covenant sign. Why do I baptise children? ...It is because God gave me an ordinance: Put the sign of the spiritual covenant on the physical seed.”
My query is that although 8-day-old babies were to be circumcised as a sign of that Abrahamic covenant, that only applied to male babies. No female babies were ever circumcised. Yet Christian water baptism is administered to both males and females (irrespective of their age). Is this not out of sync with the physical sign?
Further, the author speaks elsewhere in his book about how,
“when a man comes to faith he may embrace his children with himself under the sign of the covenant”, and “we should not give the sacrament of baptism to a man for his child unless we would be prepared to give it to him for himself.” (Ibid. p 219 & 220)
But what about a woman coming to faith, who seeks baptism, and she has children? Is it only a female – like myself – who notices a need to consider females a bit more regarding the theology of baptism? Disregard that last question if you don’t think it helpful.
My question is, Given that no female babies were circumcised as a sign of the Abrahamic covenant, why are female babies of Christian believers given the sign of the new covenant (water baptism)?
Edit to clarify what my question is NOT: it is not asking why females are baptised given that they are not circumcised. To clarify what my question IS: it is questioning the claimed link between circumcision as a sign of the old covenant and the claim that water baptism is a corresponding sign of the new covenant. There seems to be something out of sync with this claimed link.