What do you think?
Rate this book
The Baptism of Disciples Alone
Book by Malone, Fred A
319 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2003
18 people are currently reading
168 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
July 9, 2011
Malone Fred A. : The Baptism of Disciples Alone: A Covenantal Argument for Credobaptism Verses Paedobaptism Revised and Expanded (G)(185pgs + appendixes) This was a great book in learning what the bible teaches about baptism. It was a bit technical in places but for the most part not to bad of a read. It was helpful in understanding what the differences where between paedobaptist covenant theologians and credobaptist covenant theologians. It was actually a decent introduction into covenant theology. It was helpful in understanding the regulative principle of worship also. He starts by allowing John Murray to speak for himself about baptism so as to prevent forming a straw man. Malone then helps us understand a biblical hermeneutic and how the paedobaptist is inconsistent with his hermeneutic. Malone explains the paedobaptist don’t have specific verses they point out necessarily to support infant baptism but rather have a “string of pearls” and teaching and inferences they make when strung together allow them to form the doctrine of infant baptism. Malone takes each pearl of the necklace and refutes it leaving the paedobaptist in my opinion with nothing to hold on to and only to turn to biblical baptism of disciples alone. I was impressed by the book and am currently working through the appendixes. I would recommend this to all who are serious about understanding what the bible teaches about baptism, but especially to those who agree with many paedobaptist on their soteriology and may be considering their ecclesiology as well. Malone was a Baptist, to a Presbyterian, and back to a Baptist so reading his story at the beginning of the book will be of interest to many as well.
January 14, 2016
Having always been a Baptist, the baptism of disciples alone (or believer's baptism or credobaptism) is something I have mostly taken for granted. From some more recent interactions with some Presbyterian friends, I thought that I would take a look at this book. Malone was, for a good many years, a convinced paedobaptist Presbyterian minister (he even footnoted once that he interned in my hometown in the early 1970's!). At one point in the late 1970's Malone wrote an essay about his change in convictions with regards to the scriptural passages. This is available online (search for Malone String of Pearls) and is the basis of what later would become this volume.
I appreciate how Malone starts out by outlining John Murray's defense of paedobaptism and then later interacts with it. For me, this book was quite helpful in systematically working through credobaptism from a reformed, covenantal perspective. Malone was gracious to our paedobaptist brethren which is quite refreshing. Much of Malone's argument is Regulative Principle-related as well as being hinged on the difference in the WCF and LBCF 1689 statements on whether the WCF principle of doctrine being understood from "good and necessary consequences" versus the more limited view of The 1689 change to the wording of the doctrine being "necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture". This is a key distinctive that I had already formulated in my own theology. Malone then goes on to interact with the various scriptural passages related to this doctrine. I highly recommend this book as a great starting point.
I appreciate how Malone starts out by outlining John Murray's defense of paedobaptism and then later interacts with it. For me, this book was quite helpful in systematically working through credobaptism from a reformed, covenantal perspective. Malone was gracious to our paedobaptist brethren which is quite refreshing. Much of Malone's argument is Regulative Principle-related as well as being hinged on the difference in the WCF and LBCF 1689 statements on whether the WCF principle of doctrine being understood from "good and necessary consequences" versus the more limited view of The 1689 change to the wording of the doctrine being "necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture". This is a key distinctive that I had already formulated in my own theology. Malone then goes on to interact with the various scriptural passages related to this doctrine. I highly recommend this book as a great starting point.
July 11, 2021
"The baptism of disciples is the only baptism prescribed by Holy Scripture. The weight of an erroneous inference from silence, whether biblical or historical, cannot overturn such testimony" - page 177
This book argues that believers baptism is the only baptism taught in scripture and that the practise of infant baptism is based on bad and unnecessary inference and should be rejected. It further encourages reformed baptists to stick to their baptist identity and actively seek to build up (and reform) baptist churches rather than taking refuge in presbyterian churches.
Fred Malone introduces the case with his own background, he grew up as a baptist but was lead to support paedobaptism whilst studying at RTS he was then ordained as a presbyterian minister and ministered in the PCA for several years, however further study lead him back to firm baptist convictions and forced him to resign; he now pastors a baptist church.
What does this book do?
- argues that getting baptism right is very important for the long term health of the church.
- makes a basic case for the baptism of disciples alone from scripture.
- presents the case for infant baptism, initially by summarising John Murray's argument for it from his book "Christian Baptism", though throughout the book comparisons are made with other proponents of paedobaptism showing both agreement and disagreement between them
- presents an analysis of the hermeneutics that lead to infant baptism and argues that more careful hermeneutics will not do so
- compares and contrasts the arguments of different proponents of paedobaptism - it's not one unified position
- dismantles the case for infant baptism one point at a time
- encourages the reader to join/support baptist churches BUT to continue to cooperate graciously with paedobaptists
- includes useful appendices responding to popular paedobaptist books
The case for Disciples Baptism
John and Jesus both baptised those who were making professions/confessions. There is no mention of either of them baptising infants. The command in the great commission was to baptise disciples, there was no command to baptise anyone else. Baptism symbolises entrance into the New Covenant, the new covenant is unbreakable (see Hebrews 8) hence entrance into it occurs only upon regeneration which is only evidenced by a confession of faith. As reformed believers we believe that worship should only contain those elements God has commanded (the regulative principle) there is no command to practise infant baptism, so it should not be done.
The case for Infant Baptism - and the response
1. Covenant theology
Chapters 3 and 4 address Biblical covenant theology - how God relates to man through covenants. The presbyterian position is that salvation is through the covenant of Grace first promised in Genesis 3:15, proclaimed more clearly to Abraham and then administered differently at different times BUT at all times fundamentally the same covenant. The presbyterian argues that as Abraham's children were part of the covenant (shown in their circumcision) the children of New Testament believers should also be part of the covenant (which we should show through baptism). Similarly the presbyterian argues that God deals with households not individuals. Children are believers are to be treated as christians until they reject the faith rather than treated as unbelievers until they accept it.
The baptist counters that there is an explicit statement of infant inclusion in the abrahamic covenant but no such statement in the new covenant AND whilst the new covenant fulfils promises made to Abraham and throughout the old testament it is a fulfilment of that covenant NOT just a different administration and hence its membership is different (see Hebrews 8 particularly). Further it is argued that the "you and your offspring" principle and the household principle are signs/pictures that have been fulfilled and that do not map over directly to the new covenant.
2. The relationship between circumcision and baptism
Chapter 5 The paedobaptist argues that baptism is the new covenant circumcision (Colossians 2:11-12) and therefore should be applied to children just as old covenant circumcision was.
The baptist counters that that's not what Colossians 2 says if you read it, old covenant circumcision was a picture of new covenant regeneration (circumcision made without hands) not baptism and it was a picture not a sign that maps over exactly.
3. Household baptism
Chapter 6 The paedobaptist argues that as in the book of Acts households were baptised this must have included infants, this reflects the OT principle of God dealing with households not individuals, they cross reference jewish sources about proselyte baptism that seemed to involve this.
The baptist counters that the plain reading the passages in Acts refer to the same group believing/professing Jesus as Lord as then being baptised and so it's a very strange reading to assert that there were infants baptised there. Further it is argued that the argument from Jewish sources is dubious/doesn't match for a number of reasons (e.g. if a pregnant woman was baptised in jewish proselyte baptism the child we not then be baptised upon birth).
4. Infant Baptism proof texts
Chapter 7, Several specific texts - such as Colossians 2, Acts 2, 1 Corinthians 7 etc. that are frequently presented as making a case for infant baptism are examined and responded to.
5. Jesus' attitude towards children
Chapter 8, the passages where Jesus tells his disciples to "let the little children come to me" are considered, some paedobaptists see this as demonstrating a principle of Jesus welcoming infants a principle that ought to be imitated in baptising such.
The baptist counters by examining the passages and seeing what is actually taught - yes Jesus blesses the children - and we can certainly copy that example BUT nothing is said on baptism - it is a supposition what age the children are, whether these are infants or not, nothing is mentioned on baptism; then Jesus uses the incident to teach his disciples that membership in the kingdom of heaven is through dependence and faith not personal ability.
6. The Disjunction of John and Jesus' baptism with christian baptism
Chapter 9, Some (though not all) paedobaptists argue that christian baptist is not the same thing as the baptism performed by John the baptist or the baptism Jesus performed in his earthly ministry. Having drawn this distinction a lot of material in the gospels that baptists frequently turn to can then be ignored.
The baptist argues that John's baptism and Jesus' baptism were fundamentally the same kind of baptism as christian baptism - I am not entirely convinced on the identity with John's baptism, though it's an interesting case.
7. The argument from silence
Chapter 10, Many paedobaptists argue that infant baptism must be practised because nothing is said about it in the new testament (relying on the unity with the old testament).
The baptist counters that based on the regulative principle of worship we absolutely must not practise a speculative sacrament never inaugurated by our Lord Jesus.
8. The argument of expanded blessing
Chapter 11, Paedobaptists argue that as children in the OT recieved circumcision and were considered part of the covenant family surely in the greater new covenant era they must recieved a greater blessing ergo they must be baptised.
The baptist counters - isn't hearing the preaching of the gospel regularly a blessing beyond what many of the children of Israel ever had?
9. The testimony of tradition
The paedobaptist argues that infant baptism has been practised for 1000s of years.
The baptist counters - the first clear reference to it was Tertulian denouncing it around 200 years after Christ, yes it was practised regularly from the 4th century until the 16th century but so were many other things we would decry - if scripture alone is our authority we should reject an unbiblical tradition.
Summary argument
Appealing to scripture alone for authority, and the regulative principle as well as highlighting the dangers of assuming salvation of baptised children when it has not occurred Fred Malone invites us all to add a 6th sola to he solas of the reformation, let us baptise "Disciples alone".
Appendices
The length of all of the appendices may seem a little intimidating at first though you don't have to read them to understand the rest of the book. They include responses to specific books, the appendix to the 1689 confession, Spurgeon's views on baptism, an essay on why baptism ought to be done by immersion and a criticism of the federal vision movement.
The specific book responses are interesting and may be helpful in some cases.
The 1689 appendix and the Spurgeon extract are mostly interesting as historical curiosities.
I found the argument for immersion not that persuasive despite agreeing with the conclusion - it was primarily focussed on responding to specific arguments against immersion rather than building a positive case and I thought this weakened it.
Conclusion
It is acknowledged by all that no single verse teaches infant baptism and yet the claim is that many pieces put together "a string of pearls" combine to teach it, upon examining each pearl in the string it is found ultimately that there is nothing there. This book is helpful in presenting both sides of the argument, and landing clearly in the baptist position.
This book is a relatively easy read, and not too long at 185 pages (plus appendices and notes adding an extra 134 pages). That said it's a little verbose and even slightly repetitive in places reading a little like it was written by someone more used to speaking than writing, this is a minor quibble that doesn't prevent it being an excellent book.
Side note on availability
This book is not sold everywhere. At the time of writing this review it can be obtained for a reasonable price in two places I'm aware of:
For the USA: https://press.founders.org/shop/the-b...
For the UK: https://www.icmbooksdirect.co.uk/prod...
This book argues that believers baptism is the only baptism taught in scripture and that the practise of infant baptism is based on bad and unnecessary inference and should be rejected. It further encourages reformed baptists to stick to their baptist identity and actively seek to build up (and reform) baptist churches rather than taking refuge in presbyterian churches.
Fred Malone introduces the case with his own background, he grew up as a baptist but was lead to support paedobaptism whilst studying at RTS he was then ordained as a presbyterian minister and ministered in the PCA for several years, however further study lead him back to firm baptist convictions and forced him to resign; he now pastors a baptist church.
What does this book do?
- argues that getting baptism right is very important for the long term health of the church.
- makes a basic case for the baptism of disciples alone from scripture.
- presents the case for infant baptism, initially by summarising John Murray's argument for it from his book "Christian Baptism", though throughout the book comparisons are made with other proponents of paedobaptism showing both agreement and disagreement between them
- presents an analysis of the hermeneutics that lead to infant baptism and argues that more careful hermeneutics will not do so
- compares and contrasts the arguments of different proponents of paedobaptism - it's not one unified position
- dismantles the case for infant baptism one point at a time
- encourages the reader to join/support baptist churches BUT to continue to cooperate graciously with paedobaptists
- includes useful appendices responding to popular paedobaptist books
The case for Disciples Baptism
John and Jesus both baptised those who were making professions/confessions. There is no mention of either of them baptising infants. The command in the great commission was to baptise disciples, there was no command to baptise anyone else. Baptism symbolises entrance into the New Covenant, the new covenant is unbreakable (see Hebrews 8) hence entrance into it occurs only upon regeneration which is only evidenced by a confession of faith. As reformed believers we believe that worship should only contain those elements God has commanded (the regulative principle) there is no command to practise infant baptism, so it should not be done.
The case for Infant Baptism - and the response
1. Covenant theology
Chapters 3 and 4 address Biblical covenant theology - how God relates to man through covenants. The presbyterian position is that salvation is through the covenant of Grace first promised in Genesis 3:15, proclaimed more clearly to Abraham and then administered differently at different times BUT at all times fundamentally the same covenant. The presbyterian argues that as Abraham's children were part of the covenant (shown in their circumcision) the children of New Testament believers should also be part of the covenant (which we should show through baptism). Similarly the presbyterian argues that God deals with households not individuals. Children are believers are to be treated as christians until they reject the faith rather than treated as unbelievers until they accept it.
The baptist counters that there is an explicit statement of infant inclusion in the abrahamic covenant but no such statement in the new covenant AND whilst the new covenant fulfils promises made to Abraham and throughout the old testament it is a fulfilment of that covenant NOT just a different administration and hence its membership is different (see Hebrews 8 particularly). Further it is argued that the "you and your offspring" principle and the household principle are signs/pictures that have been fulfilled and that do not map over directly to the new covenant.
2. The relationship between circumcision and baptism
Chapter 5 The paedobaptist argues that baptism is the new covenant circumcision (Colossians 2:11-12) and therefore should be applied to children just as old covenant circumcision was.
The baptist counters that that's not what Colossians 2 says if you read it, old covenant circumcision was a picture of new covenant regeneration (circumcision made without hands) not baptism and it was a picture not a sign that maps over exactly.
3. Household baptism
Chapter 6 The paedobaptist argues that as in the book of Acts households were baptised this must have included infants, this reflects the OT principle of God dealing with households not individuals, they cross reference jewish sources about proselyte baptism that seemed to involve this.
The baptist counters that the plain reading the passages in Acts refer to the same group believing/professing Jesus as Lord as then being baptised and so it's a very strange reading to assert that there were infants baptised there. Further it is argued that the argument from Jewish sources is dubious/doesn't match for a number of reasons (e.g. if a pregnant woman was baptised in jewish proselyte baptism the child we not then be baptised upon birth).
4. Infant Baptism proof texts
Chapter 7, Several specific texts - such as Colossians 2, Acts 2, 1 Corinthians 7 etc. that are frequently presented as making a case for infant baptism are examined and responded to.
5. Jesus' attitude towards children
Chapter 8, the passages where Jesus tells his disciples to "let the little children come to me" are considered, some paedobaptists see this as demonstrating a principle of Jesus welcoming infants a principle that ought to be imitated in baptising such.
The baptist counters by examining the passages and seeing what is actually taught - yes Jesus blesses the children - and we can certainly copy that example BUT nothing is said on baptism - it is a supposition what age the children are, whether these are infants or not, nothing is mentioned on baptism; then Jesus uses the incident to teach his disciples that membership in the kingdom of heaven is through dependence and faith not personal ability.
6. The Disjunction of John and Jesus' baptism with christian baptism
Chapter 9, Some (though not all) paedobaptists argue that christian baptist is not the same thing as the baptism performed by John the baptist or the baptism Jesus performed in his earthly ministry. Having drawn this distinction a lot of material in the gospels that baptists frequently turn to can then be ignored.
The baptist argues that John's baptism and Jesus' baptism were fundamentally the same kind of baptism as christian baptism - I am not entirely convinced on the identity with John's baptism, though it's an interesting case.
7. The argument from silence
Chapter 10, Many paedobaptists argue that infant baptism must be practised because nothing is said about it in the new testament (relying on the unity with the old testament).
The baptist counters that based on the regulative principle of worship we absolutely must not practise a speculative sacrament never inaugurated by our Lord Jesus.
8. The argument of expanded blessing
Chapter 11, Paedobaptists argue that as children in the OT recieved circumcision and were considered part of the covenant family surely in the greater new covenant era they must recieved a greater blessing ergo they must be baptised.
The baptist counters - isn't hearing the preaching of the gospel regularly a blessing beyond what many of the children of Israel ever had?
9. The testimony of tradition
The paedobaptist argues that infant baptism has been practised for 1000s of years.
The baptist counters - the first clear reference to it was Tertulian denouncing it around 200 years after Christ, yes it was practised regularly from the 4th century until the 16th century but so were many other things we would decry - if scripture alone is our authority we should reject an unbiblical tradition.
Summary argument
Appealing to scripture alone for authority, and the regulative principle as well as highlighting the dangers of assuming salvation of baptised children when it has not occurred Fred Malone invites us all to add a 6th sola to he solas of the reformation, let us baptise "Disciples alone".
Appendices
The length of all of the appendices may seem a little intimidating at first though you don't have to read them to understand the rest of the book. They include responses to specific books, the appendix to the 1689 confession, Spurgeon's views on baptism, an essay on why baptism ought to be done by immersion and a criticism of the federal vision movement.
The specific book responses are interesting and may be helpful in some cases.
The 1689 appendix and the Spurgeon extract are mostly interesting as historical curiosities.
I found the argument for immersion not that persuasive despite agreeing with the conclusion - it was primarily focussed on responding to specific arguments against immersion rather than building a positive case and I thought this weakened it.
Conclusion
It is acknowledged by all that no single verse teaches infant baptism and yet the claim is that many pieces put together "a string of pearls" combine to teach it, upon examining each pearl in the string it is found ultimately that there is nothing there. This book is helpful in presenting both sides of the argument, and landing clearly in the baptist position.
This book is a relatively easy read, and not too long at 185 pages (plus appendices and notes adding an extra 134 pages). That said it's a little verbose and even slightly repetitive in places reading a little like it was written by someone more used to speaking than writing, this is a minor quibble that doesn't prevent it being an excellent book.
Side note on availability
This book is not sold everywhere. At the time of writing this review it can be obtained for a reasonable price in two places I'm aware of:
For the USA: https://press.founders.org/shop/the-b...
For the UK: https://www.icmbooksdirect.co.uk/prod...
October 28, 2023
2023 update: Presbyterian now so lots of paradigm changes from when reading this in 2022.
November 6, 2023
The Baptism of Disciples alone is not an easy-breezy read. The text is dense and flows about as well as the graphic design of the cover. In other words, reading this book is going to take some work. However, having finished the book, I am coming away with stronger convictions towards credobaptism. One difficulty for me has been trying to understand the string of pearls that connect the paedobaptist position and as it turns out, there is a lot of disagreement in that position. So much so, that the author, who was a paedobaptist, is accused of misrepresenting the position. I can see some of where infant baptism is pulled from references in Scripture and perhaps the argument of silence, but that’s overshadowed by the clearer practice of baptism for disciples who can obey the command to repent and believe. The book is a recommend for anyone who wants a helpful contribution to the discussion of baptism but it’s not going to come easy. I wouldn’t lightly suggest this to someone; they would have to want to dig this deep.
November 6, 2022
This book is a good introduction to credobaptism, specifically in contrast with paedobaptism. The author neatly and systematically covers each of the main areas of disagreement between the two sides. My main critique is how he takes a divide and conquer approach--isolating each aspect of the paedobaptist position from other related concepts. IMO his arguments are often strained, and any paedobaptist who has a decent grasp of Covenant Theology and baptism's meaning and role in the story of Scripture will come away as a stronger paedobaptist.
June 26, 2023
A great resources for those wanting a robust understanding of believers baptism. This more than just a work on traditional passages and how to interpret them, but even more so an understanding on the application of how these views play out.
May 5, 2008
This is an underrated apologetic for credobaptism, in my opinion. Many have lauded Malone's book. I think a critical read yields a different appraisal. The book is also filled with straw men, self-excepting fallacies (cf. his argument from the regulative principle), and sundry other errors.
I found the baptist tendency to "Vulcanize" the texts to be especially prevalent in this book. Saying that since the text says "the household served the saints" it couldn't have had infants is pedantic Vulcanizing at its finest. The Jones' family at my church is always helping their brothers and sisters. Would you say I couldn't say that if you knew the Jones' had an infant? Can I not say that my family celebrated the New Year given that we had a 3 month old at the time? Could Joshua say what he said about him and his family serving the Lord only when they didn't have babies?
His argument that paedobaptists would have to be paedocommunionists is particularly weak; especially since I don’t think unchatechized childred partook of the Passover (12 yr. old was probably the first time they partook). So, there’s no covenantal link there.
Malone frequently cites the fact that the only cases of baptism we have are cases of professors baptism. But not only is this false, it’s fallacious. It would be like me arguing that since only white men have been president of the United States, only white men ought to be president.
I'd love to get specific and note all the errors in this book, but (a) it's packed away and (b) they don't give me enough words to list all the errors. Anyway, I've been on record here giving credobaptist books on the whole a better rating, so this isn't some partisan rant. I think this book really is a poor defense of credobaptism.
I found the baptist tendency to "Vulcanize" the texts to be especially prevalent in this book. Saying that since the text says "the household served the saints" it couldn't have had infants is pedantic Vulcanizing at its finest. The Jones' family at my church is always helping their brothers and sisters. Would you say I couldn't say that if you knew the Jones' had an infant? Can I not say that my family celebrated the New Year given that we had a 3 month old at the time? Could Joshua say what he said about him and his family serving the Lord only when they didn't have babies?
His argument that paedobaptists would have to be paedocommunionists is particularly weak; especially since I don’t think unchatechized childred partook of the Passover (12 yr. old was probably the first time they partook). So, there’s no covenantal link there.
Malone frequently cites the fact that the only cases of baptism we have are cases of professors baptism. But not only is this false, it’s fallacious. It would be like me arguing that since only white men have been president of the United States, only white men ought to be president.
I'd love to get specific and note all the errors in this book, but (a) it's packed away and (b) they don't give me enough words to list all the errors. Anyway, I've been on record here giving credobaptist books on the whole a better rating, so this isn't some partisan rant. I think this book really is a poor defense of credobaptism.
December 23, 2017
I found myself so disappointed by the misrepresentation of the paedobaptist position that it was difficult for me to get through the book.
However, it did lay out the Baptist position on baptism well.
With that said, if you’re looking for a good book that discusses baptism fairly then I would not look here.
However, it did lay out the Baptist position on baptism well.
With that said, if you’re looking for a good book that discusses baptism fairly then I would not look here.
January 28, 2016
Excellent book by a former paedobaptist who is now a Baptist.
August 26, 2017
Absolutely the best book on Believer's Baptism from a Covenantal perspective. Strong argument, and very faithful to the Scriptures.
February 13, 2024
On the whole, this book was good. Although I think it was a bit wordy—he definitely belabored his points, at times, to an excessive degree.
On the one hand, while I wholeheartedly agree with his conclusion—that credobaptism is the only biblically faithful practice, it was frustrating that he wanted to ground many of his arguments in the regulative principle, which as far I can tell, is unnecessarily restrictive. I see more freedom in the text and believe that the Normative Principle more appropriately captures the spirit of the text.
That said, I still think that a solid argument can be made for credobaptism without an appeal to the regulative principle, so those arguments certainly resonated more with me.
In a weird twist that betrays my in-betweenness, I did bristle a bit at his vociferous condemnation of Federal Vision. While I’m not a proponent personally, I don’t believe a good case be made that it is the evil so many people think it is. Similarly, I don’t necessarily see the issue with hypercovenantalism that Malone does. In my experience, whenever someone puts “hyper” in front of something they don’t like, they’re really just unjustifiably creating a “boogeyman” to attack. This is certainly true of “hypercalvinism” which also, doesn’t really exist.
Finally, I disagree with his rejection of paedocommunion. I wholeheartedly believe that it can exist within a frame work that is acceptable to credobaptist—though I suppose that conversation is for a different time and place.
On the one hand, while I wholeheartedly agree with his conclusion—that credobaptism is the only biblically faithful practice, it was frustrating that he wanted to ground many of his arguments in the regulative principle, which as far I can tell, is unnecessarily restrictive. I see more freedom in the text and believe that the Normative Principle more appropriately captures the spirit of the text.
That said, I still think that a solid argument can be made for credobaptism without an appeal to the regulative principle, so those arguments certainly resonated more with me.
In a weird twist that betrays my in-betweenness, I did bristle a bit at his vociferous condemnation of Federal Vision. While I’m not a proponent personally, I don’t believe a good case be made that it is the evil so many people think it is. Similarly, I don’t necessarily see the issue with hypercovenantalism that Malone does. In my experience, whenever someone puts “hyper” in front of something they don’t like, they’re really just unjustifiably creating a “boogeyman” to attack. This is certainly true of “hypercalvinism” which also, doesn’t really exist.
Finally, I disagree with his rejection of paedocommunion. I wholeheartedly believe that it can exist within a frame work that is acceptable to credobaptist—though I suppose that conversation is for a different time and place.
October 27, 2022
Fred Malone does an outstanding job critiquing Paedobaptist teachings and practice. As a former Presbyterian minister his insight into the flaws and weaknesses of their view should challenge and force Paedobaptist to rethink their position. Mr. Malone critiques the basic go to defenses of PB theology and holds them up to the light of sound biblical exegesis to show their flaws. 1. Covenant theology in the Bible 2. The relationship between Circumcision and Baptism 3. Household Baptism 4. Infant Baptism proof texts 5. Jesus' attitude towards children 6. Disjunctions of John and Jesus' baptisms 7. Arguments from silence 8. Arguments of blessings to covenant children. 9 Testimonies from tradition.
This book was written in love of truth and sadly I find that many Paedobaptists refuse to read anything from the "other side of the aisle". As a reformed Baptist my views were not handed to me on a silver platter, and I have fallen far away from the "traditions" I was raised in. It was through much toil and struggle with Scripture and opposing views that I can now stand firm on what I believe. Semper Reformanda should be the heart cry of all believers. To be conformed to the image of Christ as proclaimed in His Word should be all our goal. This book would be a challenge to those who baptize infants and an encouragement to those who realize that the practice is unbiblical.
Doctrine Matters! Theology Matters! You'll find them both within!
This book was written in love of truth and sadly I find that many Paedobaptists refuse to read anything from the "other side of the aisle". As a reformed Baptist my views were not handed to me on a silver platter, and I have fallen far away from the "traditions" I was raised in. It was through much toil and struggle with Scripture and opposing views that I can now stand firm on what I believe. Semper Reformanda should be the heart cry of all believers. To be conformed to the image of Christ as proclaimed in His Word should be all our goal. This book would be a challenge to those who baptize infants and an encouragement to those who realize that the practice is unbiblical.
Doctrine Matters! Theology Matters! You'll find them both within!
May 25, 2025
Uncompelling agreements.
I picked up this book because an older friend who is a Reformed Baptist said this book kept him from becoming Presbyterian when he first dove into covenant theology. I was disappointed from very early on.
He starts the book expressing his thanks and love for his friends in his exchurch that is PCA and paedobaptist but he writes like he has a chip on his shoulder and doesn’t like paedobaptists very much. I would expect him to steelman his opponents’ arguments better having been a PCA minister in the past, however he doesn’t at all. He does a great job bringing all the paedobaptist arguements’ scripture references to bare and even highlights other similar passages and lesser referenced places, but he doesn’t do a good job articulating why paedobaptists use them as prooftexts, so many arguments end up only combatting half the point. Generally uncompelling.
He does manage to ask a couple of provoking questions that poke at the weak points of paedobaptists but the weakness of his general argumentation make those loose traction.
I appreciate his zeal for the regulative principle and his confessionalism.
All in all I wouldn’t recommend this.
I picked up this book because an older friend who is a Reformed Baptist said this book kept him from becoming Presbyterian when he first dove into covenant theology. I was disappointed from very early on.
He starts the book expressing his thanks and love for his friends in his exchurch that is PCA and paedobaptist but he writes like he has a chip on his shoulder and doesn’t like paedobaptists very much. I would expect him to steelman his opponents’ arguments better having been a PCA minister in the past, however he doesn’t at all. He does a great job bringing all the paedobaptist arguements’ scripture references to bare and even highlights other similar passages and lesser referenced places, but he doesn’t do a good job articulating why paedobaptists use them as prooftexts, so many arguments end up only combatting half the point. Generally uncompelling.
He does manage to ask a couple of provoking questions that poke at the weak points of paedobaptists but the weakness of his general argumentation make those loose traction.
I appreciate his zeal for the regulative principle and his confessionalism.
All in all I wouldn’t recommend this.
April 6, 2024
Good book! Answered some questions that Presbys commonly arise regarding believers baptism. I found the sections on household baptisms to be helpful as well as the argument from a covenantal perspective.
I would still like to further look at what it means that the unbelieving spouse of a believer and their children are "holy/sanctified" but had never realized the reference to Ezra 10. In Ezra 10:2-3 where the people of God mixing with foreigners had to put away their wives and their children. Paul's argument here is that if a believer is married to an unbeliever and they have children that they are not called to leave them live in the old covenant family context.
Also, I would like to further investigate how reformed Baptists can get away with having an abiding moral law from the OT including Sabbath with no set command yet reject paedobaptism because of no set command.
Overall, great book! I read some appendices but restrained from reading them all. I probably skipped 45 pages of appendices.
I would still like to further look at what it means that the unbelieving spouse of a believer and their children are "holy/sanctified" but had never realized the reference to Ezra 10. In Ezra 10:2-3 where the people of God mixing with foreigners had to put away their wives and their children. Paul's argument here is that if a believer is married to an unbeliever and they have children that they are not called to leave them live in the old covenant family context.
Also, I would like to further investigate how reformed Baptists can get away with having an abiding moral law from the OT including Sabbath with no set command yet reject paedobaptism because of no set command.
Overall, great book! I read some appendices but restrained from reading them all. I probably skipped 45 pages of appendices.
April 14, 2022
This is one of the best books written on this topic that I have read, and I am not only saying that because I share Malone's views. This is a must read for any thoughtful Christian as they engage in this internal debate among the brotherhood of the saints. The Baptism of Disciple Alone provides a helpful guide and strives to present the various arguments and sides as faithfully as possible.
August 18, 2021
Very good book overall. I think it could have definitely been more concise. I appreciated Dr. Malone's unique personal perspective on this issue. I noticed that in Appendix E he misspells Dr. Daniel Doriani's name every time as "Moriani."
March 25, 2022
A particular baptist understanding of covenantal believers baptism.
The best credobaptist book on baptism I've read.
The best credobaptist book on baptism I've read.
January 14, 2023
Great book for a solid defense of believers baptism versus infant baptism. Very easy to understand. A must read for any Baptist pastor.
January 17, 2025
The best Baptist critique of the reformed covenantal view of baptism and best positive/succinct articulation of a viable baptist covenant theology.
July 9, 2025
A must read for anyone studying baptism.
January 3, 2024
I found the first 104 pages to be somewhat unfocused and a bit repetitive. Malone's two chapter explanation of Baptist Covenant Theology was hard get through (especially as I just finished Pascal Denault's excellent The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology, which I highly recommend).
However, once he hit chapter 5 the pace of the book sped up significantly with shorter focused chapters, and the strengths of the author shone through as he dismantled the paedobaptist NT arguments and prooftexts one by one while building a solid NT case for credobaptism. Every chapter from that point on (including the Appendices) was gold. Thus, I will gladly recommend this book. Just read Denault's first.
Edit: Turns out it's easy to argue for credobaptism from the regulative principle if you just subtly change the historic definition of the RP to exclude the paedobaptist argument from the start.
However, once he hit chapter 5 the pace of the book sped up significantly with shorter focused chapters, and the strengths of the author shone through as he dismantled the paedobaptist NT arguments and prooftexts one by one while building a solid NT case for credobaptism. Every chapter from that point on (including the Appendices) was gold. Thus, I will gladly recommend this book. Just read Denault's first.
Edit: Turns out it's easy to argue for credobaptism from the regulative principle if you just subtly change the historic definition of the RP to exclude the paedobaptist argument from the start.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews