What do you think?
Rate this book
The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism
Richard Pratt, Bryan Chapell, Joel Beeke, Joseph Pipa, Dan Doriani, Douglas Wilson, Cornelis Venema, R. C. Sproul Jr., and others cover aspects of the biblical underpinnings of the doctrine of infant baptism, arguments against it, and reasons for it.
336 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2003
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews
Read
April 10, 2026This baby stares into your soul
April 14, 2013
It's hard to rate this book. It's a multi-author work that makes a case for infant baptism. I am a Baptist (not by birth or upbringing, but by choice, because I see this as the biblical position), and they didn't convince me my position was wrong. So, on a level of convincing, it was one star. But the authors did their best and made some points, so I would give it four stars in that regard. If you want to know what paedobaptists think, this is probably a good book. I wish the publisher had made the margins wider so that I had more room to write my comments.
I felt like the authors of this book failed to do serious exegesis. Often times, the exegesis was poor. And their arguments were not always consistent. Case in point: two adjacent chapters addressed the new covenant passage of Jeremiah 31:31-34. The first chapter said that the only thing new about the new covenant is that the ceremonial law of the Old Testament has been fulfilled by Jesus; therefore, there are no special priests in the new covenant who have a special knowledge of God. The next chapter had a different take. It acknowledged that the new covenant means that its members will have the law of God written on their minds and hearts (by the Spirit), they will know God savingly, and they will be forgiven of sin. Fine. But then the author applied the "already but not yet" card, saying that the new covenant has been inaugurated but not fulfilled or consummated. When it is fulfilled in the new creation, then, of course, all the members will know God and be forgiven. It's easy to see that both interpretations of this passage can't be correct. Often, these arguments come across as desperate attempts to justify a tradition, and the authors not infrequently invoke inconsistent arguments and special pleading.
The one positive take away is really a question: how do Christians regard their children? Even if they are not members of the covenant, as paedobaptists assert, how do they fit in? How should we teach them and make disciples of them? These are important questions to answer.
I felt like the authors of this book failed to do serious exegesis. Often times, the exegesis was poor. And their arguments were not always consistent. Case in point: two adjacent chapters addressed the new covenant passage of Jeremiah 31:31-34. The first chapter said that the only thing new about the new covenant is that the ceremonial law of the Old Testament has been fulfilled by Jesus; therefore, there are no special priests in the new covenant who have a special knowledge of God. The next chapter had a different take. It acknowledged that the new covenant means that its members will have the law of God written on their minds and hearts (by the Spirit), they will know God savingly, and they will be forgiven of sin. Fine. But then the author applied the "already but not yet" card, saying that the new covenant has been inaugurated but not fulfilled or consummated. When it is fulfilled in the new creation, then, of course, all the members will know God and be forgiven. It's easy to see that both interpretations of this passage can't be correct. Often, these arguments come across as desperate attempts to justify a tradition, and the authors not infrequently invoke inconsistent arguments and special pleading.
The one positive take away is really a question: how do Christians regard their children? Even if they are not members of the covenant, as paedobaptists assert, how do they fit in? How should we teach them and make disciples of them? These are important questions to answer.
February 9, 2026
Good book. Having a different author every chapter wasn’t my favorite thing, but not too bad. The chapters on the New Covenant were helpful, and Sproul’s concluding chapter helped bring it all home.
October 22, 2022
This is definitely a must-read on the topic. My only critique, and this comes simply with the nature of a collection of essays like this, is that the book can feel a little disjointed. Since many authors are addressing different but related topics, some overlap occurs. But overall this is a great collection. It addressed many questions I had on this topic. I especially found chapter 5 "Baptism and Circumcision as Signs and Seals" to be especially helpful.
March 14, 2016
Read this for the 2nd time. Liked it better than the first go round while I was still unsettled about my theology of baptism. Found myself appreciating some chapters and even more than I did in my first reading as my knowledge of the subject has expanded. I'm not sure if this the best book in defense of Reformed paedobaptism, but it is very good and comprehensive. My favorite is J.V. Fesko's Biblical Theology of Baptism entitled "Word, Water, & Spirit: A Reformed Perspective on Baptism." Fesko looks at Baptism as a whole whereas Strawbridge's aim was more focused. At any rate, I think this book deserves a fair shake.
December 31, 2019
Strawbridge is great.
Baptise those babies.
WCF > LBCF fight me
Baptise those babies.
WCF > LBCF fight me
January 3, 2024
It is well worth the read but not all essays are created equal. Leithart, Strawbridge, and Wilson’s essays were the best.
May 25, 2020
As with many books that are a compilation, some chapters were great and others not so much. This volume suffered mostly from being painfully repetitive. I was also a bit concerned by some Federal Vision and CREC authors, but really only hurt the book in Wilson's chapter. These were my favorite chapters:
Chapell: He concludes his chapter with an example of what he might say to his congregation when he performs an infant baptism. SUPER clear and helpful. I will definitely be referring this in the future.
Watt: He does a deep dive into the oikos word group to show how we should read the household baptisms in Acts. Solid chapter.
Ross: He concludes his chapter with an illustration of the difference between a baptized and non-baptized child paralleled to an engaged helpful. Straight fire.
Niell: He walks through Jeremiah's New Covenant prophesy to show that much of it isn't unique to the New Covenant. What is new is that the ceremonial law is removed. This was my favorite. It gets to the main reason that I can't be a Baptist - the New Covenant remains a mixed covenant! (Only downside is they made Pratt write the exact same chapter right afterward.)
Chapell: He concludes his chapter with an example of what he might say to his congregation when he performs an infant baptism. SUPER clear and helpful. I will definitely be referring this in the future.
Watt: He does a deep dive into the oikos word group to show how we should read the household baptisms in Acts. Solid chapter.
Ross: He concludes his chapter with an illustration of the difference between a baptized and non-baptized child paralleled to an engaged helpful. Straight fire.
Niell: He walks through Jeremiah's New Covenant prophesy to show that much of it isn't unique to the New Covenant. What is new is that the ceremonial law is removed. This was my favorite. It gets to the main reason that I can't be a Baptist - the New Covenant remains a mixed covenant! (Only downside is they made Pratt write the exact same chapter right afterward.)
April 30, 2022
An excellent collection of essays regarding the traditional practice of reformed/Covenantal infant baptism and how it differs from the forms of it that have been twisted throughout church history. With the nature of the book being a collection of essays written by numerous authors, it tends to be slightly repetitive. While other works might be more thorough than this one, it still remains useful and is overall a helpful read for one looking to dig deeper into the doctrine.
September 7, 2025
Let's start with some positives. I'm glad I read this book, it gave me a few more insights into the paedobaptist viewpoint, and it was good to read directly what paedobaptists say, rather than what others claim they say. There were also some really interesting chapters in here. For example, Strawbridge's chapter towards the end of the book raised some interesting concerns that I'm keen to explore further.
However, I had a lot of problems with the vast majority of this book. It may not be designed to be read cover to cover, but that is the way I read it, and it led to something close to theological whiplash. Each chapter is written by a different author, addressing a slightly different topic within the wider topic of infant baptism. One page we're reading an exegesis of Matthew 28 and a few pages later it's a survey of church history. There has been very little thought put into how the book should fit together and it made it all feel very incoherent.
More importantly, I found many of the chapters contained certain serious holes in the argument. This is a result of some of the authors being more careful with scripture than others. Bible verses were taken out of context and not given careful exegesis. Conclusions were drawn from points which weren't well established (I am happy to concede that "If A, and B, then C", but it often didn't feel that A and B were sufficiently proven). Finally, some of the arguments felt like they were put forward to play on the reader's emotions. Words to the effect of "You surely don't want to say that a child of Christian parents is an unbeliever, do you?" These arguments just didn't land for me.
This book did portray - as its title suggests - the case for covenantal infant baptism, and there were certain things that made me want to consider the view more deeply. However, I would prefer to read a book written by one author, with better structure, and with in general a more careful handling of scripture.
However, I had a lot of problems with the vast majority of this book. It may not be designed to be read cover to cover, but that is the way I read it, and it led to something close to theological whiplash. Each chapter is written by a different author, addressing a slightly different topic within the wider topic of infant baptism. One page we're reading an exegesis of Matthew 28 and a few pages later it's a survey of church history. There has been very little thought put into how the book should fit together and it made it all feel very incoherent.
More importantly, I found many of the chapters contained certain serious holes in the argument. This is a result of some of the authors being more careful with scripture than others. Bible verses were taken out of context and not given careful exegesis. Conclusions were drawn from points which weren't well established (I am happy to concede that "If A, and B, then C", but it often didn't feel that A and B were sufficiently proven). Finally, some of the arguments felt like they were put forward to play on the reader's emotions. Words to the effect of "You surely don't want to say that a child of Christian parents is an unbeliever, do you?" These arguments just didn't land for me.
This book did portray - as its title suggests - the case for covenantal infant baptism, and there were certain things that made me want to consider the view more deeply. However, I would prefer to read a book written by one author, with better structure, and with in general a more careful handling of scripture.
January 25, 2021
Fantastic. Dense at times, but I managed to understand it at a very basic level. I’ve been just over the hedge on this issue leaning padeo, but this probably sealed it for me. Covenant Theology, the Solidarity of the Family and Households, the importance of Children right throughout Scripture, it is, in my opinion, inevitable to avoid.
November 9, 2024
DNF for me because Reformed theology these days is confusing. From my (admittedly limited) understanding, this book seems to depart from a historic Reformed view of baptism.
Edit: One star because Douglas Wilson contributed to this. If you don't know, he protected a pedophile. I hope he repents. He has no business writing about infants.
Edit: One star because Douglas Wilson contributed to this. If you don't know, he protected a pedophile. I hope he repents. He has no business writing about infants.
May 7, 2022
Only two chapters for me stood out as a strong case:
Chapter 3: Unto You, and to Your Children by Joel Beeke and Ray Lanning
Chapter 7: The Newness of the New Covenant by Jeffrey Neil
Overall wasn’t as strong of a case as I hoped. Will still be on the lookout for the “go to” Paedobaptist Covenant Theology work.
Chapter 3: Unto You, and to Your Children by Joel Beeke and Ray Lanning
Chapter 7: The Newness of the New Covenant by Jeffrey Neil
Overall wasn’t as strong of a case as I hoped. Will still be on the lookout for the “go to” Paedobaptist Covenant Theology work.
February 9, 2021
Like all essay collections, this is a blend of excellent to just alright essays. However, that being said, the excellent essays are truly excellent. Particularly, those by Beeke/Lanning, Pratt, and Wilson make the whole thing worth reading.
June 15, 2017
This book contains the best explanation of the covenantal position on infant baptism I have seen in an easily accessible format. I really loved the number of contributors who indicated they rethought their position and why they eventually rejected the adult baptist position and embraced covenantal infant baptism.
Highly recommend this to all - it gives what I think is a very strong case for the reformed position on baptism. The covenant is so crucial as it is a relationship - we are so blessed to have a God who loves us and our children and cares for the little ones so much He wants them marked with the sign and seal of His covenant promises. The best analogy I came across was of two women, both engaged, given all the assurances by their fiance' - but one has a ring the other doesn't - which has more confidence in the assurances - the one with the ring or without? This is highly persuasive and engaging.
Highly recommend this to all - it gives what I think is a very strong case for the reformed position on baptism. The covenant is so crucial as it is a relationship - we are so blessed to have a God who loves us and our children and cares for the little ones so much He wants them marked with the sign and seal of His covenant promises. The best analogy I came across was of two women, both engaged, given all the assurances by their fiance' - but one has a ring the other doesn't - which has more confidence in the assurances - the one with the ring or without? This is highly persuasive and engaging.
December 23, 2015
This book has convinced me of infant baptisms validity. Not quite thoroughly, but well enough. Ultimately, I cannot get myself to deny that children of believers are outside of God's covenant. And if they are inside God's covenant, I see no reason why they shouldn't be given the sign of God's covenant. Of course, neither does this mean that infants must be baptized, as Augustine believed. Infants are in the covenant, in part, because they are not beyond the age of accountability. They are still innocent in the eyes of God.
So for now my position on this issue is this; infant baptism should be allowed but not coerced. If a family in the congregation is not comfortable with baptizing their child, they should have the right to refrain.
So for now my position on this issue is this; infant baptism should be allowed but not coerced. If a family in the congregation is not comfortable with baptizing their child, they should have the right to refrain.
December 31, 2025
I'm glad I was convinced of the position before I read this book. If i approached it on the edge, I do not think it would have pushed me over to the paedo side. There are two areas that must receive comment: the book as a whole and individual chapters.
The book as a whole:
There is no other way to cut it, this was a poorly edited volume. As many reviews note, it was repetitive - most of the authors commented on the New Covenant, most commented on circumcision, most commented on the place of children, etc. An anthology seems like a perfect opportunity to present the case for covenantal infant baptism, it being a doctrine built upon a paradigm shift made of many different strands. Instead, the book was unfocused and did not present the case clearly.
On top of this, the ordering of the chapters was odd. Why does the reader wait until chapter 10 to read about covenant theology and baptism? Should this not be chapter 1 or 2? Why is the first chapter about pastoral application of infant baptism? Should this not be toward the end of the book? Why are there two chapters next two each other that address the NC with basically opposite perspectives? How did two such chapters make it in the same book, let alone get placed side by side? If anything is going to make knowledgable Baptists skeptical, it is surely this kind of organizational blunder. This book would have benefitted greatly from being sectioned off - historical, exegetical, theological, practical, etc. This would have helped the reader know where they are in the argument.
Now for individual chapters:
1. Chapell's chapter was good as a pastoral perspective. How does infant baptism inform pastoral practice? The example baptism homily as the end was nice too. But again, why is this the first chapter? 4 stars.
2. Doriani's chapter was fine on Matthew 28, but I don't know why he spent time on Mark 16. Should have spent more time on the Greek. 3.5 stars.
3. Beeke's chapter was great, though I wish he would have clarified what he was doing. He was not doing exegesis, but rather asking and explaining: what background/understanding would a Jew bring to Peter's speech? And how would that inform his understanding of what Peter was saying? Reading the Baptist critique of this chapter in Recovering a Covenantal Heritage shows that this goal was not understood by all readers. 4.5 stars.
4. Fine, 4 stars. The bit on slaves felt arbitrary.
5. A very unfocused chapter. This is an example of bad editing. Ross should have focused on the idea of sacraments being signs and seals, not the relationship between circumcision and baptism. That could have been relegated to another chapter looking at Col 2 specifically/exegetically. What he sais was fine, but it was all over the place. 3 stars.
6. Pipa did okay on mode, but should have leaned into the biblical theology of sprinkling/pouring. His treatment of Romans 6 was fine. It was a somewhat disorganized chapter. 3.5 stars.
7. Neill's chapter was a mess, organizationally, rhetorically, and topically. I finished the chapter thinking, 'what was he talking about?' His thesis (that Hebrews 8 was specifically focused on the ceremonial law) was unconvincing. How is the ceremonial law written on the heart? He spends a paragraph explaining it, but it did not stick. I do think Hebrews is dealing with administration, but Neill tries to prove too much. James White is right to eviscerate this chapter. 2 stars.
8. Pratt's chapter on the NC was much better, and more convincing. He was organized, clearly laid out what he meant to do, and then did it. He could have spent some time writing about historia salutis and ordo salutis and how that informs our reading of Jer. 31 and Heb. 8. 4 stars.
9. Another disorganized chapter. Booth started out okay but repeated himself and did not clearly explain what his method was. This made it feel all over the place. 3 stars.
10. A predictably solid chapter by Dr. Venema. Just vanilla Westminster Federalism. Good stuff and should been early in the book. Spends the majority of the time on covenant theology, as it should. 5 stars.
11. Good chapter. Bierma did what he set out to do - show the confessional context of baptism: election -> church -> sacraments -> baptism.
12. A commendable and interesting thesis that Leithart completely undercuts in the last two paragraphs arguing for paedocommunion. Without last paragraphs 4 stars. With, 1 star.
13. Strawbridge's own chapter was again disorganized and confusing. He started out strong but then completely shifted his focus in the last pages. 3 stars.
14. Oh Doug Wilson. A fine chapter till the end where he, like Leithart, throws darts at vanilla WCF guys and implicitly advocates for paedocommunion. A good chapter otherwise, showing the place of children in the scriptures.
15. I don't even know why this chapter was included. It's thesis (family worship and how to raise a kid in the covenant) could have been included in Wilson's chapter.
I don't think it's a coincidence that the CREC/FV guys have the weakest chapters. They persistently choose rhetoric over clarity, and their lack of a solid Reformed foundation shows on almost every page. The hints at the objectivity of the covenant and paedobaptism weakened the entire work.
Hopefully someone comes out with a better anthology some day.
The book as a whole:
There is no other way to cut it, this was a poorly edited volume. As many reviews note, it was repetitive - most of the authors commented on the New Covenant, most commented on circumcision, most commented on the place of children, etc. An anthology seems like a perfect opportunity to present the case for covenantal infant baptism, it being a doctrine built upon a paradigm shift made of many different strands. Instead, the book was unfocused and did not present the case clearly.
On top of this, the ordering of the chapters was odd. Why does the reader wait until chapter 10 to read about covenant theology and baptism? Should this not be chapter 1 or 2? Why is the first chapter about pastoral application of infant baptism? Should this not be toward the end of the book? Why are there two chapters next two each other that address the NC with basically opposite perspectives? How did two such chapters make it in the same book, let alone get placed side by side? If anything is going to make knowledgable Baptists skeptical, it is surely this kind of organizational blunder. This book would have benefitted greatly from being sectioned off - historical, exegetical, theological, practical, etc. This would have helped the reader know where they are in the argument.
Now for individual chapters:
1. Chapell's chapter was good as a pastoral perspective. How does infant baptism inform pastoral practice? The example baptism homily as the end was nice too. But again, why is this the first chapter? 4 stars.
2. Doriani's chapter was fine on Matthew 28, but I don't know why he spent time on Mark 16. Should have spent more time on the Greek. 3.5 stars.
3. Beeke's chapter was great, though I wish he would have clarified what he was doing. He was not doing exegesis, but rather asking and explaining: what background/understanding would a Jew bring to Peter's speech? And how would that inform his understanding of what Peter was saying? Reading the Baptist critique of this chapter in Recovering a Covenantal Heritage shows that this goal was not understood by all readers. 4.5 stars.
4. Fine, 4 stars. The bit on slaves felt arbitrary.
5. A very unfocused chapter. This is an example of bad editing. Ross should have focused on the idea of sacraments being signs and seals, not the relationship between circumcision and baptism. That could have been relegated to another chapter looking at Col 2 specifically/exegetically. What he sais was fine, but it was all over the place. 3 stars.
6. Pipa did okay on mode, but should have leaned into the biblical theology of sprinkling/pouring. His treatment of Romans 6 was fine. It was a somewhat disorganized chapter. 3.5 stars.
7. Neill's chapter was a mess, organizationally, rhetorically, and topically. I finished the chapter thinking, 'what was he talking about?' His thesis (that Hebrews 8 was specifically focused on the ceremonial law) was unconvincing. How is the ceremonial law written on the heart? He spends a paragraph explaining it, but it did not stick. I do think Hebrews is dealing with administration, but Neill tries to prove too much. James White is right to eviscerate this chapter. 2 stars.
8. Pratt's chapter on the NC was much better, and more convincing. He was organized, clearly laid out what he meant to do, and then did it. He could have spent some time writing about historia salutis and ordo salutis and how that informs our reading of Jer. 31 and Heb. 8. 4 stars.
9. Another disorganized chapter. Booth started out okay but repeated himself and did not clearly explain what his method was. This made it feel all over the place. 3 stars.
10. A predictably solid chapter by Dr. Venema. Just vanilla Westminster Federalism. Good stuff and should been early in the book. Spends the majority of the time on covenant theology, as it should. 5 stars.
11. Good chapter. Bierma did what he set out to do - show the confessional context of baptism: election -> church -> sacraments -> baptism.
12. A commendable and interesting thesis that Leithart completely undercuts in the last two paragraphs arguing for paedocommunion. Without last paragraphs 4 stars. With, 1 star.
13. Strawbridge's own chapter was again disorganized and confusing. He started out strong but then completely shifted his focus in the last pages. 3 stars.
14. Oh Doug Wilson. A fine chapter till the end where he, like Leithart, throws darts at vanilla WCF guys and implicitly advocates for paedocommunion. A good chapter otherwise, showing the place of children in the scriptures.
15. I don't even know why this chapter was included. It's thesis (family worship and how to raise a kid in the covenant) could have been included in Wilson's chapter.
I don't think it's a coincidence that the CREC/FV guys have the weakest chapters. They persistently choose rhetoric over clarity, and their lack of a solid Reformed foundation shows on almost every page. The hints at the objectivity of the covenant and paedobaptism weakened the entire work.
Hopefully someone comes out with a better anthology some day.
June 19, 2016
Excellent!
November 15, 2019
Solid and sound. Clear and convincing. Yet a mild tone, for those who disagree.
April 30, 2024
Good book. Bad cover.
Read
December 21, 2025What’s the money line on Zach Forehand Jr. being baptized as an infant? Comment your prediction👇
July 21, 2023
I think this book gives a fair and accurate representation of reformed theology's perspective on infant baptism. The way the book is constructed allows the reader to hear from a variety of well-respected authors on the subject, giving a holistic perspective on the theology. Questions regarding continuity between the testaments, parallelism of circumcision and baptism, household baptisms in the NT, pastoral implications of paedobaptism, church history, sprinkling vs immersion, and prophecy of the coming new covenant are all discussed in the book from a presbyterian outlook.
This book will challenge the antipaedobaptist's (not using the term as offensive, just for accuracy because both camps agree with credobaptism) assumptions on baptism, necessitating the individual to answer the argumentation of the reformed on this subject.
The last few chapters were not very nuanced and because of this, the data in these chapters may suggest baptismal regeneration in the children. However, I am not sure if the authors intended this to be the case.
The only negative I have of the book (and I forget what chapters they are on) is the discussion of Hebrews 8:8-12 in two adjacent chapters. One chapter suggested that the passage about not having to teach each man his neighbor because "all will know me" in Heb 8 and Jer 31 is referencing the practice of Levitical priests dispensing the knowledge of God to the Hebrews. The argument goes that in the NC we have greater access and knowledge of God as compared to the Old. The following chapter had an entirely different interpretation. The writer admitted that this passage referred to salvific knowledge, however, this doesn't affect covenant membership because this complete and full knowledge of God will only come during the consummation of history.
Perhaps the editor missed this or wanted to give both perspectives on the passage to the reader. Interestingly, as I am reading "Theonomy in Christian Ethics", Greg Bahnsen discussed the passage as well and explicitly denied the legitimacy of the "Levitical Priesthood" intrepretation and favored the "Consummation of the World" interpretation.
Other than that, the book was well put together and very useful for those who are starting to study the subject of paedobaptism.
This book will challenge the antipaedobaptist's (not using the term as offensive, just for accuracy because both camps agree with credobaptism) assumptions on baptism, necessitating the individual to answer the argumentation of the reformed on this subject.
The last few chapters were not very nuanced and because of this, the data in these chapters may suggest baptismal regeneration in the children. However, I am not sure if the authors intended this to be the case.
The only negative I have of the book (and I forget what chapters they are on) is the discussion of Hebrews 8:8-12 in two adjacent chapters. One chapter suggested that the passage about not having to teach each man his neighbor because "all will know me" in Heb 8 and Jer 31 is referencing the practice of Levitical priests dispensing the knowledge of God to the Hebrews. The argument goes that in the NC we have greater access and knowledge of God as compared to the Old. The following chapter had an entirely different interpretation. The writer admitted that this passage referred to salvific knowledge, however, this doesn't affect covenant membership because this complete and full knowledge of God will only come during the consummation of history.
Perhaps the editor missed this or wanted to give both perspectives on the passage to the reader. Interestingly, as I am reading "Theonomy in Christian Ethics", Greg Bahnsen discussed the passage as well and explicitly denied the legitimacy of the "Levitical Priesthood" intrepretation and favored the "Consummation of the World" interpretation.
Other than that, the book was well put together and very useful for those who are starting to study the subject of paedobaptism.
June 28, 2012
Introduction
If you are looking for a book to give all your Baptist (and baptistict friends) to read then this one is (almost!) it. There are fifteen chapters by as many and more different contributors. Some well known names such as Bryan Chapell, Joel R Beeke, Joseph Pipa figure among them. It’s great to see the case for infant baptism so well and ably defended from Scripture alone.
I thought it was too good to be true (and indeed it was!) to find a book that I could read cover to cover while cheering and rejoicing in the Lord the whole way. However, it was upon reaching the penultimate chapter titled, Baptism and Children: Their Place in the Old and New Testaments.
This section was written by Douglas Wilson, who, I am sorry to say, crunches the covenantal gears by slowing down the pace of, and effectively stalling, the book by his introduction of the very controversial and potentially church-splitting issue of Paedo-Communion (ie, child communion). When I read this chapter I must admit that my covenantally renewed (and up to that point rejoicing) heart began to sag!
For a solidly Reformed rebuttal of this view see eg, Francis Nigel Lee’s Summary against Paidocommunion and Have You Been Neglecting Your Baby? and The Sins of Adult Rebaptism and of Leaving One’s Babies Unbaptised and The Anabaptists and their Stepchildren and Calvin versus Child Communion and Paedocommunionism versus Protestantism and other items at http://www.dr-fnlee.org/
One is left to wonder at the wisdom of introducing such a schismatizing issue (as Paedocommunion) in a book designed to bring about covenantal unity of thought! O well, because of this controversial issue we’ll have to find another book to convince our Baptist brothers and sisters of the Biblicity of Covenant Baptism!
Close but no cigar!
Premise & Content
The premise of the book is the continuity of God’s everlasting covenant through the ages and the oneness of His covenant people (ie, the Church). The Covenant of Grace, though at times differently administered, remains the same. As did Isaac and Ishmael, so those belonging to faithful Abraham’s household receive the covenant sign and seal.
From Abraham to Christ male infants and male adults were circumcised. From Christ to His return all infants and all adults belonging to faithful Abraham’s household are to be baptised with water. The sign and seal continues, but the mode of administration matures, broadening out to include the Gentile nations as the blessing promised to Abraham is fulfilled (“…in you [Abraham] all the families of the earth shall be blessed” Genesis 12:3b). The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism illustrates from the Bible the right of place infants of believers have in Abraham’s household of faith.
In his introduction editor Strawbridge says, “I have moved through the door from the Calvinistic Baptist room to the Reformed Covenantal Paedobaptist room.” (p. 2).
Paedobaptists are those Calvinists who with Calvin believe that infants of believers belong to the covenant community and as such ought to receive the sign and seal of God’s covenant promise given to believers and their children: “For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call” Acts 2:39.
The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism demonstrates clearly from the Bible that God’s covenant promise to Abraham, ie, the Abrahamic Covenant, is the same covenant promise that is sounding forth throughout all the nations in our own day.
The promise of God is signified and sealed to all who qualify for membership of the covenant community. Water baptism signifies and seals this membership.
Strawbridge explains how he (as a former Baptist) was faced with the issue of Covenant baptism,
The signs of the covenant are for members of the visible church. Since this is so, even the youngest members, infants, can be included in the visible church and receive the sign of inclusion. This was the critical theological point for me.
After working through this question, I began to see that the basic structure of the Baptist polemic against paedobaptism is this: (1) We have an explicit biblical basis for believer’s baptism. (2) There is no explicit warrant (an example or a command) for infant baptism. (3) The new covenant is made exclusively with regenerate individuals. (4) Believers’ little children cannot be assumed to be regenerate. Therefore, the baptistic conclusion is that the children of believers are not to receive the sign of the new covenant until they confess their faith (and thus give evidence of their membership in the new covenant).
After due consideration of this argument, I came to see its weak points. (1) The Baptist assumes that the cases of adult converts being baptized are sufficient to deal with the question of the children of believers. But is this true? Are not the children of the faithful throughout Scripture regarded differently than pagan adults? (2) The Baptist lacks explicit warrant to exclude the infants of believers from the new covenant, for there is no biblical command or example that demands their exclusion. (3) Their exclusion is inferred from what Baptists take to be the nature of the new covenant. Baptists often deny to paedobaptists the right to draw inferences that lead to infant baptism, yet their central theological objection to infant baptism—that the children of believers are not members of the new covenant—is an inference from their view of the new covenant. (page 5).
Conclusion
Strawbridge goes on to address and answer these objections. Thus Strawbridge and the contributors to the rest of the book put forth a compelling and Biblical case for infant baptism.
If you are looking for a book to give all your Baptist (and baptistict friends) to read then this one is (almost!) it. There are fifteen chapters by as many and more different contributors. Some well known names such as Bryan Chapell, Joel R Beeke, Joseph Pipa figure among them. It’s great to see the case for infant baptism so well and ably defended from Scripture alone.
I thought it was too good to be true (and indeed it was!) to find a book that I could read cover to cover while cheering and rejoicing in the Lord the whole way. However, it was upon reaching the penultimate chapter titled, Baptism and Children: Their Place in the Old and New Testaments.
This section was written by Douglas Wilson, who, I am sorry to say, crunches the covenantal gears by slowing down the pace of, and effectively stalling, the book by his introduction of the very controversial and potentially church-splitting issue of Paedo-Communion (ie, child communion). When I read this chapter I must admit that my covenantally renewed (and up to that point rejoicing) heart began to sag!
For a solidly Reformed rebuttal of this view see eg, Francis Nigel Lee’s Summary against Paidocommunion and Have You Been Neglecting Your Baby? and The Sins of Adult Rebaptism and of Leaving One’s Babies Unbaptised and The Anabaptists and their Stepchildren and Calvin versus Child Communion and Paedocommunionism versus Protestantism and other items at http://www.dr-fnlee.org/
One is left to wonder at the wisdom of introducing such a schismatizing issue (as Paedocommunion) in a book designed to bring about covenantal unity of thought! O well, because of this controversial issue we’ll have to find another book to convince our Baptist brothers and sisters of the Biblicity of Covenant Baptism!
Close but no cigar!
Premise & Content
The premise of the book is the continuity of God’s everlasting covenant through the ages and the oneness of His covenant people (ie, the Church). The Covenant of Grace, though at times differently administered, remains the same. As did Isaac and Ishmael, so those belonging to faithful Abraham’s household receive the covenant sign and seal.
From Abraham to Christ male infants and male adults were circumcised. From Christ to His return all infants and all adults belonging to faithful Abraham’s household are to be baptised with water. The sign and seal continues, but the mode of administration matures, broadening out to include the Gentile nations as the blessing promised to Abraham is fulfilled (“…in you [Abraham] all the families of the earth shall be blessed” Genesis 12:3b). The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism illustrates from the Bible the right of place infants of believers have in Abraham’s household of faith.
In his introduction editor Strawbridge says, “I have moved through the door from the Calvinistic Baptist room to the Reformed Covenantal Paedobaptist room.” (p. 2).
Paedobaptists are those Calvinists who with Calvin believe that infants of believers belong to the covenant community and as such ought to receive the sign and seal of God’s covenant promise given to believers and their children: “For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call” Acts 2:39.
The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism demonstrates clearly from the Bible that God’s covenant promise to Abraham, ie, the Abrahamic Covenant, is the same covenant promise that is sounding forth throughout all the nations in our own day.
The promise of God is signified and sealed to all who qualify for membership of the covenant community. Water baptism signifies and seals this membership.
Strawbridge explains how he (as a former Baptist) was faced with the issue of Covenant baptism,
The signs of the covenant are for members of the visible church. Since this is so, even the youngest members, infants, can be included in the visible church and receive the sign of inclusion. This was the critical theological point for me.
After working through this question, I began to see that the basic structure of the Baptist polemic against paedobaptism is this: (1) We have an explicit biblical basis for believer’s baptism. (2) There is no explicit warrant (an example or a command) for infant baptism. (3) The new covenant is made exclusively with regenerate individuals. (4) Believers’ little children cannot be assumed to be regenerate. Therefore, the baptistic conclusion is that the children of believers are not to receive the sign of the new covenant until they confess their faith (and thus give evidence of their membership in the new covenant).
After due consideration of this argument, I came to see its weak points. (1) The Baptist assumes that the cases of adult converts being baptized are sufficient to deal with the question of the children of believers. But is this true? Are not the children of the faithful throughout Scripture regarded differently than pagan adults? (2) The Baptist lacks explicit warrant to exclude the infants of believers from the new covenant, for there is no biblical command or example that demands their exclusion. (3) Their exclusion is inferred from what Baptists take to be the nature of the new covenant. Baptists often deny to paedobaptists the right to draw inferences that lead to infant baptism, yet their central theological objection to infant baptism—that the children of believers are not members of the new covenant—is an inference from their view of the new covenant. (page 5).
Conclusion
Strawbridge goes on to address and answer these objections. Thus Strawbridge and the contributors to the rest of the book put forth a compelling and Biblical case for infant baptism.
August 14, 2022
Solid collection of essays and a useful resource for the covenantal paedobaptist argument. One really can appreciate the view of Scripture and the coherent vision of God's redemptive purposes while reading this book of widely acclaimed authors. I did think that a few of the essays were repetitive or contributed very little to the discussion, but most of the essays were very helpful in working through the relevant issues. I really appreciated how many of the essays worked through the new covenant and its administration in the church with great care. I do wish there were some more essays just working through exegesis on the critical passages, such as Romans 6, Colossians 2, and others, but overall I am thankful for this volume.
June 2, 2025
A mostly excellent and thorough case for covenantal infant baptism. The authors do a great job of not shying away from some of the more serious challenges to their position. At times, they almost manage to convince the reader of anti-paedobaptism, but this works to strengthen their case. More often than not, their responses to counterpoints don't simply aim to dismiss alternative views but instead focus on grounding their argument in a complete, consistent, and coherent reading of Scripture.
The downside. As with any multi-author work, there's a good bit of repetition. More concerning is some Federal Visionism and paedo-communion advocacy that doesn't mix well with the more traditional reformed covenental sections.
The downside. As with any multi-author work, there's a good bit of repetition. More concerning is some Federal Visionism and paedo-communion advocacy that doesn't mix well with the more traditional reformed covenental sections.
January 27, 2019
This is the first time I have read a thorough, biblical, and winsome argument for paedobaptism. I learned a ton. The arguments are more complex than, "there is no explicit mention of infant baptism in the NT." Baptists should engage in this debate from a well informed perspective and this book is a helpful introduction to the arguments on the other side. At the end of the day, I'm still not convinced; although, i have begun to see some of the weaknesses of the credobaptist arguments. I guess I'm not smart enough to be a paedobaptist :)
January 9, 2018
Wow! Finally, so many mysteries about the relationship between the Old and New Testaments are now made clear to me. It's very satisfying to finally understand that God has not changed in the way that he deals with his people. I liken this satisfaction as similar to the experience of realizing that the Bible teaches "Calvinism"- after which you realize the whole Bible is unified and makes a lot of sense. It feels great!
May 23, 2020
Overall a good book on the issue. It's the only one I've read, so I can't compare it with others in the category. B/c it's a collection of essays, certain points get repeated often, but that's the point—the others address various subtopics of infant baptism all from the same basic foundations of infant baptism (covenant theology, baptism as a sign and seal, covenant children). The very first chapter, by Bryan Chapell, is a great overview argument; I found it quite convincing.
February 9, 2023
Really enjoyed much of this book. Having been recommended it from several sources, I wanted to finally take a stab. Many say this was a lynchpin book in their turning from Credobaptist to Paedobaptist and I understand why. My only complaint is really that there are a couple contributors who go too far (also advocating paedocommunion ideas), which, to be fair, I expected based on familiarity those individuals. Overall a helpful read.
November 11, 2019
This is an interesting read. Since the book is a collection of essays by various authors nothing builds on the chapter before it making it not as valuable as a book by a single author on the subject. However, some of the essays I found to be excellent, specifically the one written by Joel Beeke. This is a good book but there are surely better ones on covenant baptism.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews