Covenant Theology: A Reformed Baptist Perspective

by Phillip D.R. Griffiths

God has always dealt with his people through the covenant. Yet, in spite of this, it is a teaching that is all too often neglected. Many Baptists don't know why they are Baptist. If questioned they are most likely to respond by alluding to the mode of baptism rather than its underlying theology. This book seeks to remedy this. It is accessible to the average Christian in the pew, providing the reader with a clear understanding of the historical Baptist position. In doing so it will enable the Christian to appreciate more fully his position in Christ. The work clearly shows that there is only one covenant of grace, namely the new covenant in Christ. In doing this the work points out the errors inherent in the Reformed paedobaptist paradigm.

Genres: Theology

208 pages, Paperback

Published June 10, 2016

Reviews

[Parker Bentley · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author interacts a lot with paedobaptists in this book. It almost comes as a polemic against their covenantal framework. His takes on Pentecost were interesting, but I think it’s a pretty good summation of baptistic covenant theology. In my opinion, the strengths were in his discussions on the federal headship of the covenants, circumcision, and the application of Christ’s work to those in the OT.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 starts ⭐️ excellent book, simple language and easy to read with solid theology and scripture exposition.
There are some typos that I hope it was avoided in the newer edition!
I highly recommend it.

[William Thomas · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book. Covenant theology is something I am interested in, only from a presbyterian perspective. It certainly got me thinking, and to be frank, I don't know how to answer Griffith's arguments. As he says, if Christ is the mediator of only the New Covenent, then how can I say that there was salvation under the Old Covenant?
The book is endorsed by Pascal Denault and Geff Johnson. It is up there with them and I would recommend that all presbytariens read it, it may not change their minds, but it will sure make them consider their position.

In all, Griffith presents us with a well written and cogent defence of Baptist covenant theology.

[B · Rating 1 out of 5]

In his book Covenant Theology: A Reformed Baptist Perspective, Phillip D. R. Griffiths' goal is "to explain the Reformed Baptist position in a manner that is easily accessible." He wants the reader "to see that this is the only covenant theology that is faithful to the teaching of Scripture" and "that it will assist the believer in coming to a greater appreciation of the riches that are his in Christ," (Preface, p. ix). He also notes that his intention is not "to hurt or insult paedobaptists, but to, in grace, encourage them to, at the very least, rethink their position, and, maybe, even adopt the Reformed Baptist position," (p. 7). His purpose is "to examine what is often considered to be a difficult topic, and provide something that will encourage Christians to think about their faith," (p. 7).

In his book the author defines the term 'covenant', looks at the Covenant of Works under Adam, the New Covenant under Christ, and then focuses on the differing views of these covenants between Reformed Baptists and Presbyterians. While the subject matter of this book is needed in today's Christian world, Covenant Theology is unnecessarily cumbersome in many places because the author does not stay within the stated scope of his book.

For example, Mr. Griffiths questions Reformed Baptist Pastor Walter Chantry's position on the Kingdom of God (pp. 35-36), on the Mosaic Covenant (pp.90-92), and on the old and new covenant (pp. 133-134). His statements against Pastor Chantry are limited and do not help paedobaptist embrace the Reformed Baptist view since the author is highly critical of another pastor within the Reformed Baptist camp. Surprisingly, the author favorably quotes many Presbyterians (or those sympathetic to paedobaptism) throughout his book, including: Carl Trueman, Michael Horton, A.A. Hodge, O. Palmer Robertson, J.V. Fesko, R.C. Sproul, and Louis Berkhof. If Mr. Griffiths' motive is to convince paedobaptists to change their position on baptism and covenant theology, then appealing to the authority of paedobaptists is counter-productive.

In addition, in his chapter on the Mosaic Covenant, Mr. Griffiths refers to the book Merit and Moses and admits it "[e]ssentially amounts to nothing more than a regurgitation of the standard Presbyterian contention," (p. 99). However, he continues to refute the book. The author realizes that he should limit his comments when he says: "There is much to say about this book [Merit and Moses], however, space only allows for a glimpse into the way the writers employ what I would refer to as specious arguments...bizarre statements...designed to confuse rather than clarify," (pp. 99, 101). His comments are muddled in this area because they lack the logical development needed for a clear and complete book review.

Many times the author does not stay focused on the purpose of his book and admits this when he states: "This is questionable, and whilst it would be nice to spend time exploring this [AW Pink's view on obedience to God], the important thing to bear in mind..." (p. 97), and "I will not spend time trying to refute this [Pratt's view on the mixed church], suffice it to say..." (p. 126). If these points can not be fully developed and disproved, then they are not necessary and lead the author astray from his goal of explaining "the Reformed Baptist position in a manner that is easily accessible." Because of Mr. Griffiths' inclusion of these, as well as other, unnecessary arguments, the book loses the coherence needed for a concise primer on Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology.

Finally, I do not agree with Mr. Griffiths's contention that "[t]he Reformed Baptist paradigm put forward here, as already said, believes entrance into the new covenant to be a reality before Christ's completed work. The new covenant, in regard to its blessings, was before the old covenant," (p. 125). There is no denial that faith in Jesus Christ is how all believers are saved throughout history. However, the New Covenant did not exist before the incarnation of Christ; therefore, Old Testament saints are not benefactors of all the New Covenant blessings and are not members of the New Covenant, which is supported by many Reformed Baptist scholars.

In his sermon "Redemptive History and the Covenants", Pastor Samuel Renihan does an excellent job of defining the Reformed Baptist view of the biblical covenants and states that: "The New Covenant is the Covenant of Grace in its fullness and fulfillment." He clearly summarizes the distinction as thus: "In the Old Testament, Christ had not come and the New Covenant had not yet been established; there was no New Covenant. However, the New Covenant was as good as done because it is part of God's eternal decree. God revealed the New Covenant in His progressive promises throughout the Old Testament; therefore, the Covenant of Grace is the progressive revelation of the New Covenant."

Unfortunately, Mr. Griffiths goes beyond this biblical understanding of the New Covenant. In his argument against the paedobaptist position (one covenant with two administrations), he pushes his argument too far by forcing the New Covenant back into the Old Testament. From a more biblical and traditional perspective, in his book The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology, Pascal Denault states: "As a result, all those who were saved since the creation of the world were saved by virtue of the New Covenant which was in effect as a promise even before it was an accomplished covenant," (p. 71). While Mr. Griffiths does acknowledge that "[a]ll those saints who lived prior to Christ would have believed in the promise as Abraham had done...This was the promise of the new covenant in Christ," (p. 82), he does not consistently and clearly continue the idea of the promise of a Covenant of Grace seen in the Old Testament, but insists that the New Covenant is there. He agrees with Mr. Denault's statement that the Covenant of Grace was progressively revealed in the Old Covenant, but Mr. Griffiths goes on to say: "I would go further than this, maintaining that Old Testament believers, by believing in the promise were actually in the new covenant," (p. 139). This is the main problem with Covenant Theology because this is where Mr. Griffiths departs from the commonly held understanding of Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology.

Having read several books on this subject, I do not consider myself a novice. But in the end, I found myself frequently confused with unnecessary and unclear arguments in Mr. Griffiths' Covenant Theology. Therefore, I do not recommend reading this book.

Full Disclosure: I received a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.

[Ronnie Nichols · Rating 5 out of 5]

A Proper Perspective

Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology at it’s finest! For centuries the Reformed Baptist perspective on covenant theology has been buried in a mountain of paedo-Baptist covenantal theology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. Phillip Griffith has contributed another outstanding explanation of our Reformed view that is both biblical and clearly defines the differences in the credo/paedo distinctives.

[Simon Wartanian · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a welcomed addition to the increasing literature on 1689 Federalism (although this work does not use this designation). Repetition is a strength in this book to remind us that there is but one covenant of grace, which is the New Covenant. All pre-New Covenant covenants were not administrations of the Covenant of Grace, rather, they were subservient covenants of works.

All believers from all ages were members of the New Covenants, united to Christ and in possession of the indwelling Spirit of Christ. Many pages are dedicated to argue for these points.

This book is very accessible, understandable and very enjoyable to read. The author is acquainted with the works of those with whom he is in disagreement. He cites the works of other Reformed Baptists who hold to a baptist version of Westminster Federalism (sometimes called 20th Century Baptist Covenant Theology), Presbyterians, Dispensationalists and New Covenant Theologians. He interacts and answers their objections or points.

The author from the beginning does not claim that this is the only view of Covenant Theology held by Reformed Baptists, and he does so throughout the book. Although we 1689 Federalists argue that this is the most consistent view with the 1689 Confession, but more importantly Holy Writ. I liked the fact that the author was respectful to the other position, although he also raised many points against it (not particularly of 20th Century Baptist, but Westminster Federalism, which is for the most part the same).

I would have given this book 5 stars, but I will not because it was poorly edited. Here are some problems:

* Typos;
* Some wrong references of biblical texts;
* Incorrect citation of some passages;
* Switching between translations without noting the particular translation;
* Long sentences;
* Missing capitals (e.g. "son of God");
* A couple of wrong footnote references.

I hope that there would be a better edited version, but this is a very good work. To see these errors in such a fine book was very frustrating, to be honest. Nonetheless, it is a good work and I'm sure that I will revisit it.

[Luke Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

I bought this book in June 2019, and it appears that Griffiths has re-edited it himself, eliminating the typos etc.
I notice that one reviewer gave the book one star, criticizing the fact that Griffiths makes extensive use of peadobaptist writers. In his revised work he explains his logic for doing this, stating, correctly, that touching most doctrines there is no difference between the Westminster Confession and the Second London Baptist Confession. Hence, there is no requirement to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
The one-star reviewer again criticizes the work because it places believers who lived before the incarnation, in the New Covenant. In my opinion, this betrays the reviewer’s inability to understand the nature of the New Covenant. Throughout the book Griffiths articulates the vital truth that there is only one covenant in which salvation may be found, and that it makes no sense to place Old Testament believers outside of the New Covenant simply because this is the ONLY covenant of which Christ is the Mediator.
Griffiths has extended the chapter dealing with the Pentecostal gift of the Spirit. He shows that it is a blessing which provides the believer with the deepest form of assurance and enables him to enter into a greater understanding of his place in Christ, one which goes beyond merely an intellectual understanding. His understanding of the baptism with the Holy Spirit is, from what I can gather, the same as that held by the late Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones.
This work has given me a fresh understanding of covenant theology. In all, not only is this work a devastating critique of the paedobaptist position, but provides and excellent understanding of what Reformed Baptists believe.

[Melody]

I throughly enjoyed the book. It is well written and author makes a powerful case for the Reformed Baptist position. I would strongly recommend this book for any who are perplexed about how God's covenants work. In my estimation he had dealt a fatal blow to the Presbyterian paradigm.
The style of the book makes it easy to follow. One will come away realising with any doubt that a major difference exists been the covenant made with Abraham and the covenant that was promised to him. I have never thought of it in this way before. So whilst Abraham had two seeds, he was also associated with two covenant. The one that was made was kinked to carnal Israel.

All in all, a must read for Presbyterians.

[David Jenkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

Griffiths correctly identifies all believers as being in the New Covenant. He correctly understands that blessings in Ezekiel 36 and Jeremiah 31 have to do with regeneration. All OT believers were regenerate. A previous reviewer has clearly misunderstood the nature of the New Covenant. One must ask, can one be regenerate without being in Christ, and can one be in Christ and not be in the New Covenant? I think not. This is the books strength, where the author shows that the New Covenant was before the Old Covenant. The previous reviewer has simply shown that she takes a half-way house position, taking the pedobaptist position and applying it to Baptists. It is far removed from what reformed Baptists believe.

[Josh Stenberg · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think Mr. Griffiths argument is devastating to paedobaptist's formulation of covenant theology. There were some editing issues in my copy, I emailed the publisher and was told the editing mistakes were the authors fault. The misspellings and punctuation issues were slightly annoying but the argument is excellent.

[Kathryn]

Hard to understand.