The 4th Chapter of "Believer's Baptism"

As I mentioned in an earlier post, this chapter alone is worth the price of the book. And if you only had time to read one chapter, this would be the one to read. Whether you are a Baptist or a Presbyterian, Stephen Wellum (of Southern Seminary) brings remarkable clarity to what is really at the heart of the debate over infant baptism: the relationship between the old and new covenants. This chapter is also the longest in the book, but I will do my best to relate the main point in a concise way.

First, Wellum helps us understand the covenental argument for paedobaptism. It starts with what covenant theologians call the covenant of grace - the one, overarching covenant that God has with all His people, whether Old Testament or New Testament. This is the covenant in which God graciously saves His people through Christ, granting them a faith that leads to obedience.

According to most Presbyterians, the old covenant (i.e., the Mosaic covenant, God's covenant with Israel) and the new covenant (i.e., God's covenant with the New Testament church) are really two dispensations of the same covenant of grace. Thus, Presbyterians tend to emphasize the unity of these covenants and the ways in which they are similar. The basic structure remains the same, but some of the elements have changed. According to covenant theologians, in both the old and the new covenants God makes a covenant with His people (Israel in the old, the Church in the new), calls them to trust and obey Him, and gives them a sign to show that they are members of the covenant (circumcision in the old covenant, baptism in the new).

The argument, then, is that since infants were to be given the sign of the covenant in the Old Testament (at 8 days old), before they were capable of exercising faith and obedience, infants are also expected to receive the sign of the covenant in the New Testament. In other words, since all Israelite males were expected to receive the sign at infancy - though many were not elect and would not ultimately be saved - therefore, infants in the new covenant should receive the sign of baptism - though, again, many will not ultimately believe and be saved . Since God's Old Testament people were a "mixed community", Presbyterians say, His New Testament people should be as well. Wellum says:

"..covenant theology's discussion of [the "newness" of the new covenant] fails to reckon that in the coming of Christ the nature and structure of the covenant has changed, which at least entails that all those within the "new covenant community" are people, by definition, who presently have experienced regeneration of heart and full forgiveness of sin (see Jer 31:29-34). Obviously this view of "newness" implies a discontinuity at the structural level between the old and new covenant - a view which is at the heart of the credobaptist position - but which covenant theology rejects. So, for example, paedobaptists continue to view the nature of the new covenant like the old, namely, as a mixed covenant which includes within it both the elect (covenant keepers) and the non-elect (covenant breakers) simulatenously. Suffice it to say, how one understands the nature and structure of the new covenant vis-a-via the previous biblical covenants takes us to the heart of the baptismal divide."

So here is the issue clearly laid out: in the New covenant, are God's covenant people a "mixed community" of adult believers and infant unbelievers, or are they a purely regenerate community in which every member has been quickened to salvation?

At this point one should go to the New Testament Scriptures and see what is taught. This is exactly what was done in the first three chapters of this book (see previous posts), chapters that probably would have been better placed after this chapter. In the third chapter, however, Tom Schreiner argued quite convincingly from the epistles that water baptism is the initation rite whereby one symbolizes their spiritual baptism and their inclusion into the new covenant people of God. The structure of the covenants has changed.

(As a parenthesis, let me say that I believe the new covenant is truly new. The Old Covenant was fulfilled in Christ, and the new covenant has been inaugurated through His death on the cross. No longer are we bound to the Mosaic law written in stone, but rather to the law of Christ that has been written on our hearts. The implications of this are far-reaching, but among other things explain why I am not a Sabbatarian.)

Let me close this post by quoting another important and helpful passage from the essay:

"No doubt there is only one people of God throughout the ages; that is not in dispute. However, in the OT promises of the new covenant (Jer 31:29-34) and its fulfillment in Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8-10), the nature of the covenant communities are not the same, which entails a difference in the meaning and application of the covenant sign. Specifically, the change is found in the shift from a mixed community to that of a regenerate community with the crucial implication that under the new covenant, the covenant sign must only be applied to those who are in the covenant, namely, believers. The covenant sign of circumcision did not require faith for all those who received it, for a variety of reasons, even though it marked a person as a full covenant member. However, the same cannot be said of baptism. Because the church, by its very nature, is a regenerate community, the covenant sign of baptism must only be applied to those who have come to faith in Christ. It is at this point that we see the crucial discontinuity between the old and new covenant communities, a point the paedobaptists fail to grasp."

I do not intend to comment on the remaining chapters of this book, though they are helpful in different ways. Just so you know, here are the rest of the chapters in the book:

"Baptism in the Patristic Writings" - Steven A McKinion (SEBTS)

"Confessor Baptism: The Baptismal Doctrine of the Early Anabaptists" - Jonathan H. Rainbow

"Baptism and the Logic of Reformed Paedobaptists" - Shawn Wright (SBTS)

"Meredith Kline on Suzerainty, Circumcision, and Baptism" - Duane A. Garrett (SBTS)

"Baptism in the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement" - A. B. Caneday (Northwestern College)

"Baptism in the Context of the Local Church" - Mark Dever