I have a new favorite book on baptism (it takes the place of John Murray’s Christian Baptism). The author, Daniel Baker, trained at Old Princeton and was an avid evangelist. Though written in 1853, A Plain and Scriptural View of Baptism is immediate and readable. He starts in the right place:
I am now an old disciple; my locks are silvery. Full threescore years have rolled over my head, and more than thirty-six years have I preached with some success, I hope, the glorious gospel of the blessed God. My sun of life must soon go down; even now the shades of evening are lengthening around me. With much love for my brethren who in the matter of baptism differ from me (and yet with many of whom I have often taken sweet counsel, and gone to the house of God in company), I now hand over to my family, to the church of God, and the world at large, in this little book, my testimony in favor of doctrines and practices which I verily believe to be both scriptural and true; and all I request of the reader is, with a prayerful spirit to read, examine, and compare; bringing everthing to the test of God’s blessed word, withal remembering, that as neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature, even so neither will water baptism, however administered, avail anything without the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost.
Pick up a copy. If you are a paedobaptist, you’ll be strengthened. If you are a credobaptist, you’ll be challenged.
Is Murray’s Christian Baptism the same as his lectures on baptism in vol 2 of his collected works? Trying to save a buck…
If I were feeling feisty, I’d say, ‘Challenge accepted.’ But I really appreciate these recommendations, so I’ll just say, ‘thank you’, and read them both.
Not sure, Aaron. I don’t have Murray’s Works. Compare the lectures to the PDF .
I don’t suspect Baker’s book will convince you but down here in the South almost everbody is credobaptist by default and have absolutely no idea why. They ought to read Baker and accept it. Well, you should too…but I suspect you know why you believe what you believe.
No, Christian Baptism is a full book, while the chapter in the collected works is a scant 5 pgs.
I would pass on the collected works. Most of the entires are short and the content can be found elsewhere. Unless you’re a diehard Murray fan, save your buck.
Great read. Thanks for commending this. Succinct and pointed. I will refer back to it often.
Speaking as a Baptist, I believe the author handily wins the argument against those who insist upon immersion as being the only proper mode of baptism. No disagreements there. I came to the conclusion years ago that if being a Baptist means being unflinchingly loyal to the mere mode of baptism, then… I can’t be that kind of Baptist. I may believe immersion to be more preferable or fitting, but to outright delegitimize all other modes is way beyond what I can argue for biblically.
The issue remains who the proper recipient of baptism is.
Did God take the infants
of his people into covenant with himself
under Abraham and Moses ; and command,
as a standing token of it, that the seal of the
covenant should be solemnly affixed to them ?
But under the dispensation of Jesus his Son,
has he made no such manifestation of his
regard to them—admitted them into no cove
nant, nor appointed any token that he receives
them as his children, and that he will be to
them a God ? How improbable ; nay, how
uncomfortable the thought ! Thanks to his
mercy, we can with confidence say that it is
not so
How improbable, says he. But exactly right, says the Baptist. Because something somethingcontinuity etc. which I need not get into here.
I think the fault lines between Presbyterian vs. Reformed Baptist hermeneutics remain in the same place they were before. Nevertheless, excellent read.
.