Book Review: The Baptism of Disciples Alone
A Review of Fred Malone's Book Defending Credobaptism
Dr. Fred Malone is a pastor in Louisiana and professor at Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary. In his book, “The Baptism of Disciples Alone,” he argues for a covenantal view of credobaptism (baptism following a profession of faith) as opposed to paedobaptism (baptism of infants). The main goal of the book is to convince the reader that the baptism of disciples alone is the view demanded by a covenantal understanding of Scripture.
Summary
Malone is honest in his book concerning his own personal experience with this topic. He speaks openly about his transition from a Baptist to a Presbyterian minister. He then spends the length of the book laying out the arguments that convinced him to return to the Baptist view again. For him, at the center of this decision was the issue of whether or not the unconverted infants of believing parents ought to be baptized.
As the reader makes his way through the book, the main categories of argumentation become apparent. The regulative principle of worship plays a major role in the author’s case. Malone argues that the clear precepts of Scripture are to serve as our rule of interpretation. This is opposed, in his estimation, to the argument from silence. He presents it this way in the book, “To let silence concerning infant baptism overpower the clear positive precepts of disciple’s baptism is a dangerous method of biblical interpretation” (151).
Malone furthers his argument by pointing out that both Reformed Baptists and Presbyterians subscribe to the regulative principle. With that groundwork laid, he explains that those who practice infant baptism from an argument of silence are actually acting opposite of their own principle.
Another tool of argumentation the author uses is hermeneutics. Malone seeks to pinpoint and dismiss the various biblical evidences presented by paedobaptists. He argues exegetically, meaning from the text, in an attempt to show credobaptism as the more faithful exposition.
In addition to the exegesis of these texts, Malone goes a step further. Not only does he point out what he believes to be an improper understanding of the text, but also an inconsistent application of it. His greatest emphasis in this area goes to the Lord’s Supper. In his own words, “…in the light of Acts 2:41-42…all those baptized were permitted entrance to the breaking of bread, the Lord’s Supper. If infant baptism is admitted in Acts 2, then so also must infant and small children’s communion be permitted” (150).
Malone builds upon these arguments further by pointing out the myriad differences among those belonging to the paedobaptist camp. In his estimation, the multitude of schisms within the camp shows evidence of a view that is not founded on Scripture alone. After arguing that the hermeneutical principles used to support infant baptism are also used to support dispensationalism, normative worship, and theonomy, the author argues that the acceptance of paedobaptism “inevitably opens the door to these other errors” (43).
Malone states biblical fidelity as his primary reason for writing the book. However, in both the opening and closing of his book, Malone communicates a secondary purpose for writing. That purpose is to stop the exodus of Reformed believers from Baptist churches.
He explains that he has noticed an ignorance in the area of baptism among the Baptists of our time. He also laments the loss of Reformed Baptist ministers and members to Presbyterianism. He points out the regularity of Reformed Baptists moving to Presbyterian churches in order to enjoy a more welcoming environment for their Reformed convictions. According to Malone, “We Baptists cannot afford to lose one faithful pastor unnecessarily for the cause of reformation and revival” (xxiv).
Critical Evaluation
The first of Malone’s major streams of argumentation, using the regulative principle of worship (henceforth referenced as RPW), is strong and convincing. Malone uses the RPW, which is almost identical in both the Westminster and London Baptist Confessions, to pit paedobaptists against their own confession. In doing so, he argues the Reformed Baptist view is more in line with the confession and, henceforth, the true Reformed view of baptism.
He also argues that infant baptism stretches the meaning of “good and necessary consequence”[1] beyond its bounds. I agree with the author that infant baptism is not expressly denied, but that it is also not positively prescribed. I also agree with the author that we must hold our beliefs based on Scripture’s decrees and their necessary consequences, not their possible consequences. In Malone’s words, “One must distinguish between inferences that are possibly plausible and those that are consequentially necessary” (19). It is no wonder that the RPW is a major feature throughout Malone’s work. It is, in my estimation, his strongest argument.
Malone’s second strong argument comes from the standpoint of hermeneutics. Throughout the book, he deals with each of the paedobaptist proof texts. With each text he shows that the exegetical treatment of the passage leads to the Baptist position, while the Presbyterian position is clearly eisegetical.
Malone craftily shows that you cannot come up with infant baptism from texts like Acts 2:38-39, 1 Corinthians 7:12-16, 1 Corinthians 10:1-14, and Colossians 2:9-12 unless you intentionally place infant baptism into the text. One of the most striking examples of his work is his handling of Colossians 2:9-12, one of the major anchor texts of the paedobaptist position. I see Malone’s argument regarding this passage as a crushing blow to infant baptism.
He is right to point out that the text is not linking circumcision to baptism; it is linking circumcision to regeneration. As Malone argues, circumcision is fulfilled in heart-regeneration, its antitype and replacement. Baptism is then given as the sign, not the seal, of regeneration (114-117).
Another of Malone’s points of argument is the inconsistency within the typical paedobaptist view. He reasons that Presbyterians do not use the same hermeneutical method with the Lord’s Supper that they use with baptism. I see both strength and weakness in this argument.
On one hand, it is a strong argument. It exposes the inconsistency of the Presbyterian interpretive method. If the Presbyterians want to insist that infants and small children are excluded from the Lord’s Supper, they are contradictory not to insist that only professing believers be baptized. After all, as the author points out, if we bring circumcision directly into correlation with baptism, should we not also bring the Passover directly into correlation with the Lord’s Supper?
This is an incredible argument against infant baptism, but only if the paedobaptist is resolute in the interpretive method used for the Lord’s Supper. That is where the weakness of Malone’s argument lies. His argument can just as much be a positive call for children to be included in the Lord’s Supper as it can be a negative call for infants to be excluded from baptism. In other words, pointing out the inconsistency in interpretive method may lead the paedobaptist to infant communion instead of away from infant baptism. In short, I see this approach, at best, as a call for consistency. However, it is not sufficient proof to deny a particular doctrine.
Perhaps the weakest of Malone’s arguments comes from the disunity within the paedobaptist camp. Throughout the book he is sure to mention the myriad, nuanced disagreements concerning infant baptism. This level of disagreement is used by the author to question the validity of the doctrine. According to Malone, “It will be seen that there is, by no means, unanimity among paedobaptists on these things. This reveals a real weakness in the paedobaptist position” (159). Though I find most of Malone’s arguments compelling, I find this one to be counterproductive.
There is much disagreement among evangelicals concerning many doctrines. If we use Malone’s approach consistently, we would throw out all of these doctrines simply because there are disagreements. Not only do I find this argument counterproductive, but also self-defeating. Malone is writing a book arguing for his side of a division on baptism while, at the same time, claiming the falsehood of the opposing side based upon the fact that they have divisions. If we follow Malone’s reasoning to its logical conclusion, we will be forced to throw out baptism altogether.
Conclusion
In summary, Malone’s book provides a powerful and compelling case for credobaptism. In addition to the doctrinal side, the book also gives a much needed charge for a resurgence of Reformed theology and leadership in Baptist circles. I would highly recommend this book for any pastor or layman who wants to gain a better understanding of a truly Reformed view of baptism.
Show Some Love
Two ways to show some love and keep the newsletter going:
Support the newsletter on an ongoing basis by upgrading to a paid subscription ($3/month).
Give a one-time gift over at Buy Me a Coffee.
[1] Westminster Confession of Faith, 1:6.