|
Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ (Nac Studies in Bible & Theology) | 
 enlarge | Creators: Thomas R. Schreiner, Shawn Wright
Publisher: B&H Academic
Category: Book
List Price: $19.99
Buy New: $13.59
You Save: $6.40 (32%)
New (23) Used (11) from $10.00
Rating:  9 reviews
Sales Rank: 309544
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 364
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.2
Dimensions (in): 9.1 x 6 x 1
ISBN: 0805432493
Dewey Decimal Number: 234.161
EAN: 9780805432497
ASIN: 0805432493
Publication Date: January 1, 2007
Shipping: Eligible for Super Saver Shipping
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Is believer's baptism the clear teaching of the New Testament Scriptures? What are the historical and theological challenges to believer's baptism? What are the practical applications for believer's baptism today? Volume two in the NEW AMERICAN COMMENTARY STUDIES IN BIBLE & THEOLOGY (NACSBT) series for pastors, advanced Bible students, and other deeply committed laypersons addresses these compelling questions. Indeed, Believer's Baptism begins with the belief that believer's baptism (as opposed to infant baptism or other faith proclaiming methods) is the clear teaching of the New Testament. Along the way, the argument is supported by written contributions from Andreas Kostenberger, Robert Stein, Thomas Schreiner, Stephen Wellum, Steve McKinion, Jonathan Rainbow, Shawn Wright, and Mark Dever.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 4 more reviews...
 A Strong Case for Believer's Baptism October 20, 2008
What is the biblical case for believer's baptism? What biblical support do paedobaptists point to for their belief in infant baptism? What is the relationship between the old and new covenants? What did Alexander Campbell, one of the first voices of the Restoration movement, actually think about baptism?
These questions and more are answered splendidly in Believer's Baptism: Sign of hte New Covenant in Christ. A host of well-known Baptist scholars have collaborated to provide a resource for all who seek to better understand the biblical underpinnings for believer's baptism.
The book begins with three important New Testament scholars mapping out the New Testament teaching on baptism. Andreas Kostenberger writes about baptism in the Gospels; Robert Stein describes baptism in Luke and Acts; Tom Schreiner treats baptism in the epistles. Throughout the summary chapters, the authors maintain a steadfast commitment to taking the text seriously and demonstrate a willingness to question popular assumptions about believer's baptism.
Steve Wellum writes a chapter on baptism and the relationship between the covenants that is well worth the price of the book. The force of the paedobaptist argument comes from a misunderstanding of the nature of the two covenants. Wellum persuasively argues against infant baptism and shows how the practice stems from a misinterpretation of the different covenants.
Steven McKinion shows that infant baptism was not accepted as commonly and widespread in the early church as has been assumed. Archeological evidence shows that most early baptisms were by immersion. Many of the church fathers argue against infant baptism. Others argue for it, demonstrating that the issue was debated, not settled in the first few centuries. This chapter takes away one of the main arguments of paedobaptists for infant baptism: the historical practice.
Shawn Wright tackles the logic of Reformed paedobaptists and pokes holes in the Reformational view, showing how Zwingli's divorcing of faith from baptism was an innovation, never believed by anyone before that period in history. A.B. Caneday offers a helpful summary of the Stone-Campbell doctrine of baptism. The churches of Christ and the Christian Church are less united on baptism than one might think. Finally, Mark Dever ends the book with helpful suggestions on practicing baptism in the local church.
There are times when the authors disagree with each other (appropriate age, immediate baptism, etc.), but each writer seeks to filter his understanding of baptism through a rigorous study of Scripture. Believer's Baptism is one of the most important books on the subject to come out in recent years. It belongs on every pastor's library shelf.
Excellent work that creates important questions June 27, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
This is a marvelous study of the subject of baptism written for the pew member, the scholar, and everyone in between. It is written by Baptists for Baptists to encourage a return among the Baptist people to a biblical position on the purpose and result of baptism, namely, that baptism brings the forgiveness of sins to those who submit to it in faithful obedience to the gospel message.
I hope this book finds a wide circulation among its intended audience and others who sincerely desire to know what the Bible teaches on this vital subject.
 Merely a defense of the Baptist Doctrine February 8, 2008
2 out of 11 found this review helpful
Although much of the research was good, the point of the book fails to prove that baptism is necessary. There was a complete misrepresentation and mistreatment of Alexander Campbell and his teachings, and invalid arguments against what he proposed. This was very dishonest and became merely an ad hominem argument.
In the end, the book leaves the Christian on a shaky foundation: believers should be baptized but it is still not absolute necessary for salvation, thus there remains no reason to argue it should be done yet doesn't need to be.
In response to the author:
It is important to consider all of Campbell's understanding of Christian faith in regards to baptism before narrowly asserting a view he did not maintain. Of course, Campbell would never have advocated a "faithless baptism" but held that only "disciples" were qualified to be baptized (whether our definition of a "believer" is satisfactory is another matter). Campbell demonstrated that the "faith alone" soteriology was self-contradictory. He showed that if one concedes that Christ's blood or God's grace is necessary for salvation then salvation cannot be of faith "alone." He later demonstrated that when Scripture states a means by which we are saved it is never an exclusive statement, but the sum of God's word shows we are saved through several inclusive means (or what he defined as "causes"): grace, blood, faith, baptism, etc. Regardless if certain isolated Scriptures state that we are "saved by grace through faith" this does not narrowly assert that this is all that is required for one's salvation, for we already know that the cross and Christ's blood was also required to achieve our redemption.
He later showed that "belief in (en)" versus "belief into (eis)" have vastly different meanings (as we see in John 8). "Eis" specifically signified the transfer from one realm into another, whether this be belief into (eis) Christ (a movement from outside to inside Christ and all that that entails) or baptism for (eis) forgiveness of sins (a movement into the realm of forgiveness). He taught that, within baptism, one is "born of water and spirit" (note the singular preposition joining the two means into one singular event), that until one is "born again" of "water and spirit one cannot enter the kingdom of God." It is via the means of baptism that one is transferred from the realm and reign of sin (Rom 5) into the realm and reign of grace (Rom 6). Paul succinctly demonstrated that it was in baptism that one is "buried with Christ to walk in newness of life," that in baptism "the old man, the body of sin, might be put away." Campbell appealed to Peter that it is in baptism one makes the appeal to God for a good conscience. It is in baptism that one "calls upon the name of the Lord" as did the apostle Paul.
Campbell sufficiently argued that one cannot enter the kingdom of God if one is not "born of water and spirit." He would never have conceded that one's mental ascension of various propositions constituted faith, let alone the new birth into God's kingdom. He faithfully maintained that it is in baptism that one is granted entrance into the kingdom, through the blood of Christ, through faith in the powerful working of God in it. It is not as if Campbell was advocating one "works" in baptism, but it is the working of God in it and our submission to it if Christ indeed be our Lord. Thus, the proposition that one can be saved, be forgiven sins, be buried with Christ, and enter the kingdom of God prior to baptism would be contradictory to everything Campbell taught.
In response to the ad hominem attack against Campbell, it was quite intriguing how his education and proficiency with logic was utilized to undermine his performance in defeated and discounting others' view on baptism. This type of attack did not deal with his teachings, but merely served as a backhanded impugning of the person.
(In foreview of the "baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire" argument, it must be noted that this baptism, as foretold by John, occurred on the day of Pentecost in the upper room as Christ commanded the apostles wait for its fulfillment in Acts 1:4-5.)
 Go Ye...And Read The Old Testament November 19, 2007
4 out of 9 found this review helpful
Lest I misrepresent too important a topic to have misunderstood:
'Believer's baptism accords with the gospel because it teaches that the objective work of God in salvation necessarily leads to the subjective response of faith. When Churches practice infant baptism or allow into membership those who were baptized as infants, they have sundered the biblical connection between baptism and faith.' pg 2
'Therefore, Baptists only view as true members of the new covenant community those who have actually entered into union with Christ by repentance and faith and as such are partakers of all the benefits and blessings of the new covenant age. Furthermore, for Baptists, it is for this reason that baptism, which is the covenant sign of the new covenant church, is reserved for those who have entered into these glorious realities by the sovereign work of God's grace in their lives.' pg 113
All the above ignores the blatantly obvious. Serious theological implications remain unanswered. Why do Baptists always conclude their teaching on the sacrament of baptism with 'but...many baptised fell away, and many that were saved were never baptised.' If baptism, by their own admission, and proven through factual history, does not constitute salvation, or guarantee further bellief, but does serve as a sign of the new covenant, again, by their own admission, why can't a child be baptised by believing parents, when they accept it not to contribute to salvation? Whether they succeed in honoring that commitment as adults in raising their child (adult baptism negates this necessity), or if a baptised adult were to continue in his confession of faith, is beyond the scope of man's jurisprudence.
And 'all Israel', men, women and children, walked between the Red Sea, and followed the cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night. The Law was received unto the whole of Israel, and read unto the whole of Israel, men, women and children. The typology of the old covenant cannot be dispensed with as if it never mattered - not only to Israel, but more importantly, to God.
'I will betroth thee unto me in faithfulness, and I will say, Thou art My people, and they shall say, Thou art our God.'
A history of baptism will surely show that the necessity of faith in adult baptism arose when the gospel was brought to the heathen nations where in larger proportions were adults than children. Even when baptism took on a new form, it could not negate the original role of paedo-baptism maintained by orthodoxy, inherent in the tradition of orthodox Christian countries.
The second issue also not settled is as to whether there needs to be a revisionist baptism - a second baptism as adult, replacing that of the baptized infant. With the exception of those in the baptistic tradition, infant baptism is seen as the catholic (universal) position and practice of the Western church, which should not be replaced at a later stage, as only one baptism is required in all instances. The mode of infant baptism was received from the apostles directly, claim the church fathers, as a tradition, likely linked to the sprinkling of the blood on the Mercy Seat from the Old Testament.
This study fails to address these issues critically.
One-sided book, even for a Southern Baptist reader November 3, 2007
10 out of 20 found this review helpful
I am a student at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and I normally admire the level of scholarship that happens here (this book was written in part by SBTS professors), especially in the area of theology. I was also raised as a Southern Baptist and I believe that believer's baptism (credobaptism) is the most likely depiction of what the Scriptures intended, so I bought this book fully anticipating what is stated on the back cover: "destined to be a classic," "scholarly, ... without demeaning those with whom they disagree," "unquestionably the best volume on a theology of baptism," etc. To be sure, the authors are respected theologians who are well equipped to handle the subject, and they cite many other important works during their discussion. The first few chapters form a logical, systematic review of every instance of baptism in the NT (these are the best chapters of the book and the most useful). They also give a great deal of space to discussing and responding to reformed/covenantal paedobaptism, though always in view of how it disagrees with the credobaptist view.
Unfortunately, even in light of my respect for the seminary and my appreciation for believer's baptism, I don't think the book is worthy of its hype. The biggest problem is that it seems biased and even pretentious at times, even in spite of the authors' stated intentions to the contrary. Obviously, the cover presents the book as a case for believer's baptism, which is exactly what I was looking to buy. However, rather than presenting an unbiased, scientific examination of the Scriptures and historical evidence and then deciding upon the evidence that credobaptism is the most appropriate interpretation, the authors often fall into the trap of reading their strong convictions into their argument. I was dismayed at the number of times the authors precede their citations with words like "(this author) wrongly states," "rightly claims," "correctly asserts," etc., which demonstrates that the authors present their position as the one by which all others should be judged. No one can fault them for having strong convictions on a subject, or stating a case and defending it, but their methods leave much to be desired, and this type of writing is simply inappropriate for a scholarly work. This is not an analytical, biblical theology of baptism which culminates in a case for credobaptism nearly as much as it is a pointed response to those with whom they disagree.
Aside from the clear credobaptism vs. reformed paedobaptism sparring that permeates the book, it also lacks depth in a few areas. Its discussion of some confusing and oft-disputed passages (such as I Cor. 15:29, baptism on behalf of the dead) is very brief. In all fairness, the author clearly states that he has no intent of canvassing the various views on the passage and directs readers to another book, but his reason is that he doesn't believe it changes "the view argued for in this essay" (credobaptism). I guess this goes back to my argument in the previous paragraph that the authors tend to use the Scriptures to defend their pre-determined belief, but I also mention it to point out that the book can't be a "classic" or "the best volume" if it defers its toughest interpretations to other books. In many respects, this book is not nearly as thorough as other books on the subject.
All of the above is to say this: if a person is seeking a strong defense for credobaptism, then this book is a good tool. In fact, this review might not have been so harsh if the book had been clearly labeled "a defense against paedobaptism" on the front cover. However, if a person is seeking an honest, open, unbiased, thorough review of the evidence (which may or may not lead to a particular view), this book will not fit the bill, as its better parts (and there are good parts) are muddied by a sense of condescension.
|
|
|
|
Powered by CBN AssociateStore
| |
