Considering To a Thousand Generations

It has been quite some time since I’ve read anything by Doug Wilson.  The constant controversy turned me off.  But I had been meaning to read To a Thousand Generations: Infant Baptism- Covenant Mercy for the People of God for a few years.  I lacked opportunity.  Teaching a class on baptism provided the opportunity.  So I took it.

Like many of Doug Wilson’s books it is not very think.  It can be a quick read that touches on the most important aspects of the issue.  He doesn’t go overboard, and this one clocks in at just over 100 pages.  I know, some of you are thinking that 100 is too many pages for something that “doesn’t exist” in Scripture.

I think Wilson does a good job proving you wrong on that regard.  He opens with the problem of nominalism in churches.  This topic is never far from the surface of this book.  He revisits it often.  Sadly, some lay nominalism at the feet of infant baptism.  This is utterly erroneous for many/most baptistic churches are also plagued by nominalism.  It is not something particular, or peculiar, to churches that practice infant baptism (from a covenantal view).

In this regard Wilson brings up the problem of an “over-realized ecclesiology” (my term, I think).  Many advocates of believer’s baptism strive for a “pure” church or a “regenerate” church membership.  This includes some the “new Calvinists”.  This is a good goal- not letting pagans into church membership.  But the Scriptures are honest in that under both covenants there would be a mixed assembly- both covenant keepers and covenant breakers would be there.  The only ‘pure’ church will be in the New Jerusalem.  The visible church is not comprised only of the elect- that would be the invisible church.

Wilson argues that as a result people derive their doctrine of the covenant from their doctrine of baptism instead of the other way.  Baptism is the sign of the covenant, we should seek to understand the covenant first.

He argues, from Scripture, that many prophecies regarding the New Covenant specifically mention the children of believers.  This is an area of continuity between the covenants, not discontinuity as supposed by many credobaptists.  He makes a great distinction: though our contemporary debates should be answered by Scripture, they are often not found in Scripture.  We expect them to be there, and end up misunderstanding Scripture by reading them into the Scriptures.  We miss the historical issues at work there, which could correct our misunderstandings.

One of the issues found in the NT church (as well as the OT) was unbelief (Rom. 11, 1 Cor. 10, Heb. 3).  Not all the people in the church were elect.  There were false professions of faith.  People were guilty of apostasy.  Notice the warnings against this, they exist because there were nominal Christians then too.  Though the New Covenant is internal, not all who profess it have been regenerated.

He then spends time developing a fuller understanding of circumcision.  Too many “covenantal” baptists argue that the sign has to do with the land.  Ah, not really.  It does, and so much more.  And since when are we not getting land?  I read that we get the whole new earth (Rev. 21-22, Mt. 5).  As a sign, it points to an inward reality- the circumcision of the heart.  After building the connection between water baptism and Spirit baptism, Wilson persuasively argues that they refer to the same thing.  One (faulty) argument against infant baptism is that they don’t refer to the same realities.  This charge does not stand up to examination.

“Let us ask this question another way.  In the New Testament, were any infants legitimate members of any visible Christian covenant community?”

Yes, they were.  Believing Jews were continuing to circumcise their children, and were part of legitimate Christian communities.  Paul did not argue for them to stop circumcising their children.  Wilson notes how with circumcision believing Jews continued to identify with the promise to Abraham.  With baptism they also identified with believing Gentiles as the new, or true, Israel (Eph. 2-4).

Wilson closes the book arguing against the exclusive immersion position for an open immersion position.  Mode of baptism, from a Scriptural perspective, is broader than immersion.  That is because baptizo can mean to immerse, dip, pour, and sprinkle.  All are legitimate modes of baptism, so let’s not be more restrictive than Scripture.

I read this book wondering if some of the Federal Vision stuff would show up.  I wondered if he’d so objectify the signs & seals of the covenant that he’d think it meant that the children of believers are saved.  He didn’t.  He clearly teaches the need to believe in the gospel promises, just as they needed to in the Old Covenant.  He recognizes the problem of nominalism.  He’s remembering that baptism is a seal of justification by faith, not the justification itself.

So, while he’s not always my cup of tea I thought this a solid book that may prove helpful for people wrestling with this issue.