First off, an apology. As some who may be reading this may know, I recently finished recording a podcast called Coffee+Confessions, something which concerns next week’s post much more than today’s. I decided I would take a week off of social media, including blog writing, but apparently that turned into two weeks. So that is why this post is two weeks late.

In any case, the last two posts have sought to narrow. Everyone believes something; I believe Christianity. Of those who claim Christianity, I believe the Reformed stripe is correct. But there are multiple groups that are Reformed, and so I narrow it down further. There are Presbyterians who are Reformed. The Dutch Reformed are … well, Reformed. And then some (but certainly not all!) Baptists who claim the title Reformed as well. I am of the last sort. I am a Reformed Baptist. Now, I recognize that some may take issue with a Baptist calling themselves Reformed. To be honest, I’m not super-concerned about any label. That said, I don’t care. I’m still calling myself a Reformed Baptist, because it best describes what I believe.

So why is it that I am not a Presbyterian? Why is it that I am not Dutch Reformed? I love my P&R (Presbyterian and Reformed, the name given to Presbyterians and Dutch Reformed considered together) brothers and sisters. But I am a Baptist. This post is not designed to persuade, rather it is designed to explain my beliefs. I make no intention of providing an exhaustive defense of Baptist beliefs. But what some do not realize is that the difference between P&R and Reformed Baptists is not primarily about Baptism, though that is the most obvious outworking of our two theologies. Rather, it is about covenant theology, the theology concerning God’s covenants with man. While all the Reformed have a lot of similarity between each other in covenant theology, the differences are very important.

Salvation is only in the New Covenant

First, as a Reformed Baptist, I hold that salvation is found only in the New Covenant. Now, that is something that can be easily misunderstood. I am not saying that only those who believed in Christ by name after the Crucifixion can be saved. People have been saved from their sin far before Jesus was on the tree. Rather, what I mean is that The New Covenant is the only covenant by which people obtained eternal life. God has been relating with His people throughout human history. But if you actually look at these covenants, eternal life is simply absent after the Fall. Before Adam fell, eternal life was in view, as we see concerning the fruit of the tree of life that would keep them alive forever. But when we see the Abrahamic Covenant, things change. Land is in view. Offspring is in view. Eternal life? Not even mentioned. Nobody is saved by means of the Abrahamic covenant because salvation is never offered in the Abrahamic covenant! The same is with the Mosaic covenant. Long (albeit temporal) life is in view. Continued permission to stay in the land is in view. Eternal life simply isn’t offered by means of the Mosaic covenant. Yet under the New Covenant, eternal life is exactly what is in view! Therefore, while God related temporally with His Old Covenant people by means of the Abrahamic/Mosaic covenant, God related salvifically with His Old Covenant people by means of the New Covenant! Those on the earlier side of the Cross partook of New Covenant benefits before the New Covenant was instituted.

All in the New Covenant are saved

All that, though, concerns previous covenants and their relationship to the New Covenant. The Abrahamic/Mosaic covenant is no longer in effect, having been superseded by the New Covenant. Now, not only does the New Covenant relate us to God salvifically, but also temporally. We, as God’s people, as God’s church, are in the New Covenant. But that brings us to a second distinction between P&R and Reformed Baptists. We as Reformed Baptists believe that everyone in the New Covenant is saved. We see the New Covenant as being so connected with the Atonement that they cannot be separated. Those who receive atonement do so by means of the New Covenant, and those who are in the New Covenant receive atonement. The practical outworking of this, then, is baptism. It is here that connections between circumcision and baptism break down. Under the Old Covenant, the majority entered into the Covenant by birth, and thus received its sign. But under the New Covenant, we do not enter by birth. Rather, we enter by new birth. We are then to reserve the sign of Baptism for those who, to the best of our understanding, possess the saving faith that coincides with new birth. In sum, we baptize believers, and not the unprofessing children of believers.

Baptism should resemble its object

Finally, Baptism should resemble its object. Romans 6:4 gives us a clear description of the spiritual reality behind baptism:

Therefore we were buried with Him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father,  so we too may walk in a new way  of life. 

We see that baptism is a visible, tangible picture of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and that it is a participation in that death, burial, and resurrection on the part of the believer. Because Scripture so links baptism to this reality, we as Baptists believe that, as standard procedure, baptism should be done by immersion. Just as Jesus was not sprinkled with dirt, nor was dirt poured on Him, but was immersed in a cave, so too we do not sprinkle or pour water in baptism, but fully immerse the new believer.

To finish, I will summarize the Reformed Baptist view on baptism by quoting the 1689 London Baptist Confession:

Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him; of remission of sins; and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.

Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.

The outward element to be used in this ordinance is water, wherein the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Immersion, or dipping of the person in water, is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance.