Baptists do not confess nor do they ordinarily teach that baptism necessarily confers what it signifies. They baptize professing believers because, it is believed, that person professing faith already has what baptism signifies. Nevertheless, the Federal Visionists and the Baptists agree that the visible church is composed of those who have what baptism signifies. Both views more or less reject the internal/external distinction and thus, in their own ways, collapse the decree into the external administration….

Let us define our terms. A Baptist is someone who believes that baptism is only validly administered to professing believers. He denies that the infant children of believers are the proper subjects of baptism. A Federal Visionist is someone who, among other things, holds that at the administration of baptism all the benefits of Christ, namely election, regeneration, faith, justification, union with Christ, and adoption are conferred temporararily. To be sure, most Baptists are not Federal Visionists. The Particular Reformed traditions especially, in contrast to the Federal Visionists, confess and teach a perfectly orthodox doctrine of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone. Nevertheless, most Baptists do have something common with Federal Vision theology: From the point of view of confessional Reformed theology, both movements collapse the divine decree into the outward administration of the covenant of grace, though for different reasons.

This connection has became evident to me over the years as I have found myself having the same sorts of discussions with my Baptist friends as I have had with my Federal Vision opponents. With both of them, if for different reasons, the discussion often turns to the two ways of being in the one covenant of grace. According to the classical Reformed theology, there are two ways of relating to the covenant of grace: externally and internally. I have tried to explain this distinction in Baptism, Election, and the Covenant of Grace, which the publisher sells at cost. I have also sought to explain the historical-theological background of this distinction in the essay, “Baptism and the Benefits of Christ: The Double Mode of Communion,” which the publisher has graciously posted gratis. The reader will want to consult one or both of these for more details.

The Federal Visionist overtly, consciously conflates the eternal decree with the external administration of the covenant of grace. This is his fundamental error. Paedocommunion (the communing of infants, the theology and practice of which is utterly rejected by the Reformed churches), and the doctrine of baptismal regeneration are errors but they are also really only symptoms of this underlying problem. The Federal Vision theology posits two parallel systems: the system of the decree, which they render merely theoretical and the system of baptismal union with Christ, which is their operative theology. When considering baptism and the administration of the covenant, the decree and the administration become one in Federal Vision theology. They do this for a variety of reasons but one of the most important is their rejection of the biblical and historic Reformed distinction between the two ways of being in the one covenant of grace: external and internal. In Romans 2:28 Scripture says that “a Jew is one who is a Jew inwardly” and in Romans 9:6, “not all those who are of Israel are Israel.” Nevertheless, all those who are “of Israel” are in the external administration of the covenant of grace. This is precisely why Paul asks rhetorically, “What advantage has the Jew?” only to answer his own question, “Much in every way!” (Rom 3:1ff). This is why he repeats the same teaching in Romans 9:1–5 explaining that it was to the Jews, his brothers, his kinsmen “who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises…” (Rom 9:4; NASB). According to Paul the external administration of the covenant of grace is vitally important because it is through or, as I have been saying in the series “Engaging With 1689,” it is “in, with, and under” the external administration of the covenant of grace in both the typological periods and in the New Covenant that God the Spirit brings his elect to faith in Christ.

Read More