{"id":1082,"date":"2009-08-24T08:00:31","date_gmt":"2009-08-24T12:00:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.danielgoepfrich.com\/?p=1082"},"modified":"2022-10-24T19:31:43","modified_gmt":"2022-10-24T23:31:43","slug":"to-a-thousand-generations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.theologyisforeveryone.com\/to-a-thousand-generations\/","title":{"rendered":"Book Review: To a Thousand Generations"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"to-a-thousand-generations\"<\/a><\/figure>

To a Thousand Generations: Infant Baptism \u2013 Covenant Mercy for the People of God<\/a><\/h3>

by Douglas Wilson<\/h3>

Most of the book reviews that I write<\/a> are fairly positive. This is primarily because I get to choose which books I will review, and I tend to choose books that I think I will like and that will be beneficial for you.<\/p>

However, in my years as a pastor, there have been several times that I opened the mailbox to find a book sent to me, totally unrequested. Most of the time I do not recognize the sender\u2019s name, if one is even given. While sometimes the books are good (some very<\/em> good), most of the time they are way off-base. This is one of those times.<\/p>

Because I have always been taught that infant baptism is not valid and is unscriptural, I admit that I am biased in that way. However, I also consider myself to be open-minded if someone can prove from the Scriptures that I am wrong in my beliefs.<\/p>

So when Wilson opened his book by writing, \u201cMy desire is to present here a case for biblical<\/em> infant baptism,\u201d (p. 8, italics original<\/em>) I was willing to listen. And by the end of his introduction, where he wrote, \u201cWater baptism does not regenerate, it does not save, and it does not cleanse,\u201d he had my attention! Is it possible that I have<\/strong> missed something all along?<\/p>

For the next 110 pages, Wilson laid out his case in a very compelling way. In fact, there are a couple of places where he makes some really good arguments. The problem is that those arguments actually go against<\/em> his premise, not for it!<\/p>

Instead of a biblical case for infant baptism, I found a series of self-contradicting and straw man<\/a> arguments. In fact, out of the 78 notes that I made throughout the book, I was able to write, \u201cYES!\u201d or \u201cGood!\u201d (showing strong agreement), only eight times. Here is a sample of the other things I jotted in the margins:<\/p>