Following the Westminster Confession’s definition of baptism, Gary Crampton presents a compelling argument for credobaptism versus paedobaptism. He examines each phrase of this definition as the outline of his work, finding that neither Scripture, the Apostolic Fathers, the Church Fathers, nor many modern paedobaptists support the definition in favor of infant baptism. His work is thorough in its research, broad in its survey, forceful in its irenic argument, and very readable for all. It betrays Dr. Crampton’s own wrestling with the Scriptures, historical theology, and his own personal convictions as a former paedobaptist to become a convinced and biblical baptist.
This book, in combination with Wright and Schreiner's "Believer's Baptism" and Conner's "Covenant Children Today" is the triological awesomeness of baptist theology.
What Crampton offers is a critique of paedobap from someone who upholds the Westminster Standards as the best expression of the Christian faith. What's so interesting, is that it is *because of this (not despite it), that Crampton cannot hold to paedo baptism: A), the way the Westminster standards define baptism precludes paedobaptism, and B), the WCF requires a sacrament to be positively instituted by Jesus himself (which paedobaptism is not). So, in order to be truly faithful to the standards and Scripture, one must reject the paedobaptism the same standards teach.
It drives presbys' nuts, of course. To even suggest an internal theological consistency in the Standards at any rate isn't going to go over well, much less on a touchy subject like this one. But it's a fair argument.
Long story short, great volume, worthy of the endorsements it has. Highly underrated in today's contemp discussion.