• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Baptismal Regeneration

T

TheologiaCrucis

Guest
My question is quite simple. I only have two problems with Calvinism. One of them is the rejection of baptismal regeneration and the other is the dreaded "L." I am currently a Lutheran (as seen by the icon) but I have recently become fascinated with Calvinism. At first it seemed utterly ridiculous to me, but it seems to be making more and more sense as I study. I have many links and sites about limited atonement, but could someone please explain why baptismal regeneration is not accepted by Calvinists? Scriptural support would be great. Actually, there is one more question. What is the difference between "Calvinist" and "Reformed?" I have it said that one is Calvinist but not Reformed so I figure they must be different. Thanks for your help and God Bless!!!!
 

Jon_

Senior Veteran
Jan 30, 2005
2,998
91
43
California
✟26,116.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
TheologiaCrucis said:
My question is quite simple. I only have two problems with Calvinism. One of them is the rejection of baptismal regeneration and the other is the dreaded "L." I am currently a Lutheran (as seen by the icon) but I have recently become fascinated with Calvinism. At first it seemed utterly ridiculous to me, but it seems to be making more and more sense as I study. I have many links and sites about limited atonement, but could someone please explain why baptismal regeneration is not accepted by Calvinists? Scriptural support would be great. Actually, there is one more question. What is the difference between "Calvinist" and "Reformed?" I have it said that one is Calvinist but not Reformed so I figure they must be different. Thanks for your help and God Bless!!!!
I can only speak for myself, but I reject baptismal regeneration because there is no Scriptural support for it. It is clear in the Word that regeneration is an act of the Holy Spirit, i.e. baptism by the Holy Spirit is regeneration. The sacrament of baptism is like all other sacraments: a tenet of the Christian religion. Baptism is not a requirement for justification.

On Limited Atonement, all I can offer you is to continue reading and praying about it. Accepting Limited Atonement requires throwing off years of entrenched Arminian perspective and understanding of God. That is, it requires going against everything you learned about God's character, and re-learning the Biblical nature of God's character. If the Holy Spirit enables you to understand that, you will accept it, and will consequently have a greater understanding and appreciation of God's grace.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon
 
Upvote 0

cygnusx1

Jacob the twister.....
Apr 12, 2004
56,208
3,104
UK Northampton
Visit site
✟94,926.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
TheologiaCrucis said:
My question is quite simple. I only have two problems with Calvinism. One of them is the rejection of baptismal regeneration and the other is the dreaded "L." I am currently a Lutheran (as seen by the icon) but I have recently become fascinated with Calvinism. At first it seemed utterly ridiculous to me, but it seems to be making more and more sense as I study. I have many links and sites about limited atonement, but could someone please explain why baptismal regeneration is not accepted by Calvinists? Scriptural support would be great. Actually, there is one more question. What is the difference between "Calvinist" and "Reformed?" I have it said that one is Calvinist but not Reformed so I figure they must be different. Thanks for your help and God Bless!!!!

well all I can add is I am happy Calvinist's reject Universal atonement and baptismal regeneration , also a few other strange doctrines ....... on a similar note I always like it when a Mormon or a JW calls , they don't hang around long when they here full booded Suprapalsarianism :wave:

if water could regenerate us then God would rain on everyone. (given an Unlimited atonement)
 
Upvote 0

Tertiumquid

Regular Member
Jul 26, 2003
342
41
Visit site
✟997.00
Faith
Protestant
TheologiaCrucis said:
Actually, there is one more question. What is the difference between "Calvinist" and "Reformed?" I have it said that one is Calvinist but not Reformed so I figure they must be different. Thanks for your help and God Bless!!!!

I figured i'd tackle the easy question first.

"Reformed" theology is Calvinism. I use these terms interchangably-, if someone were to suggest otherwise, I would probably find that certain "someone" has a personality that tends to argue and nit-pick over trivalities.

On the other hand, not all "Reformed" churches are "Calvinist" churches. It took me quite a while to find a Reformed church that held to the 5 points of Calvinism. Maybe at one time all the "Reformed" churches held to doctrinal Calvinism, but due to liberal theology and theological trends they abandoned these doctrinal distinctives. Some examples:

I visitied a few Christian Reformed Churches (CRC) when looking for a church. One of the CRC's had a minister who lectured on M.Scott Peck's Road Less Traveled book as his sermon. The church had succumbed to "self-help" sermons. Another CRC church had a rockin' band and a pentacostal-type-guy screaming out a sermon that could've been in any non-Reformed pentacostal church. Even in Presbyterianism this has been a sad trend. I met a Presbyterian minister a few years back, and I mentioned to him how much I liked the Westminster Confession of Faith. His response: "Oh, my church has progressed beyond that."

I eventually found the church I now attend, which is part of the United Reformed Churches in North America: http://www.iserv.net/~bethany/URC.htm. They are very doctrinally strong.

My church was one of the founding churches: http://www.pprbc.org/. You'll note we adhere to these confessions:
The Heidelberg Catechism gets top theological billing in my church. Here is how this confession explains baptism:

Q66: What are the sacraments?

A66: The sacraments are visible, holy signs and seals appointed by God for this end, that by their use He may the more fully declare and seal to us the promise of the Gospel, namely, that of free grace He grants us the forgiveness of sins and everlasting life for the sake of the one sacrifice of Christ accomplished on the cross.[1]
1. Gen. 17:11; Rom. 4:11; Deut. 30:6; Heb. 9:8-9; Ezek. 20:12

Q67: Are both the Word and the sacraments designed to direct our faith to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross as the only ground of our salvation?

A67: Yes, truly, for the Holy Ghost teaches in the Gospel and assures us by the holy sacraments, that our whole salvation stands in the one sacrifice of Christ made for us on the cross.[1]
1. Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27; Heb. 9:12; Acts 2:41-42

Q68: How many sacraments has Christ instituted in the New Testament?

A68: Two: Holy Baptism and the Holy Supper.

Q69: How is it signified and sealed to you in Holy Baptism that you have part in the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross?

A69: Thus: that Christ instituted this outward washing with water [1] and joined to it this promise,[2] that I am washed with His blood and Spirit from the pollution of my soul, that is, from all my sins, as certainly as I am washed outwardly with water, whereby commonly the filthiness of the body is taken away.[3]
1. Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 2:38
2. Matt. 3:11; Mark 16:16; Rom. 6:3-4
3. Mark 1:4

Q70: What is it to be washed with the blood and Spirit of Christ?

Q70: It is to have the forgiveness of sins from God through grace, for the sake of Christ's blood, which He shed for us in His sacrifice on the cross;[1] and also to be renewed by the Holy Spirit and sanctified to be members of Christ, so that we may more and more die unto sin and lead holy and unblamable lives.[2]
1. Heb. 12:24; I Peter 1:2; Rev. 1:5; Zech. 13:1; Ezek. 36:25-27
2. John 1:33; 3:3; I Cor. 6:11; 12:13; Heb. 9:14

Q71: Where has Christ promised that we are as certainly washed with His blood and Spirit as with the water of Baptism?

Q72: In the institution of Baptism, which says: Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [1] He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.[2] This promise is also repeated where the Scripture calls Baptism the washing of regeneration [3] and the washing away of sins.[4]
1. Matt. 28:19
2. Mark 16:16
3. Titus 3:5
4. Acts 22:16

Q72: Is, then, the outward washing with water itself the washing away of sins?
A72: No,[1] for only the blood of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit cleanse us from all sin.[2]
1. I Peter 3:21; Eph. 5:26
2. I John 1:7; I Cor. 6:11

Q73: Why then does the Holy Ghost call Baptism the washing of regeneration and the washing away of sins?
A73: God speaks thus with great cause, namely, not only to teach us thereby that just as the filthiness of the body is taken away by water, so our sins are taken away by the blood and Spirit of Christ;[1] but much more, that by this divine pledge and token He may assure us that we are as really washed from our sins spiritually as our bodies are washed with water.[2]
1. Rev. 7:14
2. Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38

Q74: Are infants also to be baptized?

A74: Yes, for since they, as well as their parents, belong to the covenant and people of God,[1] and through the blood of Christ [2] both redemption from sin and the Holy Ghost, who works faith, are promised to them no less than to their parents,[3] they are also by Baptism, as a sign of the covenant, to be ingrafted into the Christian Church, and distinguished from the children of unbelievers,[4] as was done in the Old Testament by circumcision,[5] in place of which in the New Testament Baptism is appointed.[6]
1. Gen. 17:7
2. Matt. 19:14
3. Luke 1:14-15; Psa. 22:10; Acts 2:39
4. Acts 10:47
5. Gen. 17:14
6. Col. 2:11-13


Hope this clarifies some things. I would say, look up the prooftexts given in the answers. Likewise, review the answers given in the Book of Concord (and maybe also check the Westminster Confession of Faith). Then pray, alot. On second thought, first pray alot, then look up the scriptures, then pray alot again.

Blessings,
James Swan
 
Upvote 0

StAnselm

Theologue
Aug 17, 2004
1,222
48
47
Melbourne
Visit site
✟24,304.00
Faith
Protestant
Tertiumquid said:
I figured i'd tackle the easy question first.

Well, it gets very complicated. For one thing, many Reformed folks don't like their belief system to be named after a sinful human being, and so abandoned the name "Calvinism". Indeed, it is significant, I think, that unlike Luther, Calvin's name never was attached to *churches* - except the Calvinistic Methodists in Wales.

But the most difficult thing in all this, is that the words are used in narrower and wider senses. For example, "Reformed" is sometimes used to mean "adhering to the 5 points" and "Calvinist" refers to acceptance of what I would consider its wider implications - infant baptism, covenant theology, a particular "world-and-life-view" etc.

Big problem, though - often the words are switched, and Calvinist refers to the 5 points, while Reformed means the larger theological (and life) position.

And then you have the natural watering-down of the terms over time, as evident in TertiumQuid's experiences.
 
Upvote 0

Jon_

Senior Veteran
Jan 30, 2005
2,998
91
43
California
✟26,116.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
StAnselm said:
Well, it gets very complicated. For one thing, many Reformed folks don't like their belief system to be named after a sinful human being, and so abandoned the name "Calvinism". Indeed, it is significant, I think, that unlike Luther, Calvin's name never was attached to *churches* - except the Calvinistic Methodists in Wales.

But the most difficult thing in all this, is that the words are used in narrower and wider senses. For example, "Reformed" is sometimes used to mean "adhering to the 5 points" and "Calvinist" refers to acceptance of what I would consider its wider implications - infant baptism, covenant theology, a particular "world-and-life-view" etc.

Big problem, though - often the words are switched, and Calvinist refers to the 5 points, while Reformed means the larger theological (and life) position.

And then you have the natural watering-down of the terms over time, as evident in TertiumQuid's experiences.
Couldn't have said it better myself. :thumbsup:

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon
 
Upvote 0
T

TheologiaCrucis

Guest
After much careful study and prayer, I truly truly feel that God is leading me to Calvinism. My issues with baptismal regeneration have cleared up as well as my problems with limited atonement. I would say that I am now a full 5-point Calvinist! :) I thank the Lord so much for making this all so clear in my head now. I think it kind of took me an extra long time since I was raised in a very devout Lutheran church and school. I understand now that Lutheranism does teach many things that are true, but they also hold to many doctrines that are simply not Biblical.

I thank you all so much for your help and for taking time out of your lives to help me see the truth. That being said -- I am going to need to look for a new church to attend. I will take a look at the URC, but I have been investigating the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. They seem like a good fit from what I have seen so far, but I am not sure yet. Can anyone else recommend some doctrinally strong churches?

God Bless,
James
 
Upvote 0

Elderone

Senior Member
Mar 31, 2004
823
20
SW PA
✟18,717.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Be careful of the OP's as they are having an internal dispute, as are other Presbyterian groups.

The following address will take you to a short report on it.

http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=204

Some of the OP congregations that have broken away because of the New Pauleen Perspective, NPP (which is heresy), are using the title "Reformed Orthodox Presbyterian" which is what you should look for. If none of those are within a reasonable distance and a regular OP is, ask about their stand on the NPP.

Good solid reformed Bible believing Bible teaching churches are difficult to find, my wife and I are still searching after moving to this area 9 months ago.

Keep asking God for help in your search.
 
Upvote 0

Jon_

Senior Veteran
Jan 30, 2005
2,998
91
43
California
✟26,116.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
TheologiaCrucis said:
After much careful study and prayer, I truly truly feel that God is leading me to Calvinism. My issues with baptismal regeneration have cleared up as well as my problems with limited atonement. I would say that I am now a full 5-point Calvinist! :) I thank the Lord so much for making this all so clear in my head now. I think it kind of took me an extra long time since I was raised in a very devout Lutheran church and school. I understand now that Lutheranism does teach many things that are true, but they also hold to many doctrines that are simply not Biblical.

I thank you all so much for your help and for taking time out of your lives to help me see the truth. That being said -- I am going to need to look for a new church to attend. I will take a look at the URC, but I have been investigating the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. They seem like a good fit from what I have seen so far, but I am not sure yet. Can anyone else recommend some doctrinally strong churches?

God Bless,
James
Praise God! I thank the Lord for his wonderous grace and mercy that he has bestowed upon you, James. It is so blessed to be given this understanding. With time you will come to know just how graciously blessed and favored you are. While God has no favorites according to election, he certainly "favors" others with bountiful understanding--understanding that surpasses others. Those of the highest favor are counted among the Reformed and I praise and glorify God that he has revealed this to you. The elect are few among many, and we Reformed are few among the many elect. What an amazing gift that has been given us to be few among many among few. The most magnificent of it all is that God alone receives the glory, having enabled his children to receive the true doctrine of the Word. No many can claim credit for arriving at Reformed Theology on his own understanding--it is God's work alone and God's glory alone.

On the subject of churches, I have heard many good things about the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. I am sure other members more knowledgeable than I will chime in with better critiques of the currently operating Reformed denominations, however. My best recommendation is to look for a church that upholds the traditionally Reformed subordinate doctrines. I would look for a church that professes the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Belgic Confession, the Canons of Dordt (Dort), the Helvetic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, etc. These are all strong works in the Reformed tradition. They are best known as subordinate doctrines because, of course, as Reformers, we derive our doctrines from the Word, not from institutions of men. The value these creeds have is in their excellent explanations and summaries of biblical doctrine. We value them because we hold what they say to be true and correct to what the Bible says. If that were not true, their value as doctrinal confessions would be nothing.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon
 
Upvote 0

Tertiumquid

Regular Member
Jul 26, 2003
342
41
Visit site
✟997.00
Faith
Protestant
TheologiaCrucis said:
After much careful study and prayer, I truly truly feel that God is leading me to Calvinism.


Just my 2 cents (and you probably already know this)- There is nothing non-Calvinistic about "the Theology of the Cross". In my thinking, this is the greatest theological paradigm Luther put forth. In your quest for a church, find one that preaches Christ. The church I attend makes sure to preach law/gospel each week.

God bless,
James Swan
 
Upvote 0

Tertiumquid

Regular Member
Jul 26, 2003
342
41
Visit site
✟997.00
Faith
Protestant
StAnselm said:
But the most difficult thing in all this, is that the words are used in narrower and wider senses. For example, "Reformed" is sometimes used to mean "adhering to the 5 points" and "Calvinist" refers to acceptance of what I would consider its wider implications - infant baptism, covenant theology, a particular "world-and-life-view" etc.

Big problem, though - often the words are switched, and Calvinist refers to the 5 points, while Reformed means the larger theological (and life) position.

I personally prefer using the word Reformed in identifying my theology. Particularly with non-Christians who ask where I go to church, it has been a real conversation starter when I reply, "Well, i'm Reformed..." Then the next question is, "What in tarnation does that mean?" Then, a very quick history lesson about the gospel being unshackled from the clutches of the Roman Catholic Church is given.

Popularly, I think it's just a fact that folks use the words "Reformed" and "Calvinism" interchangably (for better or for worse). I would further state that both word populary simply mean adherence to the 5 points. I simply let it be. There's not really anything I can do about it. However, depending on whom I'm talking with is how precisely I will define either term.

And defining our terms is crucial. Recall brethren how muddled and confusing Dr. Geisler made the term "Calvinism" a few years ago in his book Chosen But Free. Remember when he defined himself as a moderate Calvinist rather than an extreme Calvinist? One wonders if extreme Calvinists are simply, in commonly understood terms, “Calvinists,” and moderate Calvinists are in essence “Arminians,” are there some other groups not mentioned… perhaps, Mild Calvinists? Would these be Pelagians? It would seem then, that everyone embracing the Christian faith to any degree or extent is thus some form of “Calvinist.” There could be, extremely mild Calvinists (Unitarians?), or mild moderate Calvinists, or extreme mild moderate Calvinists. It becomes clear how redefining a term the way Dr. Geisler has, eliminates it from meaning anything. Dr. Geisler seems to have some vague awareness that his definitional novum will be rejected. He states: “We should note that theologians we classify as extreme Calvinists consider themselves simply ‘Calvinists’ and would probably object to our categorizing them in this mannerProbably” being an understatement indeed, and the burden of proof lies with Dr. Geisler to validate this linguistic redefinition.

God Bless,
James Swan
 
Upvote 0

Tertiumquid

Regular Member
Jul 26, 2003
342
41
Visit site
✟997.00
Faith
Protestant
Jon_ said:
My best recommendation is to look for a church that upholds the traditionally Reformed subordinate doctrines. I would look for a church that professes the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Belgic Confession, the Canons of Dordt (Dort), the Helvetic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, etc. These are all strong works in the Reformed tradition. They are best known as subordinate doctrines because, of course, as Reformers, we derive our doctrines from the Word, not from institutions of men. The value these creeds have is in their excellent explanations and summaries of biblical doctrine. We value them because we hold what they say to be true and correct to what the Bible says. If that were not true, their value as doctrinal confessions would be nothing.

Excellent advice Jon, and well said.

I recall one of my early visits to the church I am now a member of- I asked one of the elders for a statement of faith (I was still thinking in the dispensational evangelicalism mode). He handed me the church Psalter, and told me to look in the back. Everything I needed would be there. I popped it open- It had these writings:
Now, there was no doubt in my mind that this church was not vague about what they believed. Vague and ambigious statements of faith are an attribute of many of the modern churches, and should be avoided. Vague statements of faith are usually a good indicator that a church is not theologically sound: In other words, no one really knows what they exactly believe in the church.

God Bless,
James Swan
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jon_
Upvote 0

StAnselm

Theologue
Aug 17, 2004
1,222
48
47
Melbourne
Visit site
✟24,304.00
Faith
Protestant
Tertiumquid said:
There could be, extremely mild Calvinists (Unitarians?), or mild moderate Calvinists, or extreme mild moderate Calvinists.
:) Excellent point! :thumbsup:

ElderOne said:
Be careful of the OP's as they are having an internal dispute, as are other Presbyterian groups.
Well, if people are leaving the denomination, that will resolve the internal dispute. Personally, I don't give an awful lot of credibility to the Trinity Foundation.

which is heresy
Has there been a discussion of this yet, in SR? If not, I would like to talk about it, but in another thread. Though I think the issue in the OPC concerns the so-called "Federal Vision theology", which is quite distinct.
 
Upvote 0