Is Baptismal Regeneration False?

[YeshuaFan]

Am I correct in assuming you refer to Romans 5:1, or is it elsewhere? With all due respect, it is far more helpful to accurately quote the Scripture we refer to, when we are claiming to base our argument upon it. Saves a lot of time and misunderstanding.

Galatians 2:16
Romans 3:28

 

[YeshuaFan]

That's not even the stuff the Reformers believed.

Its what the scriptures teach!

 

[YeshuaFan]

Water baptism is to be an outward witness to the new birth.

The water baptism would indeed be a external wetness and sign to the Holy Spirit already indwelling us by virtue of being born again!

 

[YeshuaFan]

That's not even the stuff the Reformers believed.

We are reformed Baptists, not our Presbyterianism brethren!

 

[devin553344]

If you are someone opposed to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, please give your reasons for being opposed, and preferably back up your argument from the text of Scripture.

It's garbage, there are plenty of unbaptized people that I'm sure God would save. Maybe it's required when presented with baptism in the name of God. But there are plenty that God talks about that are never baptized, because the idea was never presented. If you feel the dead need to be baptized then you would be Mormon and have a temple where you are a proxy for the baptism of the dead people. Matthew 24:14

 

[YeshuaFan]

It's garbage, there are plenty of unbaptized people that I'm sure God would save. Maybe it's required when presented with baptism in the name of God. But there are plenty that God talks about that are never baptized, because the idea was never presented. If you feel the dead need to be baptized then you would be Mormon and have a temple where you are a proxy for the baptism of the dead people. Matthew 24:14

Ask the thief on the Cross when he got dunked!

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

That's not even the stuff the Reformers believed.

Hello David, you are correct. I am thankful for many of the saints. Reformers, Puritans, who have gone before us. I draw several truths that they recovered from the errors of Rome.
Baptists however did not need to reform from Rome.
Some of the reformers brought some baggage with them. I leave baggage when I do not see it in scripture.

 

[Not David]

Its what the scriptures teach!

Something said by 25 thousand denominations.

 

[Not David]

We are reformed Baptists, not our Presbyterianism brethren!

So Reformers of the Reformers?

 

[devin553344]

Ask the thief on the Cross when he got dunked!

Jesus was presented with baptism to show his faith. That was my point. There are trillions or more humans that never were presented with a "be baptized to show your allegiance to God and defy Satan" ordinance.

I'm not sure how Jesus' baptism relates to what I said. But sure I see your point. Jesus was baptized to fulfill the law.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The sacrament is certainly a seal and God's promise is attached to it. But the baptized person must use their baptism by believing in order for the promise to do them any good. A baptized person who does not believe is not regenerated by baptism.

The bold sure sounds like works-righteousness to me.

The additional problem seems to be that you are forgetting that faith doesn't come to us spontaneously out from the aether, God gives and works faith in us through means. Anywhere we find God's word we shall find the gift of faith.

As a member of the Reformed tradition surely you would agree that the preaching of the Gospel is efficacious to create faith, yes? On account of the fact that Romans 10:17 says faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. So wherever God's word is, there is faith.

If, therefore, God's word is attached to the water in Baptism, then to deny the reality of faith to the baptized is to deny the efficacy of God's word in creating faith.

So if God's word and promise is found in baptism, then we must confess that the baptized have faith.
Or else God's word and promise is not found in baptism, and baptism is mere empty ritual.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[devin553344]

To respond to the OP more accurately, perhaps there should be made a distinction between the three baptisms:

Baptism with water is an ordinance performed by children, not God. God baptizes with the holy Ghost and with fire: Matthew 3:11. And although the child given ordinance may not be required for salvation perhaps the God performed baptism is?

 

[worshipjunkie]

If you are someone opposed to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, please give your reasons for being opposed, and preferably back up your argument from the text of Scripture.

I'm opposed because belief and repentance are consistently mentioned as necessary for salvation, and baptism is mentioned only in union with these. However, belief and repentance are mentioned by themselves. For just a few verses:

"9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says,“Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” (Romans 10:9-11)

"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (I John 1:9)

"Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” (Acts 16:30-31)

"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16)

"He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5)

"For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power" (I Corinthians 1:17)

It also brings up too many problems. What happens to those who die before they can be baptized? If you say that it is their faith that will count you have argued against baptismal regeneration. If you say they are damned then you are saying a person with true faith in Jesus can be damned if they die before they're baptized. If a person leaves the faith then comes back, then what? Most denominations don't believe in rebaptism. So how do they show their repentance and their reentry to the children of God? ETA: I believe baptism is commanded by God and is supposed to pretty much immediately follow conversion as a powerful sign of the inward reality.

Here's a good article: Is baptism necessary for salvation? | CARM.org

 

[Roidecoeur78]

If you are someone opposed to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, please give your reasons for being opposed, and preferably back up your argument from the text of Scripture.

It depends on whether you're talking about someone being baptized in water by their own apparent choice, as a ritual or tradition of initiation into an organized religion, or someone being baptized with the Holy Spirit, outside of those contexts and by the will of God. The first would be merely a type of dog and pony show which will not yield any regeneration, but will allow one entrance into a social club glossed over with religious trappings, while in the second case the old natural person will die and the spiritual man will be born; thus it is called the second birth.

 

[FireDragon76]

Ask the thief on the Cross when he got dunked!

Don't confuse the extraordinary with the ordinary.

 

[FireDragon76]

It depends on whether you're talking about someone being baptized in water by their own apparent choice, as a ritual or tradition of initiation into an organized religion, or someone being baptized with the Holy Spirit, outside of those contexts and by the will of God. The first would be merely a type of dog and pony show which will not yield any regeneration, but will allow one entrance into a social club glossed over with religious trappings, while in the second case the old natural person will die and the spiritual man will be born; thus it is called the second birth.

It's astounding to hear people so bold to call an ordinance of the Gospel a "dog and pony show".

In truth, this attitude has its roots in pietism. A simple faith received through ordinary means is not enough, we have to be "super-Christians" to be saved. And here enters the opinio legis and all man-made religion.

Our baptismal practices need not be seen as a judgment on other Christians who choose to baptize only adult believers, I do not understand why others feel the need to cast aspersions on our faith.

 

[greenguzzi]

Imagine this scene:
You are discussing your faith with a friend, and they tell you that they want to follow Christ, and they ask "what do I do next"?

What would be your answer?

Would your answer be the same as the answer Peter gave?

When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
(Acts 2)

He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
(Mark 16)

In the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
(1 Peter 3)

The answer from scripture to a person who asks "what should I do"? is pretty straightforward. Get baptised! Baptism is the appeal to God for a good conscience. What's the alternative? Nothing good.

It's not about "Baptismal Regeneration", that's a bogus distraction. It's all about obedience.

Obey God, get baptised.

QED

 

[Tree of Life]

The bold sure sounds like works-righteousness to me.

The additional problem seems to be that you are forgetting that faith doesn't come to us spontaneously out from the aether, God gives and works faith in us through means. Anywhere we find God's word we shall find the gift of faith.

As a member of the Reformed tradition surely you would agree that the preaching of the Gospel is efficacious to create faith, yes? On account of the fact that Romans 10:17 says faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. So wherever God's word is, there is faith.

If, therefore, God's word is attached to the water in Baptism, then to deny the reality of faith to the baptized is to deny the efficacy of God's word in creating faith.

So if God's word and promise is found in baptism, then we must confess that the baptized have faith.
Or else God's word and promise is not found in baptism, and baptism is mere empty ritual.

-CryptoLutheran

Luther taught that we must believe the promises extended to us in the sacraments in order for the sacraments to be efficacious. It is not true that God's word always produces faith in every individual. I do not see why we should suppose that God's word in baptism necessarily produces faith in the infant who is being baptized.

 

[Butch5]

If you are someone opposed to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, please give your reasons for being opposed, and preferably back up your argument from the text of Scripture.

Baptismal Regeneration is what the Scriptures teach. Many reject it based on a misunderstanding of what the Bible mean by works.

 

[YeshuaFan]

So Reformers of the Reformers?

No, just that Calvin got it right on sotierology, but missed on infant baptism and how to govern a local church!