Regeneration, Romanism, and the Covenant: Some

Toughts on the Baptism Service in the Book of

Common Prayer
Te Rev. Canon Mark E. Rudolph
Rector, St. John the Evangelist Anglican Church
Last Revised: 08/29/2014
Abstract
Miscellaneous thoughts on baptism and the Anglican baptism service
responding to emergent questions in my congregation. As much as possible,
references are given from online resources, in order to ease access to those
resources by the reader.
Contents
Contents 1
1 On Regeneration 2
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Historical Uses Of Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2.1 Terms Clarifed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.2 Uses in the 1662 BCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.3 Te Tirty-nine Articles Of Religion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.2.4 Other Uses By BCP Contemporaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.2.5 Te Westminster Confession Of Faith & Te London Baptist
Confession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.2.6 Charles Hodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1
1.3 Biblical Uses Of Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.3.1 Short List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.3.2 Breadth Of Meanings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.3.3 Closing Comments About the Biblical Uses . . . . . . . . . 15
1.4 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2 Te Similarity Between Roman And Baptist Views Of Baptism 17
2.1 Positions Defned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.1.1 Roman Catholic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.1.2 (Ana)baptistic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2 Comparing, Contrasting, Defning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3 A Covenantally Unifed View Of Baptism And Te Law Of Abroga-
tion 20
3.1 A Common Objection To Infant Baptism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2 Critique Of Te Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2.1 Weakness Of Te Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.2.2 Te Real Danger Of Te Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.3 Te Law of Abrogation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.3.1 Difering Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.3.2 Demonstrating Apostolic Continuity With Te OT (Te Law
Of Abrogation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3.3 Defnition Of Te Law Of Abrogation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.3.4 Examples Of Abrogated Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.3.5 Te Danger Of Ignoring Te Law Of Abrogation . . . . . . 27
1 On Regeneration
1.1 Background
Te word regeneration is an important word of the Christian faith. In current Chris-
tian vocabulary, the term born again the Anglo-saxon equivalent of the Latin
originated regeneration is commonly used to distinguish the sincere follower of
Jesus from the nominal Christian.
Historically, its also as a word of contention. What regeneration is, in what it
results, how its accomplished these are all points which have been debated and,
2
in some cases, for which people have died. For example, these debates have been
partially responsible for the division between Catholic and Protestant.
Tis series of short studies was prompted by the use of the word in the Anglican
baptism service. Te use of regeneration in the baptism service can cause a great deal
of confusion, consternation, and disagreement, especially when a reader assumes
that their understanding of the word is the same as that intended by the BCP.
1
Tose who are convinced of the correctness of infant baptism stumble, be-
cause they are afraid of a Roman Catholic ex opere operato
2
implication in the
baptismal service.
Tose who do not yet understand infant baptism stumble, because they strike
the word regeneration head-on and are convinced that those crazy pdo-
baptists
3
really are closet Roman Catholics.
However, the modern reader assumes incorrectly. And it is this fact that I frst
address in these studies.
1.2 Historical Uses Of Regeneration
Some of the language used in the BCP (see the list on page 4) appears to indicate
that water washes away original sin. But is that what it means?
I begin with the two following assertions.
1. Regeneration and baptism are connected.
2. However, regeneration does not necessarily mean the supernatural change
efected by the spirit of God by which a soul is made spiritually alive,
4
though
it can. Especially when reading reformational works, or language derived
from the theological understanding of that period, one must assume a diferent
signifcance for the use of regeneration than that of the present day.
Lets see if these are defensible assertions.
1
When I speak of the Book of Common Prayer (BCP), I primarily have the 1662 book in mind,
since it is customarily considered to be the gold standard among world-wide Anglicanism.
2
A theological term of art, ex opere operato is a Latin phrase meaning from the work, worked
referring to the efcacy of the sacraments deriving from the action of the sacrament as opposed to
the merits or holiness of the priest or participant (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex opere operato, last
accessed 2014-05).
3
Pdo-baptists are literally child baptizers, pdo coming from the Greek paidion, young child,
infant.
4
Charles Hodge, Systematic Teology, Volume III, Chapter XX (Te Means of Grace), Section 12
(Efcacy of Baptism), Baptismal Regeneration.
3
1.2.1 Terms Clarifed
First, its important to be sure that we are using certain words in the same way and
with the same meaning.
By conversion, I mean the invisible, internal work of Gods Spirit which
translates [one] into the state of grace.
5
Tis is also the meaning commonly
given to regeneration in our day.
When I use the word necessarily, I am trying to signify that while there is a
relationship between regeneration and conversion, those two words are not
synonyms for each other, i.e., two diferent names for the same thing. Tey are
diferent things, which can be and ofen are closely related but still remain
diferent things.
Regeneration and born again are synonymous terms, regeneration coming
from the Latin regeneratio, to be born again. Youll fnd these terms used
interchangeably in this document.
In order to prove my assertion, I start by citing from a number of extra-biblical
sources. Tese citations are intended to show that regeneration has not always had
the one particular meaning which modern usage gives to the word.
1.2.2 Uses in the 1662 BCP
Here follows all of the uses of the word regeneration in the 1662 Book of Common
Prayer.
Aiicu1v God, who hast given us thy only-begoten Son to take our nature
upon him, and as at this time to be born of a pure Virgin: Grant that we,
being regenerate and made thy children by adoption and grace, may daily be
renewed by thy Holy Spirit; through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who
liveth and reigneth with thee and the same Spirit ever, one God, world without
end. Amen.
6
Aiicu1v God, who hast given us thy only-begoten Son to take our nature
upon him, and as at this time to be born of a pure Virgin; Grant that we
being regenerate, and made thy children by adoption and grace, may daily be
5
Westminster Confession, Chapter 9, Section 4.
6
Te proper collect for Te Nativity of our Lord, or the Birth-day of Christ, Commonly called
Christmas-Day. Note that we are regenerate by adoption and grace, not by water. In this and the
following examples, the emphasis is mine.
4
renewed by thy Holy Spirit; through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who
liveth and reigneth with thee and the same Spirit, one God, world without end.
Amen.
7
Diviv beloved, forasmuch as all men are conceived and born in sin: and that
our Saviour Christ saith, None can enter into the kingdom of God, except he
be regenerate and born anew of Water and of the Holy Ghost: I beseech you to
call upon God the Father, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that of his bounteous
mercy he will grant to this Child that thing which by nature he cannot have;
that he may be baptized with Water and the Holy Ghost, and received into
Christs holy Church, and be made a lively member of the same.
8
Aiicu1v and immortal God, the aid of all that need, the helper of all that
fee to thee for succour, the life of them that believe, and the resurrection
of the dead: We call upon thee for this Infant, that he, coming to thy holy
Baptism, may receive remission of his sins by spiritual regeneration. Receive
him, O Lord, as thou hast promised by thy well-beloved Son, saying, Ask, and
ye shall have; seek, and ye shall fnd; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
So give now unto us that ask; let us that seek fnd; open the gate unto us that
knock; that this Infant may enjoy the everlasting benediction of thy heavenly
washing, and may come to the eternal kingdom which thou hast promised by
Christ our Lord. Amen.
9
SiiiNc now, dearly beloved brethren, that this Child is regenerate, and grafed
into the body of Christs Church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for
these benefts; and with one accord make our prayers unto him, that this Child
may lead the rest of his life according to this beginning.
10
l nv1izi thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost. Amen.
7
Te proper collect for Te Sunday afer Christmas-Day.
8
Opening paragraph of the Te Ministration of Publick Baptism of Infants. Te emphasized text
is refective of Jesuss words to Nicodemus. Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water
and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5). Tis language is also found in the
opening paragraph of the Te Ministration of Publick Baptism to Such as are of Riper Years, and Able
to Answer for Temselves.
9
An early prayer in the baptism service. Note that there is no assumption that the imposition of
water itself works anything in the soul of the recipient. Rather, the pastor calls upon God to do the
work of remission of sins.
10
Said immediately afer the baptism. Note that two things are being said in this statement. 1) Tere
is a clear assumption that what has been symbolized has taken place. 2) Tere is a clear statement that
it is God alone who brings about the reality of the thing symbolized, that this Child may lead the rest
of his life according to this beginning.
5
Wi yield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee to
regenerate this Infant with thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for thine own Child
by adoption, and to incorporate him into thy holy Church. And we humbly
beseech thee to grant, that as he is now made partaker of the death of thy Son,
so he may be also of his resurrection; and that fnally, with the residue of thy
Saints, he may inherit thine everlasting kingdom; through the same thy Son
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
11
l civ1iiv you, that in this case all is well done, and according unto due order,
concerning the baptizing of this Child; who being born in original sin, and in
the wrath of God, is now, by the laver of Regeneration in Baptism, received
into the number of the children of God, and heirs of everlasting life: for our
Lord Jesus Christ doth not deny his grace and mercy unto such Infants, but
most lovingly doth call them unto him, as the holy Gospel doth witness to our
comfort on this wise.
12
Aiicu1v and everliving God, who hast vouchsafed to regenerate these thy
servants by Water and the Holy Ghost, and hast given unto them forgiveness
of all their sins: Strengthen them, we beseech thee, O Lord, with the Holy
Ghost the Comforter, and daily increase in them thy manifold gifs of grace;
the spirit of wisdom and understanding; the spirit of counsel and ghostly
strength; the spirit of knowledge and true godliness; and fll them, O Lord,
with the spirit of thy holy fear, now and for ever. Amen.
13
It is particularly telling that we fnd this prayer at the end of the baptismal service.
ANu humbly we beseech thee to grant, that he (the recipient of baptism),
being dead unto sin, and living unto righteousness, and being buried
with Christ in his death, may crucify the old man, and uterly abolish
the whole body of sin; and that, as he is made partaker of the death
of thy Son, he may also be partaker of his resurrection; so that fnally,
with the residue of thy holy Church, he may be an inheritor of thine
everlasting kingdom; through Christ our Lord.
Te language of this prayer clearly shows that there is no theology of one and
done. In the soul of the person baptized, it is Gods work by which one becomes
11
From the Te Ministration of Publick Baptism of Infants. Te agent of regeneration is the Holy
Spirit; and not the water, or the acts of the pastor. Tis language is also found in the Te Ministration
of Private Baptism of Children, in Houses.
12
Found in the Te Ministration of Private Baptism of Children, in Houses. Te Gospel witness
to which the sentence refers is likely Mark 10:1315.
13
Te opening prayer in Te Order of Confrmation.
6
an inheritor of Gods everlasting kingdom, not the work of the ofciant, or even the
work of the recipient of baptism.
1.2.3 Te Tirty-nine Articles Of Religion
I cite from the 27th of the 39 Articles of Religion.
Baptism is not only a sign of profession and mark of diference
whereby Christian men are discerned from other that be not christened,
but is also a sign of regeneration or new birth, whereby, as by an instru-
ment, they that receive baptism rightly are grafed into the Church; the
promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of
God, by the Holy Ghost are visibly signed and sealed; faith is confrmed,
and grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God.
Te baptism of young children is in any wise to be retained in the
Church as most agreeable with the institution of Christ.
Take a closer look at the careful manner of expression in this Article.
1. Baptism is not only a sign of profession and mark of diference whereby
Christian men are discerned from other that be not christened . . .
a) Baptism does have something of the meaning that Baptists give to it,
namely, it is a ritual by why we are demonstrating a diferentiation from
those around us.
b) What we are demonstrating, or signifying is (at least) that the baptized
Christian is diferent from one who is not baptized (be the recipient a
Christian or not in the hidden parts of the heart), whereby Christian
men are discerned from other that be not christened.
2. . . . but is also a sign of regeneration or new birth,
14
. . .
a) Baptism signifes something in addition to point one above.
b) It is not only an external symbol of diferentiation between a baptized
and non-baptized person, it is also a sign (symbolizes, points to) the new
birth or regeneration.
3. . . . whereby, as by an instrument, . . .
a) Baptism is likened to an instrument, a tool in the hand of a crafsman.
14
Note how the words are interchangeable.
7
b) It is a means (tool, instrument) to an end (result, outcome), which is the
reason for which baptism is called a means of grace by the reformers.
15
4. . . . they that receive baptism . . . Now the Article begins to enumerate
some of the things that happen in baptism.
a) First, they are . . . rightly are grafed into the Church; . . .
i. A visible sign makes a visible diference, like a pastor saying, I
now pronounce you man and wife. Some call these performative
acts accomplished (in part) by performative words. To state it
diferently, saying . . . man and wife of itself accomplishes no
essential change
16
in reality. Nevertheless, there is an external,
formal, even legal change of relationship upon the pronouncement
of the ofciant of the wedding. What happens in the heart, or
what will happen in the future: these cannot be controlled by the
declaration.
ii. Te Church here means the only church about which we can know
anything concretely, namely, the visible church (as distinct from the
invisible/universal church).
b) Second, . . . the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption
to be the sons of God, are visibly signed and sealed . . . Tis can be a
bit confusing. In order to properly grasp the meaning, I start by taking
out the extra words in the middle, so that this portion reads, promises
. . . are visibly signed and sealed. What are the promises that are signed
and sealed in a visible way? Te answer to that question is found in the
words in the middle of the phrase.
i. the forgiveness of sin, and
ii. adoption as the children of God, which is,
iii. a promise that is only accomplished by the Holy Ghost.
15
Means of grace . . . are those means which God has ordained for the end of communicating
the life-giving and sanctifying infuences of the Spirit to the souls of men (Systematic Teology,
Charles Hodge, Vol/Part III, Chapter XX, Section 20, Prayer, Subsection Prayer As A Means Of
Grace.). Hodge also include the sacraments and the word of God as means of grace. He does not
include every conceivable instrument by which grace might be communicated, By means of grace are
not meant every instrumentality which God may please to make the means of spiritual edifcation to
his children. Te phrase is intended to indicate those institutions which God has ordained to be the
ordinary channels of grace, i.e., of the supernatural infuences of the Holy Spirit, to the souls of men.
Te means of grace, according to the standards of our Church, are the word, sacraments, and prayer
(ibid., Section 1).
16
Essential is here used technically, as in, a change in the essence of a thing or relationship.
8
c) Note that these promises are visibly signed and sealed.
i. For simplicity, think of seal as meaning an ancient seal (be it a
ring, a stamp, or some other device for impressing an image into
sof wax).
A. Te seal was used to press into the still sof wax on the document
a symbol of the authors ownership and authority. Te document
is literally sealed
17
by the impression lef behind in the wax.
B. Neither the seal, nor the wax, nor the paper, nor the image lef
behind by the seal necessarily efect any essential outcome.
18
Only the owner of the seal has the authority and power to bring
to pass whatever is promised in the sealed document.
C. Nevertheless, the symbol can very powerfully point to the real-
ity, in such a way that the diference between the symbol and
the reality becomes small, even blurred.
ii. So likewise baptism signifes/seals Gods authority and ownership
over us.
A. Only God the Holy Spirit has the authority and power to makes
the promises efective.
B. Neither the water, nor the words of the service, nor the ofciant
can make any outcome efective.
19
d) . . . faith is confrmed, . . .
i. Tis is true both for children and adults.
ii. Faith is confrmed, in that one is reminded of the stamp of Gods
ownership of them.
iii. Its a stamp of ownership that can be betrayed or denied, but that
would be an act of treason by the actor, not an act of faithlessness
by the sealer, God.
e) . . . and grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God. Note how grace
is increased. Its not the water by which grace is increased; it is prayer!
Its no accident that this language is so carefully crafed. Te English reformers,
like those on the continent, were caught between two opposing camps: the Roman
17
Seal coming from the Latin sigillum, a small picture.
18
Essential here again refers to the essence, or basic nature of a thing or relationship.
19
Additionally, if water (the symbol) and conversion (the thing symbolized) are exactly the same,
then what is the meaning of symbol? As Article 28 poetically puts it, such a meaning is repugnant
to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to
many superstitions.
9
and the Anabaptist.
20
Te reformers had to be careful to neither over-react nor
under-react to these two positions.
What is particularly interesting about Article 27 is that most Christians, whether
baptists or pdo-baptists, could probably agree with the language of the article up to
this point. However, the next sentence would exclude the (ana)baptist: Te baptism
of young children is in any wise
21
to be retained in the Church as most agreeable
22
with the institution of Christ.
1.2.4 Other Uses By BCP Contemporaries
This is a section with which Rev. Mr. Cook can provide
help.
1.2.5 Te Westminster Confession Of Faith & Te London Baptist
Confession
Im citing from these two documents together, because:
Te London Baptist Confession (hereinafer LBC, 1689) is a derivation of the
Westminster Confession (hereinafer WCF, 1647).
No less a light than Charles Spurgeon defended the LBC vigorously, a Baptist
with whom many modern Baptists identify.
Te LBCconfession especially exists to uphold baptistic theology, so comparing
it with the WCF is instructive in how baptists of reformational persuasion have
tried to analyze and articulate their position as being similar to, yet distinct
from the Presbyterian position.
What one does not say can be as signifcant as what one does say. Lets overlap the
two statements, using the earlier WCF as the base template. Note the similarities
and the diferences between these two statements.
23
20
Anabaptist is the historical term for what we now call Baptists. It comes from Greek roots
simply meaning again-baptize.
21
Wise here means the manner or extent of something, related to the German Weise, as in the
phrase, in einer Art und Weise.
22
Tough most sometimes is used to mean very, in Elizabethan English it carries its customary
dictionary meaning, greatest in amount or degree. Tis is saying that infant baptism is the best
understanding of baptism. Other understandings are less agreeable with the institution of Christ.
Observe again how carefully the Article articulates its position. It is not saying that other positions are
necessarily heresy. It is implying that they are, however, defcient. Tis shows a gentleness on the
topic not typical of the reformation period.
23
Qoted from the WCF, Chapter 28. Of Baptism, Paragraph I and the LBC, Chapter 29, Paragraph
1 respectively.
10
WCF:
LBC:
Baptism
Baptism
is
is
a
an
sacrament
ordinance
of
of
the
the
New
New
Testament,
Testament,
ordained
ordained
by
by
Jesus
Jesus
Christ,
Christ,
not only for the solemn admission of
to be unto
the
the
party
party
baptized
baptized,
into the visible Church, but also to be unto him a sign and seal
a sign
of the covenant of grace, of his
of his (fellowship with him,
ingrafing into Christ,
of regeneration,
in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafed into him;)
of
of
remission
remission
of
of
sins,
sins;
and
and
of his
of
giving
giving
up
up
unto
into
God,
God,
through
through
Jesus
Jesus
Christ,
Christ,
to
to live and
walk
walk in newness of life.
which sacrament is, by Christs own appointment, to
be continued in his Church until the end of the world.
Of particular interest for this discussion is how the Baptist Confession difers
from the original Westminster document:
It changes the sacrament to ordinance. Te signifcance of this is that baptism
is changed from a mystery the root meaning of sacrament to a mere legal
command.
It carefully avoids any language suggesting that God somehow could operate
through the application of water, or any other symbol, for that mater. You
can see that baptism is no longer a sign and seal, but just a sign. Te LBC
is writen to preclude the possibility that God could possibly do something at
the time of the administration of water.
And, of course, the word regeneration itself has been removed from the LBC
version.
In light of the LBCs rejection of a covenantal view of baptism, its especially puzzling
to me that the LBC keeps Chapter 10 (Of Efectual Calling) almost exactly the same
as the WCFs Chapter 10.
11
WCF:
LBC:
Elect
Elect
infants,
infants
dying
dying
in
in
infancy,
infancy
are
are
regenerated
regenerated
and
and
saved
saved
by
by
Christ
Christ
through
through
the
the
Spirit,
Spirit;
who
who
worketh
worketh
when,
when,
and
and
where,
where,
and
and
how
how
He
he
pleaseth.
pleases;
So
so
also
also
are
are
all other
all
elect
elect
persons,
persons,
who
who
are
are
uncapable
incapable
of
of
being
being
outwardly
outwardly
called
called
by
by
the
the
ministry
ministry
of
of
the
the
Word.
Word.
Te LBC accepts the salvation of infants who die in their infancy, even using the
word regeneration!
24
Yet, while the LBC holds to covenant assurances regarding
those who are in a covenant community, it omits the covenant symbol of that
community!
1.2.6 Charles Hodge
Finally, I quote from a well-respected Princeton theologian of the old school, Charles
Hodge.
25
By regeneration is sometimes meant . . .
1. . . . an external change, translation from the world, as the kingdom of dark-
ness, into the Church, as the kingdom of light. In this sense it implies no
subjective change.
2. Sometimes it means the life-long process by which a soul is more and more
transformed into the image of God.
3. Sometimes it means the whole process which takes place in the consciousness
when a sinner turns from sin through Christ unto God. It is then synonymous
with conversion.
4. In our day, in ordinary theological language, it means that supernatural change
efected by the Spirit of God by which a soul is made spiritually alive.
26
24
WCF & LBC, Chapter 10. Of Efectual Calling, Paragraph III.
25
Te list format used here is mine, with the hope of making Hodges thinking clearer, but the
words are quoted exactly as found.
26
Systematic Teology, Volume III, Chapter XX (Te Means of Grace), Section 12 (Efcacy of
Baptism), Baptismal Regeneration.
12
Whether one agrees or disagrees with the meaning of regeneration in any of these
statements, it must be recognized that regeneration has had a diversity of senses,
albeit all on the same spectrum. As Hodge explicitly states, regeneration does not
necessarily mean conversion of the soul in the contemporary sense. Indeed, the LBC
demands that kind of diversity within itself, as in the use of regeneration in Chapter
10!
1.3 Biblical Uses Of Regeneration
One rightly will want to know what the Scriptures say. But if one wants to know
what regeneration really means from the Bible, it will be seen that the task is not as
simple as one might hope.
1.3.1 Short List
Tere are three diferent Greek words for regeneration/born again. Since theyre
all closely related, I simply list all of them here in their order of reference from
Scripture.
27
By the way, the following are all the uses of these words; this is an
exhaustive list of NT uses.
1. Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when
the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Mathew 19:28).
2. Jesus answered and said to (Nicodemus), Truly, truly, I say to you, unless
one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus said to Him,
How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into
his mothers womb and be born, can he? Jesus answered, Truly, truly, I say
to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God. Tat which is born of the fesh is fesh, and that which is
born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, You must be
born again. Te wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but
do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is
born of the Spirit (John 3:38).
3. (God our savior) . . . saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done
in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration
and renewing by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:45).
27
Te words are (1) anagenn a o (1 Peter 1:3, 23), (2) paliggenesa (Mathew 19:28, Titus 3:5), and, (3)
the phrase genn eth e an othen (John 3:3, 7). All citations are from the NASB, 1995.
13
4. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to
His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (1 Peter 1:3).
5. . . . for you have been born again not of seed which is perishable but im-
perishable, that is, through the living and enduring word of God (1 Peter
1:2223).
1.3.2 Breadth Of Meanings
What do we learn from these citations? I think at least these things:
1. Tere arent very many uses of these words. As much as some Christians
heavily lean born again as a termfor and measure of true faith, the expression
simply isnt used very much in Scripture. Indeed, one wonders if the term can
bear the weight of our usage, when compared to the far more frequent uses of
such terms as saved, salvation, believe the gospel, or other such terms,
which are used dozens of times in the NT.
2. Te meanings are varied. We would have to take quite a bit of space to deal
with the specifcs of each passage, but heres a quick summary.
a) Te Mathew passage speaks of the end of time, a new world (as per the
ESV), the new heavens and the new earth of 1 Peter 3:13 or Revelation
21:1.
b) Johns gospel speaks of the idea in a complex way, referring to water
and the Spirit. I have a series of sermons on this text alone, so its more
complex than just a sentence or two can explain. One can easily see that
whatever born again means in that text, it is intimately related to the
work of the Holy Spirit.
c) Paul, writing to Titus, speaks of water and the Spirit, too, but in a diferent
way from John. Some will argue that the washing of which Paul speaks
cannot mean baptism. However, I fnd that those who so argue already
have a baptistic bent, which demands such an interpretation. In other
words, it seems that they (perhaps all sides?) read what they need into
the text. Tis text deserves more careful exegesis.
d) Peters two references speak neither of water, nor Spirit, but of the
resurrection and the word of God.
14
1.3.3 Closing Comments About the Biblical Uses
No mater what one may individually think of each of the six uses cited above, it
would be swallowing camels to try to get each use and meaning to align perfectly
with all of the other texts. I think that we must conclude that new birth, born again,
and regeneration have a breadth of meaning that defes simple defnition. Its meaning
fts across a spectrum of senses, just as Hodge expresses in his systematic theology.
Its not a precise scientifc word, as we might like it to be, or as some Greek words
can be.
One should not be alarmed by this diversity of meaning. Every language has
examples of such words. Consider, for example, how the word salvation is used in
the Bible. It can refer to:
the internal work of God in the soul,
a woman being saved through child birth (however one understands this
text), and,
the saving of ones physical life.
28
Its the nature of human language to use words in such a fashion. We must rely on
context, intent, and usage to derive more precise meanings from words and phrases
and to distinguish between literal or fgurative uses.
1.4 Observations
So what does all this mean for those who call ourselves Anglicans?
29
I analyze the
uses and their meanings along these lines.
We assume, even presume, that the sign (water) and the thing signifed (salvation)
are related. As symbols point to realities, baptism points to regeneration (and many
other benefts). We assume that those benefts are connected with baptismjust like
Baptists do, though in a very diferent way. But we do not assume that they must,
of necessity, be connected. As startling and provocative as the following statement
may seem, it is the Baptist who like the Roman Catholic creates a necessary
link between baptism and regeneration. I will pursue this assertion in the next major
section.
Tink about it this way. Dont we usually assume in most cases that symbols
and the things they symbolize have a close relationship? Consider these examples.
28
James 1:21, 1 Timothy 2:15, and Mathew 8:25 respectively.
29
And I would argue, anyone who uses a covenantal hermeneutic (way of interpreting Scripture).
15
Te serpent in the wilderness and the healing of those biten by serpents
(Numbers 21:89),
Circumcision and its incorporation into the covenant family of those to whom
circumcision was given (Genesis 17:10),
Te rainbow and Gods promise never to food the earth again (Genesis 9:14
15),
Te lambs blood on doorposts in Egypt and the real physical salvation of the
frst-born from death (Exodus 12:2223).
Its not so diferent from assuming that a sign that says Philadelphia, 20 miles,
means that in 20 miles, we will be in Philadelphia. Can the sign be moved, or the
calculations wrong? Sure. But we assume a relationship between the sign and the
thing signifed until some proof is ofered to the contrary.
To use another and complementary analogy, when one is born in the U.S., one
assumes that the protections and responsibilities of U.S. citizenship apply to that
child. Being born in the U.S. means something. Only if one proves traitorous, or
rejects ones citizenship for that of another country, do we question the citizenship of
the person born here. Otherwise the symbol of being born in a specifc geographical
region and the reality of legal rights and responsibilities are assumed or presumed
to be connected for the child.
1.5 Conclusion
Teres no doubt that regeneration, as presently used, does usually mean the su-
pernatural change efected by the spirit of God by which a soul is made spiritually
alive, i.e., the internal, permanent, subjective change that can also be called conver-
sion. My argument is that when reading the reformational standards (i.e., Articles,
Westminster Confession, or the Book of Common Prayer), one is not permited to
assume that the present popular meaning is the same as the meaning and usage of
the reformers.
16
2 Te Similarity Between Roman And Baptist Views Of
Baptism
In the previous study, I said that both the Baptist and the Roman Catholic create a
necessary link between baptism and regeneration (see page 15). What Im asserting
is that Baptists and Roman Catholics have basically the same view of baptism, though
their approaches begin at opposite ends of the argument.
Here I briefy defne each position and then show how both positions are closely
related to each other.
2.1 Positions Defned
2.1.1 Roman Catholic
Romanism demands a necessary relationship between the symbol and the
thing symbolized, such that the symbol always does what it symbolizes.
For the Roman Catholic, the application of water necessarily must be connected
with a change in the soul.
Water demands salvation, so to speak.
Tis is what theologians describe as ex opere operato, from the work, (the
thing is) worked/made efective.
2.1.2 (Ana)baptistic
Baptists demand a necessary relationship between the symbol and the thing
symbolized.
For the Baptist, the application of water necessarily must be connected with a
change in the soul.
However, in this case the thing symbolized is not caused by the water, but
the water results from the conversion of the soul, the thing symbolized. Te
cause and efect are reversed. Salvation demands water, so to speak. With-
out salvation, no water the reverse of the Roman view without water, no
salvation.
For the Baptist, unless one is assured that there really is a change in the
soul, then water is not permited. Te only diference is the direction of the
transaction.
17
2.2 Comparing, Contrasting, Defning
Te linkage between these two otherwise very diferent perspectives on baptism is
in the word necessarily.
Roman: From water to salvation, necessarily,
Baptistic: From salvation to water, necessarily.
30
Te Roman position is incorrect, but the baptistic or non-covenantal position
31
is, in my judgment, equally incorrect. Whereas Romanism smells of magic, the
non-covenantal position carries the odor of hubris. In the Roman position, humans
presume to actually work the works of God. In the Baptist, humans presume to know
the mind of God, whether He has efectually worked in others. Both positions are
unwilling to give due honor and respect to Gods revealed will (the word, i.e., the
Bible) and his secret will (providence) at the same time.
Only the covenantal position gives due honor and respect to both Gods:
word: He who has believed (in specifc truth, i.e., the word) and has been
baptized shall be saved (Mark 16:16),
32
and,
will: . . . Gods purpose according to His choice . . . stand(s), not because of
works but because of Him who calls (Romans 9.11).
Only the covenantal perspective holds the tension between Gods actions and our
actions, between what God is secretly causing from heaven and what we are able to
discern on earth.
As mentioned in the frst part of this paper, the covenantal perspective assumes
or presumes that the symbol (baptism) and the thing symbolized (regeneration)
are connected. But it does not make that connection necessary. Tat part is Gods
business, not ours. Our business is that of preaching, discipleship, and baptism afer
the manner of Mathew 28:18 f.
30
To be fair, both Catholic and Baptist acknowledge exceptions and extenuating circumstances.
Tese are gross statements refecting normal understanding and practice.
31
More about which, see the 3rd major section of this paper.
32
One might say here: See! Believe frst, and then be baptized! Must the sign always follow the
fact and never the reverse? What about the call to make the symbol already applied a spiritual reality:
Circumcise your heart, and stifen your neck no longer (Deuteronomy 10:16)? Teres no command
to stop circumcising until the heart is set right frst; theres just a call to repentance. Or Brethren, be
all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you (2 Peter 1:910). Teres no
command to get re-baptized, once one reaches some state of surety. In both cases, the call is simply to
be sure that what has been symbolized is matched with the reality of the inner work.
18
God can certainly save without those things e.g., the thief on the cross
however, no thoughtful Christian would ever assert that we may therefore ignore
preaching, discipleship, and the sacrament of baptism.
Children do not ask to become citizens of the country into which they are born.
Te citizenship is theirs simply by right of birth. Tey are subject to the blessings of
that citizenship, as well as the responsibilities. Only if one rejects ones citizenship,
either by adopting the citizenship of another country, or by treason, does one hold
such a person to be outside the covenant of citizenship.
Te above analogy almost exactly parallels the biblical understanding of the
sacraments in both testaments.
19
3 A Covenantally Unifed View Of Baptism And Te
Law Of Abrogation
3.1 A Common Objection To Infant Baptism
Baptists use a variety of arguments regarding infant baptism. A common and
fundamental argument goes like this.
1. Tere are no examples of baptized infants in the New Testament.
2. Tis absence of examples proves that infant baptism was not practiced in the
NT.
Its important to recognize that this argument contains an assumption that afects
ones understanding of the Bible at the most basic level. Well get to that assumption
in a moment.
Te common response on the part of the pdo-baptist is to point to texts that
refer to whole households being baptized.
33
I fnd these responses unhelpful, because
they are unconvincing.
1. Te baptist cannot fnd the word infant. Tey see the word saved and as-
sume a series of individual conversion experiences for every person mentioned
in whatever account is being discussed.
2. Te pdo-baptist sees whole household and hears Genesis 7:1 and 17:27.
In other words, the interpretation of those texts is invariably made through the lens
of ones preexisting view of baptism. Each party baptist and pdo-baptist sees
proof for its position in those texts.
What one needs to address are the presuppositions (assumptions) that are the
foundation of the above baptistic argument.
3.2 Critique Of Te Argument
Te essential core of the argument used by Baptists is this: if a certain practice has
no exemplar in the NT, that practice is prohibited. Tis is a weak and even dangerous
method of argumentation.
33
See, for example, Acts 11:14, 16:15, 16:33, 18:8, 1 Corinthians 1:16.
20
3.2.1 Weakness Of Te Argument
Why is the baptistic method weak? Because it adopts a view of interpretation (a
hermeneutic, in technical parlance) which easily can be dismantled. Its basically
an application of a hermeneutic called the regulative principle. Te regulative
principle says something like this.
1. What is found in Scripture (or can be reasonably derived therefrom) is permit-
ted/commanded.
2. Everything else is prohibited.
Tat position sounds safe and clear, but its just the opposite. Consider:
Tere are no instructions about what time to start worship services.
Teres nothing about the use of technology in ministry.
You cant derive any clarity about how to do a wedding, funeral, or even
whether ministers ought to do weddings or funerals.
Tere are no directions about how to educate ones children.
Tere are countless other examples.
Some modify the above position by saying that they are really talking about the
regulative principle of worship. Tat sounds great, too. But . . .
Te love feast at which the Lords Supper took place in the NT is unspecifc
about how it was conducted (see, e.g., Acts 2:4247, 1 Corinthians 11:2021).
In fact, not only do most Christians not celebrate the Lords Supper this way
today, there is good evidence that the agape feast was in disuse by the time of
the close of NT canon.
One cant derive any clarity about worship music. For example, many of what
were probably musical terms in the Psalms have litle no meaning for us.
34
Some respond to this by excluding all instruments, only singing Psalms, and
doing so a capella. Even that position has problems, because . . .
What does one do with the Psalms that command us to worship God with
instruments? And what does Paul mean by songs, hymns, and spiritual
songs? Its unlikely that he means Psalms, psalms, and spiritual psalms!
34
Im referring here to terms like higgaion, selah, or muth-labben.
21
Here is one of my favorite examples: there is no command or example regarding
women at the Lords supper anywhere in the NT. Oops!
Te baptistic method assumes this regulative principle and thereby exposes itself to
such weaknesses as these.
3.2.2 Te Real Danger Of Te Argument
Even more, this hermeneutic is dangerous. Te real danger lies in the fundamental
assumption which undergirds it. Te fundamental assumption is this: there is no
continuity between the two testaments. It says that if something is in the Old
Testament, but not in the New Testament, then the OT principle or practice is no
longer in force. Whatever is not repeated in the NT is abrogated by virtue of its
absence.
Is that true? Lets look more deeply into a law of abrogation.
35
3.3 Te Law of Abrogation
3.3.1 Difering Perspectives
Figure 1:
Perhaps youve seen this picture. It can be per-
ceived in two quite diferent ways.
It either depicts an old woman in a shawl
with a leaf or feather in her forelock, facing
lef and down, with a large nose in profle,
or,
a young woman with a feathered hat and
red choker, facing lef, up, and away from
the viewer, with the cheek and chin in
profle.
In the same way that one may see diferent things in such images, because of the
assumptions they have; everyone comes to all sorts of problems or puzzles with their
own set of assumptions, including Biblical questions.
We cannot examine all of the assumptions, backgrounds, and presuppositions
of those who interpret the Scriptures concerning baptism. Qite honestly, their
assumptions arent important. Tere are too many variations of thought.
35
It should be noted that this term is one that I have defned and used, though it expresses the
biblical-theological methods of virtually all reformed thinkers and many church fathers.
22
Its more important to understand the mind of those who acted and recorded
their actions for us in the Bible. We can see how they thought and believed, especially
by looking at how the NT writers handled the OT Scriptures. In the particular case
of this study, we are interested in how the topic of baptism was handled.
With that principle in mind observing how NT believers handled OT truths
one of the most powerful demonstrations of the NT apostles minds about baptism
and the OT Scriptures is found in Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost.
3.3.2 Demonstrating Apostolic Continuity With Te OT (Te Law
Of Abrogation)
It is ofen said that Scripture interprets Scripture. Indeed, the Bible is not merely a
book writen within the context of several cultures and languages (Semitic, Greek,
Roman, Babylonian, Assyrian, etc.). It is its own culture. One example (not related to
baptism) is the tree of life, referred to in the opening chapters in the Bible (Genesis
2:9). Te tree of life is also brought into the pages of the book of the Revelation
(22:19). Tis is not merely a Near Eastern or Greco-Roman image. It is a Biblical
image, with which biblically literate people would immediately connect.
Keeping this Bible-centric cultural idea in mind, consider Peters sermon on the
day of Pentecost in Acts 2. In particular, note how uterly Jewish it is.
Pentecost is a Jewish feast day.
Peter is a Jew.
Te crowd is Jewish.
Peter cites from Joel, a Jewish prophet.
Peter recites Jewish history and theology.
He also quotes from the Jewish hymnal, the Psalms.
He believes that the words and deeds of the OT are relevant in his day, since
he leans heavily on the OT to speak to his NT (Jewish) crowd.
He uses a Jewish kings words (Davids) to tie together the promises of the
Old Testament and New Testament.
As Peters Jewish hearers began to absorb this Jewish message from a Jew,
they asked for direction from their Jewish brothers, what shall we do? (Acts
2:37). Peter calls on them to repent and to be baptized in the name of Jesus
Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gif of the Holy
Spirit (2:38).
23
Do you see how thoroughly Jewish this whole event is?
And in close relation to the command to repent and be baptized in verse 38, Peter
declares in the following verse, for the promise is for you and for your children and
all who are far of, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself (2:39). What
did Peter the Jew mean by his manner and words? And what did this Jewish crowd
hear?
If the thought, content, and method of Peters sermon are Jewish, and if the
hearers are Jewish, then when Peter says that a promise belongs to them and their
children, dont we have strong warrant for saying that everyone understood those
words and ideas according to a Jewish framework?
If so, then the crowd was hearing echoes of the commandment concerning
circumcision.
As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your ofspring afer
you throughout their generations. Tis is my covenant, which you shall
keep, between me and you and your ofspring afer you: every male
among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the fesh
of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and
you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised (Genesis
17:912).
And they would likewise hear the language of the Passover meal.
You shall observe this rite as a statute for you and for your sons forever.
And when you come to the land that the Lovu will give you, as he has
promised, you shall keep this service. And when your children say to
you, What do you mean by this service? you shall say, It is the sacrifce
of the Lovus Passover, for he passed over the houses of the people of
Israel in Egypt, when he struck the Egyptians but spared our houses.
(Exodus 12:2427).
Did Peter put (baptistic) conditions on his terms: only if they believed frst, for
instance? He did not. Most importantly, if he was puting baptistic (i.e., un-Jewish)
conditions on his words, why didnt he make these things clearer? If Peter was
speaking as a baptist, he was fying in the face of several thousand years of custom,
tradition, history, theology, and presuppositions. Te sermon in Acts 2 would demand
a new set of rules, if the baptistic approach were correct. And the moment would
have demanded that kind of clarity from Peter, if the terms and conditions of Gods
contract with his people had changed.
I assert that Peter didnt need to speak any more clearly or explicitly than he
already had, because God had already made his terms and conditions clear in the OT.
24
Paul, like Peter, writes about Gods promises from an OT perspective and thereby
further anchors and emphasizes the idea of a covenantal unity between OT and NT.
Men of Israel and you who fear God, listen. Te God of this people
Israel chose our fathers and made the people great during their stay in
the land of Egypt, and with uplifed arm he led them out of it.
Of Davids ofspring God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus, as he
promised.
Brothers, sons of the family of Abraham, and those among you who
fear God, to us has been sent the message of this salvation. For those
who live in Jerusalem and their rulers, because they did not recognize
him nor understand the uterances of the prophets, which are read every
Sabbath, fulflled them by condemning him. And though they found in
him no guilt worthy of death, they asked Pilate to have him executed.
And we bring you the good news that what God promised to the
fathers, this he has fulflled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also
it is writen in the second Psalm, You are my Son, today I have begoten
you (Acts 13:67, 23, 2628, 3233).
What we fnd in Pauls sermon is just about everything one can imagine about the
covenant of God with his people in the OT. What we do not fnd is any suggestion
of a disconnect between Gods promises and rules in the OT and those in the NT.
Indeed, even of the gentile Galatians he writes: And you brethren . . . are children
of promise (Galatians 4:28), following up his thesis earlier in Galatians.
Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righ-
teousness. Terefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are
sons of Abraham. Te Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the
Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying,
all the nations will be blessed in you. So then those who are of faith
are blessed with Abraham, the believer (Galatians 3:69).
3.3.3 Defnition Of Te Law Of Abrogation
From these facts, the Acts 2 passage strongly implies what I call the law of abrogation.
Lets defne that law simply.
1. What God commands is commanded.
2. What God forbids is forbidden.
3. What God is silent about, we should likewise be silent about (meaning, we
likely have freedom regarding that mater).
25
4. Finally and this is the most important part of the law sometimes God
commands something and then later forbids, adapts, or changes it. Only where
we have clear evidence of such a change from God himself may we change
something. Otherwise, we must hold that Gods commands, terms, and conditions
always remain the same.
In essence, I am describing the inverse of the regulative principle discussed above.
3.3.4 Examples Of Abrogated Commands
Concerning point 4 above, here are some examples of things that God prescribed/
commanded, and then later proscribed/abrogated/terminated/modifed.
36
Manna
Command: Te Lovu said to Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from
heaven for you (Exodus 16:4).
Termination: Te manna ceased on the day afer they had eaten some of
the produce of the land, so that the sons of Israel no longer had manna
. . . (Joshua 5:12).
Unclean Foods
Command: One may not consume blood (Genesis 9:4) and various sorts
of creatures are forbidden (Leviticus 11:1 f.).
Termination: Regarding blood: Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you
eat the fesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life
in yourselves. He who eats My fesh and drinks My blood has eternal
life, and I will raise him up on the last day (John 6:5355, fgurative
abrogation). Regarding unclean animals: Again a voice came to (Peter)
. . . What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy (Acts 10:15, see
928 for context, literal abrogation).
Circumcision
Command: Tis is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me
and you and your descendants afer you: every male among you shall be
circumcised (Genesis 17:10).
36
Im purposely ignoring the whole of ceremonial law, which is discussed very fully in the book of
Hebrews. It is both a relatively obvious and far too massive discussion for this paper.
26
Abrogation (the replacement of circumcision with baptism): In [Christ]
you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in
the removal of the body of the fesh by the circumcision of Christ; having
been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with
Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead
(Colossians 2:1112).
37
Passover
Command: Observe the month of Abib and celebrate the Passover to the
Lovu your God, for in the month of Abib the Lovu your God brought you
out of Egypt by night. You shall sacrifce the Passover to the Lovu your
God from the fock and the herd, in the place where the Lovu chooses to
establish His name (Deuteronomy 16:12).
Termination: For Christ our Passover also has been sacrifced (1 Corinthi-
ans 5:7).
To the above list I could add polygamy, divorce, ceremonial law, theocratic govern-
ment, and many other items, all demonstrating how God changed or terminated
various aspects of His will for his people. My purpose for the above list is merely
to show that a change in the will of God can be easily discerned, when and if He
changes the rules. We dont have to guess or infer such changes.
3.3.5 Te Danger Of Ignoring Te Law Of Abrogation
Te principle I call the law of abrogation is as I have said a kind of inverse
regulative principle. While the law of abrogation is, of itself, a topic that could
require a lot of discussion; if the law of abrogation holds, that is, if everything
God commands stays perpetually in force, until and only if God himself modifes or
terminates it by what authority do baptists disassemble the relationship between
circumcision and baptism
38
and change the rules by which those rites are to
function?
Some may say that this is a case of reductio ad absurdum (reducing an argument
to an absurd degree).
1. First, I observe that reductio ad absurdum can be a useful way of looking at
the validity of anothers argument.
37
Tis is an interesting text, because Baptists use this text as a basis for immersion in water. I see
this text as physical baptism being equated with spiritual circumcision, as well as a coupling together
of the physical sign (baptism) with a spiritual reality (faith).
38
See this relationship explicitly stated in Colossians 2:912.
27
2. Second, and more to the point, the use of the above baptistic argument doesnt
need to be pressed too hard to fall apart. Some points have already been raised
in this regard (e.g., what time ought we to have our worship services; are
women allowed to take the Lords Supper?). Additionally, if one holds to such a
position as that of the baptist, why shouldnt one remove the clear relationship
between other Old Testament and NewTestament rites and institutions say
the Passover meal and the Lords Supper?
39
Te danger of misunderstanding and mishandling Gods word and the relationships
between its various parts is not merely a logical, theological, or even pragmatic
danger. It is a spiritual danger. When God re-establishes His covenant with His
people just before they enter the promised land, he says this.
Now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the judgments which I am
teaching you to perform, so that you may live and go in and take pos-
session of the land which the Lovu, the God of your fathers, is giving
you. You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor
take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lovu
your God which I command you (Deuteronomy 4:12).
God uses nearly the same words when He closes the canon of Scripture.
Everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone
adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are writen in
this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the
holy city, which are writen in this book (Revelation 22:1819).
Te baptistic hermeneutic is a form of dispensationalism, which hermeneutics
underlying premise is an essential disunity of Scripture.
40
Its key assumption is
that God has disposed of and instituted various plans of salvation several times over.
Given the above texts and the evident danger in abrogating the terms and conditions
of Gods covenant with his people without His express permission to do so, the
dispensationalist (and baptist) carries a very heavy burden of proof.
If Peter understood children to mean what non-covenantal Baptists mean ones
descendants, if and only if they confess faith in Christ then the Pentecost sermon
39
My point here is that the relationship between baptism and circumcision in Colossians 2:1112 is
either as clear as, or as muddy as, the relationship between Passover and Christs sacrifce on the cross.
See 1 Corinthians 5.7 in this regard: Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as
you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrifced.
40
In my opinion, the dispensational hermeneutic only afer European rationalism and liberalism
is most responsible for denigrating the authority of Scripture in western Christianity.
28
would have been a timely (even necessary) place to clarify his meaning. Why doesnt
Peter clarify his meaning? Because Peters sermon was refecting a position that
God Himself had made perfectly clear millennia before.
41
41
I also think of Jesus embrace of children (see Mathew 19:14, 21:16) as a type of the inhabitants
of the kingdom of God. While some might dismiss His actions as mere symbol, I would argue that
children are ofen held to be a physical reality of the kingdom of God. You shall observe this rite as a
statute for you and for your sons forever . . . And when your children say to you, what do you mean
by this service . . . (Exodus 12:24, 26). Perhaps most disturbingly, An uncircumcised male who is not
circumcised . . . Tat person shall be cut of from his people; he has broken my covenant (Genesis
17:14).
29