The Weekend Word

You may also like...

32 Responses

  1. Donner says:

    Michael, I was with you here until the end, thinking, “Good stuff.”

    Then I saw the sentence where you claim that Jesus was teaching baptismal regeneration.

    Uhhh…

    Are you really saying this? Are you saying that baptism causes regeneration — that baptism causes the new birth?

    Perhaps I do not have the context in which to process the statement. I’d appreciate it if you could expound and clarify a bit.

    Thank you.

  2. Michael says:

    Donner,

    These studies were done by MLD who is both a confessional Lutheran and a fine teacher.

    I’ll let him defend his teaching…but I really don’t have an issue with baptismal regeneration.

  3. Donner says:

    OK Michael, thank you for your response.

    So you believe that the ACT of baptism causes a spiritually dead person to become a spiritually alive person?

    Or are you saying that regeneration may occur simultaneously with the act of baptism?

    Just trying to understand, not be critical.

  4. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Hi Donner, good discussion points

    Let me touch on one of your points to begin. When one speaks of the ACT of baptism it is very important to identify who you think the actor is. If one believes that man is the main actor and he his doing the baptism – then no, no salvation / regeneration / conversion is taking place.
    However, if you believe that God is the main actor / mover in baptism and he is doing it for his purpose – then yes salvation / regeneration / conversion is taking place. So for clarification when you speak of the ACT of baptism, who do you identify as the mover?

    I really don’t understand why some people have difficulty with God using baptism to save people. All Christians believe that God uses physical means to save people – no one is save by just a spiritual happening – so why the problem with baptism?
    One NOTE – we identify baptism as the word of God mixed and applied with water.

    And to be clear – yes a spiritually dead person does become a spiritually alive person through baptism? Can I get an amen? 😉

  5. The New Victor says:

    It would be interesting to have a thread on infant baptism… unless it went off the rails. The the theif on the cross wasn’t baptized. I had my kids baptized in the RCC out of respect for their Mexican family, yet I know those who were who deny Christ later. My mother, from a reformed Dutch background, used to baptize the remains of aborted babies when she started out in her nursing career (and she said that some were still moving on the waste bins which is sickening).

  6. Michael says:

    Donner,

    The sects that hold to baptismal regeneration (Anglicans, Lutherans, Roman Catholics, Orthodox) all have different takes on what happens in baptism.
    There is even diversity among Anglicans on how they parse this, depending on where on the Anglican compass they fall.

    What they all agree on is that “something” happens…that God is taking action on His people.

    It’s beyond my scope to speak to all of that and I’m still studying to see where I’ll land.

  7. The New Victor says:

    Cross posted with MLD.

    So it valid if my kids when older want to get baptized?

    I went to a Lutheran school for a while, but we didn’t get that deep.

  8. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Victor,
    I answer the thief on the cross question in the article. He is an old covenant character and was not around at the time Jesus instituted new covenant baptism v. 19

  9. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Victor – restate this — “So it valid if my kids when older want to get baptized? “

  10. The New Victor says:

    Does it disrespect God?

  11. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Victor – are you speaking of rebaptism?

  12. The New Victor says:

    Yes. That would be the case. They were christened in the RCC, but we aren’t RCC.

    Would I say, “you don’t need to get rebaptized; you already were.”

    I was adopted at 2.4. It’s possible that I was baptized as an infant. In a weird sequence of events. My birth aunt saw us in a Lutheran Church when I was 4 or 5. My mother found this out second hand later. The church was in Sacramento, I was born in Stockton (50 miles seperated cities for non californians).

    I was baptized in the American River when I was 12, the full dunk, in a church that later affiliated with CC.

  13. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Let me just say if someone said to me “I was baptized as a baby but I don’t remember it – should I be rebaptized?” I would say no and then explain to them what baptism is, and assure them that it has already been done for them and applied to them and the work is done.

  14. John 20:29 says:

    i know when i was saved, born again, regenerated, insert term of choice – water baptism came later… there are good arguments for salvation and baptism being 2 separate processes… i think an argument can be made for the Holy Spirit’s residency in one’s soul occurring at one’s baptism, but i don’t think that is the same as one’s own spiritual birth – but this teaching posted every week is Lutheran dogma of the Faith and i have learned a great deal here…
    baptize your babies, if you must, but then raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, because i’m quite sure that you haven’t presented them with a free ticket to Paradise… i don’t think most who baptize their infants believe that either, BTW

    New Victor, i met some wonderful Dutch Reform folk when i lived in the Seattle area, we bought out first home from a Dutch couple who came from Indonesia after the war, our daughters got a kick out the fact that their first pediatrician who’d come from Holland had lived in what was now their bedroom for a couple years and our wonderful dogs came from a kennel owned by a couple who had survived the concentration camps in Indonesia during WW2 – tough business people all, but honest and don’t get me started on the wonderful Christmas baked goods from the Dutch bakery… that marzipan filled Christmas ring yummm…

  15. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Em, I don’t know why you would label this teaching a Lutheran dogma after Micheal has just listed others who teach the same? – Anglicans, Orthodox , the RCC -and there are others.

  16. Jean says:

    Verse 19 says making a disciples entails two elements: baptizing and teaching. If both of those elements came only after the disciple is made, then what is left to make a disciple? Zilch.

    If you read Acts and the Epistles, you find that the early Church treated the Lord’s command literally.

  17. Michael says:

    I left out the Church of Christ…probably forgot some others, too.
    I was listening to Albert Ammons and got lost in the boogie woogie…

  18. The New Victor says:

    Jean, so those who are baptized yet reject the faith, only have half of it (I think I’m answering my own question here).

  19. Jean says:

    Rejecting the faith means rejecting one’s baptism too. Because Baptism bestows promises. As MLD wrote earlier, Baptism is the Word added to water.

    And according to Ephesians, there is one Baptism. Therefore, there is no command nor any promises attached to a re-baptism. What’s called for is faith in the efficacy of what God promises in the one Baptism you received. This assumes the Baptism was Trinitarian.

  20. The New Victor says:

    By Trinitarian, you mean in the name of The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit/Ghost, as Jesus commanded.

  21. Jean says:

    Yes, Victor.

  22. bob1 says:

    I was pleasantly surprised to see this book by the late John Stott, on infant baptism. Though I haven’t read it, I’m inferring that he believed in infant baptism/baptismal regeneration, from the description of its contents.

    https://www.amazon.com/Anglican-Evangelical-Doctrine-Infant-Baptism/dp/0946307962/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1511079981&sr=8-1&keywords=john+stott+infant

  23. Pastor Lew Phelps says:

    As Mormons we were encouraged to be baptized for the dead. They’ve gone back to the law. That’s why they build temples, have modern day prophets, worship angels and plan for godhood. Being baptized for the dead isn’t scriptural at all for goodness sake. If they want to find out who is really faithful they should have “circumcision for the dead!” God’s not looking for an apprentice. “He’s got the whole world in His hands”

    Men’s ordinances won’t work because everyone has to make a choice. Baptism is a beautiful outward statement of those watching that I had identified myself in Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. I always felt that Pastor Chuck Smith didn’t hold me under long enough.

    Those that have passed have no second chance. And infants must be taught about their God and His sending the Son. “With the mouth one speaks unto salvation”
    PLP

  24. John 20:29 says:

    i thought that i responded to #15 earlier, but forgot that i was on a browser that won’t post here…
    my reference @ #14 to Lutheran dogma was not targeting the baptism conversation as solely a Lutheran view, rather it was in reference to this series of teaching by MLD which IS Lutheran… yes, as Michael noted there are many churches who baptize their infants for salvation… i think that they all are adherents to a sprinkling ceremony rather than an immersion… babies can be safely immersed, but one would want very sterile water…

  25. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Lee, we all agree that Pastor Chuck did not hold you under long enough. 🙂
    You see like a pretty bright guy – can you show me the passage in the scriptures that shows a person deciding on his own to be saved without being called? Why didn’t the rich young man just decide to be saved?

    About the reason for baptism, again can you show a passage that says baptism is to identify you as a Christian? If identity as a Christian Is what we are looking for, wouldn’t my bumper sticker be more effective? Perhaps 50 people saw me get baptized, but imagine how many have seen my “Jesus is my co pilot” bumper sticker going up and down the 405 freeway the past 35 years?

  26. Jean says:

    MLD,

    Before you a engage Lew (not Lee) on Bible passages, we should probably first ask Lew which Books of the Bible he believes apply to the Church and Christians. Sadly, without agreement on the Bible itself (i.e., which parts apply), it would be difficult to have a fruitful discussion.

  27. Jean says:

    Unfortunately,

    Because people don’t study history anymore or value tradition, we read things from Lew, which many of us thought was settled error in the 5th Century.

  28. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    I am sorry, but my phone auto corrected to Lee. As we are forbidden to mess with the phone gods, he will just need to change his name to Pastor Lee 🙂

  29. What about baptizing in the sense of inducting them into the Trinity?

  30. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Richard H,
    Could you expand on that thought? I have not heard of being inducted into the Trinity by any method let alone baptism.

  31. Pastor Lew Phelps says:

    Grateful for assisting in all your discussion over baptism. It’s really an easy concept. It’s ok to read Romans 6. It’s in the New Testament you know? Brian wouldn’t be mad.

    Pastor Lee 🙂

  32. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    It’s good to see Lew come to the baptismal regeneration side – citing Romans 6 as evidence he himself was brought from death to life in his baptism into Jesus.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.