Regeneration, Romanism, and the Covenant

5/21/2018 Regeneration, Romanism, and the Covenant

1/29

Regeneration, Romanism, and the Covenant: Some

oughts on the Baptism Service in the Book of

Common Prayer

e Rev. Canon Mark E. RudolphRector, St. John the Evangelist Anglican Church

Last Revised: 08/29/2014

Abstract

Miscellaneous thoughts on baptism and the Anglican baptism serviceresponding to emergent questions in my congregation. As much as possible,references are given from online resources, in order to ease access to thoseresources 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 Clarified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.2.2 Uses in the 1662 BCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.2.3 e irty-nine Articles Of Religion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71.2.4 Other Uses By BCP Contemporaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

1.2.5 e Westminster Confession Of Faith & e London Baptist

Confession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

1.2.6 Charles Hodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

1


2/29

1.3 Biblical Uses Of Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

1.3.1 Short List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131.3.2 Breadth Of Meanings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

1.3.3 Closing Comments About the Biblical Uses . . . . . . . . . 15

1.4 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

1.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

2 e Similarity Between Roman And Baptist Views Of Baptism 17

2.1 Positions Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.1.1 Roman Catholic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.1.2 (Ana)baptistic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.2 Comparing, Contrasting, Defining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3 A Covenantally Unified View Of Baptism And e Law Of Abroga-tion 20

3.1 A Common Objection To Infant Baptism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.2 Critique Of e Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.2.1 Weakness Of e Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.2.2 e Real Danger Of e Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3.3 e Law of Abrogation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3.3.1 Differing Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3.3.2 Demonstrating Apostolic Continuity With e OT (e Law

Of Abrogation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3.3.3 Definition Of e Law Of Abrogation. . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

3.3.4 Examples Of Abrogated Commands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263.3.5 e Danger Of Ignoring e Law Of Abrogation . . . . . . 27

1 On Regeneration

1.1 Background

e wordregenerationis an important word of the Christian faith. In current Chris-

tian vocabulary, the term born again the Anglo-saxon equivalent of the Latinoriginatedregeneration 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


3/29

in some cases, for which people have died. For example, these debates have been

partially responsible for the division between Catholic and Protestant.is series of short studies was prompted by the use of the word in the Anglican

baptism service. e use ofregenerationin the baptism service can cause a great deal

of confusion, consternation, and disagreement, especiallywhen a reader assumes

that their understanding of the word is the same as that intended by the BCP.1

ose who are convinced of the correctness of infant baptism stumble, be-

cause they are afraid of a Roman Catholicex opere operato2 implication in the

baptismal service.

ose who do not yet understand infant baptism stumble, because they strike

the word regeneration head-on and are convinced that those crazy pdo-

baptists3 really are closet Roman Catholics.

However, the modern reader assumes incorrectly. And it is this fact that I first

address in these studies.

1.2 Historical Uses Of Regeneration

Some of the language used in the BCP (see the list on page4)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 baptismareconnected.

2. However, regeneration does notnecessarilymean the supernatural change

effected 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 different

significance for the use ofregenerationthan that of the present day.

Lets see if these are defensible assertions.

1When 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.

2A theological term of art, ex opere operatois a Latin phrase meaning from the work, workedreferring to the efficacy 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, lastaccessed 2014-05).

3Pdo-baptists are literally child baptizers,pdocoming from the Greekpaidion, young child,infant.

4Charles Hodge, Systematic eology, Volume III, Chapter XX (e Means of Grace), Section 12(Efficacy of Baptism), Baptismal Regeneration.

3


4/29

1.2.1 Terms Clarified

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 is is also the meaning commonly

given toregenerationin 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 different names for the same thing. ey are

different things, which can be and oen are closely related but still remain

different things.

Regeneration and born again are synonymous terms,regenerationcoming

from the Latinregeneratio, to be born again. Youll find these terms used

interchangeably in this document.

In order to prove my assertion, I start by citing from a number of extra-biblical

sources. ese citations are intended to show thatregenerationhas 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 wordregenerationin the 1662 Book of CommonPrayer.

AGod, who hast given us thy only-begoen Son to take our nature

upon him, and as at this time to be born of a pure Virgin: Grant that we,

being regenerateand 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

AGod, who hast given us thy only-begoen 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

5Westminster Confession, Chapter 9, Section 4.6e proper collect for e 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 thefollowing examples, the emphasis is mine.

4


5/29

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

D 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 regenerateand 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

Aand immortal God, the aid of all that need, the helper of all that

flee to thee for succour, the life of them that believe, and the resurrectionof the dead: We call upon thee for this Infant, that he, coming to thy holy

Baptism, may receive remission of his sinsby 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 find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

So give now unto us that ask; let us that seek find; 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

Snow, dearly beloved brethren, that this Childis regenerate, and graed

into the body of Christs Church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for

these benefits; and with one accord make our prayers unto him, that this Child

may lead the rest of his life according to this beginning.10

I thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy

Ghost. Amen.

7e proper collect for e Sunday aer Christmas-Day.8Opening paragraph of the e Ministration of Publick Baptism of Infants. e emphasized text

is reflective of Jesuss words to Nicodemus. Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of waterand the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God ( John 3:5). is language is also found in theopening paragraph of the e Ministration of Publick Baptism to Such as are of Riper Years, and Ableto Answer for emselves.

9An 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 thework of remission of sins.

10Said immediately aer the baptism. Note that two things are being said in this statement. 1) ereis a clear assumption that what has been symbolized has taken place. 2) ere is a clear statement thatit is God alone who brings about the reality of the thing symbolized, that this Child may lead the restof his life according to this beginning.

5


6/29

Wyield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased theeto

regeneratethis Infant with thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for thine own Childby 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 finally, with the residue of thy

Saints, he may inherit thine everlasting kingdom; through the same thy Son

Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.11

I 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 laverof Regenerationin 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 ourcomfort on this wise.12

Aand everliving God, who hast vouchsafed to regeneratethese 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 gis of grace;

the spirit of wisdom and understanding; the spirit of counsel and ghostly

strength; the spirit of knowledge and true godliness; and fill them, O Lord,

with the spirit of thy holy fear, now and for ever. Amen.13

It is particularly telling that we find this prayer at the end of the baptismal service.

Ahumbly 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 uerly 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 finally,

with the residue of thy holy Church, he may be an inheritor of thine

everlasting kingdom; through Christ our Lord.

e 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

11From the e Ministration of Publick Baptism of Infants. e agent of regeneration is the HolySpirit; and not the water, or the acts of the pastor. is language is also found in the e Ministrationof Private Baptism of Children, in Houses.

12Found in the e Ministration of Private Baptism of Children, in Houses. e Gospel witnessto which the sentence refers is likely Mark 10:1315.

13e opening prayer in e Order of Confirmation.

6


7/29

an inheritor ofGodseverlasting kingdom, not the work of the officiant, or even the

work of the recipient of baptism.

1.2.3 e irty-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 difference

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 graed 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 confirmed,

and grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God.e 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 difference 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 differentiation from

those around us.

b) What we are demonstrating, or signifying is (at least) that the baptizedChristian is different 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 ofregeneration or new birth,14 . . .

a) Baptism signifies something in addition to point one above.

b) It is not only an external symbol of differentiation 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 crasman.

14Note how the words are interchangeable.

7


8/29

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 graed into the Church; . . .

i. A visible sign makes a visible difference, 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

differently, saying . . . man and wife of itself accomplishes no

essential change16 in reality. Nevertheless, there is an external,

formal, even legal change of relationship upon the pronouncementof the officiant of the wedding. What happens in the heart, or

what will happen in the future: these cannot be controlled by the

declaration.

ii. e 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 ... is 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 signedand sealed in a visible way? e 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.

15Means of grace . . . are those means which God has ordained for the end of communicatingthe life-giving and sanctifying influences of the Spirit to the souls of men (Systematic eology,Charles Hodge, Vol/Part III, Chapter XX, Section 20, Prayer, Subsection Prayer As A Means OfGrace.). Hodge also include the sacraments and the word of God as means of grace. He doesnot

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 edification tohis children. e phrase is intended to indicate those institutions which God has ordained to be theordinary channels of grace,i.e., of the supernatural influences of the Holy Spirit, to the souls of men.

e means of grace, according to the standards of our Church, are the word, sacraments, and prayer(ibid., Section 1).

16Essential is here used technically, as in, a change in the essence of a thing or relationship.

8


9/29

c) Note that these promises are visibly signed and sealed.

i. For simplicity, think of seal as meaning an ancient seal (be it aring, a stamp, or some other device for impressing an image into

so wax).

A. e seal was used to press into the still so wax on the document

a symbol of the authors ownership and authority. e document

is literally sealed17 by the impression le behind in the wax.

B. Neither the seal, nor the wax, nor the paper, nor the image le

behind by the sealnecessarilyeffect 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 difference between the symbol and

the reality becomes small, even blurred.

ii. So likewise baptism signifies/seals Gods authority and ownership

over us.

A. Only God the Holy Spirit has the authority and power to makes

the promises effective.

B. Neither the water, nor the words of the service, nor the officiant

can make any outcome effective.19

d) .. . faith is confirmed, . . .

i. is is true both for children and adults.

ii. Faith is confirmed, 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 craed. e English reformers,

like those on the continent, were caught between two opposing camps: the Roman

17Sealcoming from the Latin sigillum, a small picture.18Essential here again refers to the essence, or basic nature of a thing or relationship.19Additionally, 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 repugnantto the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to

many superstitions.

9


10/29

and the Anabaptist.20 e 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: e baptism

of young children is in any wise21 to be retained in the Church as most agreeable22

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 e Westminster Confession Of Faith & e London BaptistConfession

Im citing from these two documents together, because:

e London Baptist Confession (hereinaer LBC, 1689) is a derivation of the

Westminster Confession (hereinaer WCF, 1647).

No less a light than Charles Spurgeon defended the LBC vigorously, a Baptist

with whom many modern Baptists identify.

e LBC confession especially exists to uphold baptistictheology, so comparing

it with the WCF is instructive in how baptists of reformational persuasion havetried to analyze and articulate their position as being similar to, yet distinct

from the Presbyterian position.

What one doesnotsay can be as significant as what one does say. Lets overlap the

two statements, using the earlier WCF as the base template. Note the similarities

and the differences between these two statements.23

20Anabaptist is the historical term for what we now call Baptists. It comes from Greek rootssimply meaning again-baptize.

21Wise here means the manner or extent of something, related to the German Weise, as in the

phrase, in einer Art und Weise.22ough most sometimes is used to mean very, in Elizabethan English it carries its customary

dictionary meaning, greatest in amount or degree. is 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 arenecessarily heresy. It is implying that they are, however, deficient. is shows a gentleness on thetopic not typical of the reformation period.

23oted from the WCF, Chapter 28. Of Baptism, Paragraph I and the LBC, Chapter 29, Paragraph1 respectively.

10


11/29

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,

ingraing into Christ,

of regeneration,

in his death and resurrection; of his being engraed into him;)

of

of

remission

remission

ofof

sins,sins;

andand

of hisof

givinggiving

upup

untointo

God,God,

throughthrough

JesusJesus

Christ,Christ,

toto 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 differs

from the original Westminster document:

It changes thesacramentto ordinance. e significance of this is that baptism

is changed from amystery the root meaning ofsacrament to a mere legalcommand.

It carefully avoids any language suggesting that God somehow couldoperate

through the application of water, or any other symbol, for that maer. You

can see that baptism is no longer a sign and seal, but just a sign. e LBC

is wrien 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 Effectual Calling) almost exactly the same

as the WCFs Chapter 10.

11


12/29

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.

e 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 regardingthose 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 nosubjective 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

effected by the Spirit of God by which a soul is made spiritually alive. 26

24WCF & LBC, Chapter 10. Of Effectual Calling, Paragraph III.25e list format used here is mine, with the hope of making Hodges thinking clearer, but the

words are quoted exactly as found.26Systematic eology, Volume III, Chapter XX (e Means of Grace), Section 12 (Efficacy of

Baptism), Baptismal Regeneration.

12


13/29

Whether one agrees or disagrees with the meaning ofregenerationin any of these

statements, it must be recognized thatregenerationhas 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 ofregenerationin 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 regenerationreallymeans from the Bible, it will be seen that the task is not as

simple as one might hope.

1.3.1 Short List

ere are three different 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 allthe 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 regenerationwhen

the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve

thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Mahew 19:28).

2. Jesus answered and said to (Nicodemus), Truly, truly, I say to you, unlessone isborn againhe 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. at which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is

born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, You must be

born again. e 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 donein righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing ofregeneration

and renewing by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:45).

27e words are (1) anagenna o(1 Peter 1:3, 23), (2) paliggenes a(Mahew 19:28, Titus 3:5), and, (3)the phrasegenneth eanothen(John 3:3, 7). All citations are from the NASB, 1995.

13


14/29

4. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to

His great mercy has caused us to beborn againto a living hope through theresurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (1 Peter 1:3).

5. . . . for you have been born againnot 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. ere arent very many uses of these words. As much as some Christiansheavily lean born again as a term for 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. e meanings are varied. We would have to take quite a bit of space to deal

with the specifics of each passage, but heres a quick summary.

a) e Mahew passage speaks of the end of time, a new world (asperthe

ESV), the new heavens and the new earth of 1 Peter 3:13 or Revelation21:1.

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 different

way from John. Some will argue that the washing of which Paul speaks

cannot mean baptism. However, I find that those who so argue already

have a baptistic bent, which demands such an interpretation. In otherwords, it seems that they (perhaps all sides?) read what they need into

the text. is 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


15/29

1.3.3 Closing Comments About the Biblical Uses

No maer 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 wemustconclude thatnew birth,born again,

andregenerationhave a breadth of meaning that defies simple definition. Its meaning

fits across a spectrum of senses, just as Hodge expresses in his systematic theology.

Its not a precise scientific 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 figurative 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 signified (salvation)

are related. As symbols point to realities, baptism points to regeneration (and many

other benefits). We assume that those benefits are connected with baptism just like

Baptists do, though in a very different 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.ink 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.

28James 1:21, 1 Timothy 2:15, and Mahew 8:25 respectively.29And I would argue, anyone who uses a covenantal hermeneutic (way of interpreting Scripture).

15


16/29

e serpent in the wilderness and the healing of those bien by serpents

(Numbers 21:89),

Circumcision and its incorporation into the covenant family of those to whom

circumcision was given (Genesis 17:10),

e rainbow and Gods promise never to flood the earth again (Genesis 9:14

15),

e lambs blood on doorposts in Egypt and the real physical salvation of the

first-born from death (Exodus 12:2223).

Its not so different 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 thething signified until some proof is offered 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 specific geographical

region and the reality of legal rights and responsibilities are assumed or presumed

to be connected for the child.

1.5 Conclusioneres no doubt that regeneration, as presently used, does usually mean the su-

pernatural change effected 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 permied to

assume that the present popular meaning is the same as the meaning and usage of

the reformers.

16


17/29

2 e 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 page15). 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 briefly define each position and then show how both positions are closely

related to each other.

2.1 Positions Defined

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.

is is what theologians describe asex opere operato, from the work, (the

thing is) worked/made effective.

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 waterresultsfrom the conversion of the soul, the thing symbolized. e

cause and effect 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 permied. e only difference is the direction of the

transaction.

17


18/29

2.2 Comparing, Contrasting, Defining

e linkage between these two otherwise very different perspectives on baptism is

in the word necessarily.

Roman: From water to salvation,necessarily,

Baptistic: From salvation to water,necessarily.30

e Roman position is incorrect, but the baptistic or non-covenantal position31

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 effectually worked in others. Both positions areunwilling to give due honor and respect to Gods revealed will (the word, i.e., the

Bible)andhis 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 specific 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 first 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. at part is Gods

business, not ours. Our business is that of preaching, discipleship, and baptism aer

the manner of Mahew 28:18 ff.

30To be fair, both Catholic and Baptist acknowledge exceptions and extenuating circumstances.ese are gross statements reflecting normal understanding and practice.

31More about which, see the 3rd major section of this paper.32One might say here: See! Believe first, and then be baptized! Must the sign alwaysfollow the

fact and never the reverse? What about the call to make the symbol already applied a spiritual reality:Circumcise your heart, and stiffen your neck no longer (Deuteronomy 10:16)? eres no commandto stop circumcising until the heart is set right first; theres just a call to repentance. Or Brethren, beall the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you (2 Peter 1:910). eres nocommand to get re-baptized, once one reaches some state of surety. In both cases, the call is simply tobe sure that what has been symbolized is matched with the reality of the inner work.

18


19/29

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 ignorepreaching, discipleship, and the sacrament of baptism.

Children do not ask to become citizens of the country into which they are born.

e citizenship is theirs simply by right of birth. ey 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.

e above analogy almost exactly parallels the biblical understanding of the

sacraments in both testaments.

19


20/29

3 A Covenantally Unified View Of Baptism And e

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. ere are no examples of baptized infants in the New Testament.

2. is absence of examples proves that infant baptism was not practiced in the

NT.

Its important to recognize that this argument contains an assumption that affects

ones understanding of the Bible at the most basic level. Well get to that assumption

in a moment.

e common response on the part of the pdo-baptist is to point to texts that

refer to whole households being baptized.33 I find these responses unhelpful, because

they are unconvincing.

1. e baptist cannot find the word infant. ey see the word saved and as-

sume a series of individual conversion experiences for every person mentioned

in whatever account is being discussed.

2. e 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 e Argument

e essential core of the argument used by Baptists is this: if a certain practice has

no exemplar in the NT, that practice is prohibited. is is a weak and even dangerous

method of argumentation.

33See, for example, Acts 11:14, 16:15, 16:33, 18:8, 1 Corinthians 1:16.

20


21/29

3.2.1 Weakness Of e 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. e 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.

at position sounds safe and clear, but its just the opposite. Consider:

ere are no instructions about what time to start worship services.

eres 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.

ere are no directions about how to educate ones children.

ere are countless other examples.

Some modify the above position by saying that they are really talking about the

regulative principle ofworship. at sounds great, too. But . . .

e love feast at which the Lords Supper took place in the NT is unspecific

about how it was conducted (see, e.g., Acts 2:4247, 1 Corinthians 11:2021).

In fact, not only do most Christians notcelebrate the Lords Supper this way

today, there is good evidence that the agapefeast 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 lile no meaning for us.34

Some respond to this by excluding all instruments, only singing Psalms, and

doing soa 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!

34Im referring here to terms like higgaion, selah, or muth-labben.

21


22/29

Here is one of my favorite examples: there is no command or example regarding

women at the Lords supper anywhere in the NT. Oops!

e baptistic method assumes this regulative principle and thereby exposes itself to

such weaknesses as these.

3.2.2 e Real Danger Of e Argument

Even more, this hermeneutic is dangerous. e real danger lies in the fundamental

assumption which undergirds it. e 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 e Law of Abrogation

3.3.1 Differing Perspectives

Figure 1:

Perhaps youve seen this picture. It can be per-

ceived in two quite different ways.

It either depicts an old woman in a shawl

with a leaf or feather in her forelock, facingle and down, with a large nose in profile,

or,

a young woman with a feathered hat and

red choker, facing le, up, and away from

the viewer, with the cheek and chin in

profile.

In the same way that one may see different 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 presuppositionsof those who interpret the Scriptures concerning baptism. ite honestly, their

assumptions arent important. ere are too many variations of thought.

35It should be noted that this term is one that I have defined and used, though it expresses thebiblical-theological methods of virtually all reformed thinkers and many church fathers.

22


23/29

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, especiallyby 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

andthe OT Scriptures is found in Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost.

3.3.2 Demonstrating Apostolic Continuity With e OT (e LawOf Abrogation)

It is oen said that Scripture interprets Scripture. Indeed, the Bible is not merely a

book wrien within the context of several cultures and languages (Semitic, Greek,

Roman, Babylonian, Assyrian, etc.). It is itsownculture. One example (not related to

baptism) is the tree of life, referred to in the opening chapters in the Bible (Genesis

2:9). e tree of life is also brought into the pages of the book of the Revelation

(22:19). is 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 uerly Jewish it is.

Pentecost is a Jewish feast day.

Peter is a Jew.

e 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 gi of the Holy

Spirit (2:38).

23


24/29

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, Peterdeclares in the following verse, for the promise is for you and for your childrenand

all who are far off, 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 themand 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 offspring aer

you throughout their generations. is is my covenant, which you shall

keep, between me and you and your offspring aer you: every male

among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh

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 theL

will give you, as he haspromised, 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 sacrifice

of the LPassover, 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 first, for

instance? He did not. Most importantly, if he was puing baptistic (i.e., un-Jewish)

conditions on his words, why didnthe make these things clearer? If Peter was

speaking as a baptist, he was flying in the face of several thousand years of custom,

tradition, history, theology, and presuppositions. e sermon in Acts 2 would demand

a new set of rules, if the baptistic approach were correct. And the moment wouldhave 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


25/29

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. e God of this people

Israel chose our fathers and made the people great during their stay in

the land of Egypt, and with uplied arm he led them out of it.

OfDavidsoffspring 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 uerances of the prophets, which are read every

Sabbath, fulfilled 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 fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also

it is wrien in the second Psalm, You are my Son, today I have begoen

you (Acts 13:67, 23, 2628, 3233).

What we find in Pauls sermon is just about everything one can imagine about the

covenant of God with his people in the OT. What we do notfind 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. erefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are

sons of Abraham. e 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 Definition Of e Law Of Abrogation

From these facts, the Acts 2 passage strongly implies what I call the law of abrogation.

Lets define 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 maer).

25


26/29

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 wherewe 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/modified.36

Manna

Command: e Lsaid to Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from

heaven for you (Exodus 16:4).

Termination: e manna ceased on the day aer 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 ff.). Termination: Regarding blood: Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you

eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life

in yourselves. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal

life, and I will raise him up on the last day (John 6:5355, figurative

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: is is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Meand you and your descendants aer you: every male among you shall be

circumcised (Genesis 17:10).

36Im purposely ignoring the whole of ceremonial law, which is discussed very fully in the book ofHebrews. It is both a relatively obvious and far too massive discussion for this paper.

26


27/29

Abrogation (the replacement of circumcision with baptism): In [Christ]

you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, inthe removal of the body of the flesh 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

L your God, for in the month of Abib the L your God brought you

out of Egypt by night. You shall sacrifice the Passover to the Lyour

God from the flock and the herd, in the place where the Lchooses to

establish His name (Deuteronomy 16:12).

Termination: For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed (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 e Danger Of Ignoring e Law Of Abrogation

e 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 ifGod himself modifies or

terminates it by what authority do baptists disassemble the relationship between

circumcision and baptism38 and change the rules by which those rites are to

function?

Some may say that this is a case ofreductio ad absurdum(reducing an argument

to an absurd degree).

1. First, I observe that reductio ad absurdumcan be a useful way of looking at

the validity of anothers argument.

37is 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 togetherof the physical sign (baptism) with a spiritual reality (faith).

38See this relationship explicitly stated in Colossians 2:912.

27


28/29

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 raisedin 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 New Testament rites and institutions say

the Passover meal and the Lords Supper?39

e 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 amteaching you to perform, so that you may live and go in and take pos-

session of the land which the L, 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 L

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 wrien 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 theholy city, which are wrien in this book (Revelation 22:1819).

e 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

39My point here is that the relationship between baptism and circumcision in Colossians 2:1112 iseither as clear as, or as muddy as, the relationship between Passover and Christs sacrifice 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 asyou are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed.

40In my opinion, the dispensational hermeneutic only aer European rationalism and liberalismis most responsible for denigrating the authority of Scripture in western Christianity.

28


29/29

would have been a timely (even necessary) place to clarify his meaning. Why doesnt

Peter clarify his meaning? Because Peters sermon was reflecting a position thatGod Himself had made perfectly clear millennia before.41

41I also think of Jesus embrace of children (see Mahew 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 thatchildren are oen held to be a physical reality of the kingdom of God. You shall observe this rite as astatute for you and for your sons forever ... And when your children say to you, what do you meanby this service .. . (Exodus 12:24, 26). Perhaps most disturbingly, An uncircumcised male who is notcircumcised . . . at person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant (Genesis17:14).

29

Documents

Regeneration, Romanism, and the Covenant