Something that I am still working through as a Baptist is the fact that baptism has been seen as regenerative throughout much (probably should just say "all") of church history. Reading through the various proof texts from scripture that advocates of baptismal regeneration put forth are also pretty convincing, in my opinion, that there is something that God does through the waters of baptism. To what extent though? I am still not sure.
In some of his videos, Gavin Ortlund proposes that baptism is similar to a crowning, where, such as in the case of Queen Elizabeth and the passing of her father, someone becomes King/Queen before the actual ceremony but then the ceremony itself occurs and that is what "really" makes them King/Queen. Something akin to that seems like an appropriate way to handle the sacrament of baptism. So it can be seen as regenerative, but not the primary or sole means of regeneration by itself.
I'm 100% with you... It's tough because it definitely does rest, to some degree, on a bunch of metaphysical and soteriological assumptions that I am still working through. It's a bit technical, but I am hoping to read through this paper more slowly sometime https://philpapers.org/rec/PAROBF. I'm also hoping to get to the "Baptist Sacramentalism" series of books eventually.
I definitely have appreciated Gavin Ortlund's content on this as well - especially his observation that a lot of scholars studying this question specifically seem to think that the early church saw baptism as both exclusively for professing believers and as regenerative.
I think it is (or at least it should be) a given that regeneration and the act of baptism are deeply related in some way and that the question really comes down to "in what way?"
While I still have a lot of questions here too (on the metaphysics especially), I have recently been content using this phrase - "Baptism is the New Testament 'sinner's prayer.'"
1 Peter 3:20–21
[20] because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. [21] Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (ESV)
So, Peter describes Baptism as something that "saves you," and then he clarifies in what way it saves you - as "an appeal to God for a clean conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Or in another words, it "saves you" in the way that a "sinner's prayer" saves you.
So, *when rightly practiced*, Baptism is not merely "public profession" that one has already placed their trust in Christ, it is actually HOW one biblically goes about repenting (Acts 2), trusting in Christ, calling upon the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13) being reconciled to God and becoming a Christian. So, to the question "what must we do to be saved?" the answer, "trust and repent in Christ" and the answer, "be baptized" are essentially synonymous.
In the same way that we would want to stay away from thinking that reciting words in a sinners prayer is what "causes" regeneration, I think we want to stay away from that with Baptism. On the other hand, I don't think we would be content to say that a prayer of repentance and asking for God's mercy is merely a "symbol" that someone is saved.
Side stepping the debates concerning "order of salvation" (regeneration causing conversion vs. "prevenient grace" enabled free will causing regeneration) etc., broadly protestant/reformational soteriologies acknowledge both 1. The necessity of the prior work of the Holy Spirit on the human heart and 2. The involvement or "participation" of the human will in salvation - (trust, repentance - "conversion"). I think this is where we should locate New Testament baptism - as the proper way that the human will participates in Spirit's work of salvation.
I just read the introduction to that article you linked. That sounds fantastic and I am going to add it to my reading list as well. And I really like how you link together Baptism and the Sinner's Prayer and are seeking to avoid classifying the sacrament as a mere public profession which, in my experience, is all too common with Evangelicalism/SBC culture.
I know you are wanting to partially side step the order of salvation debate, but I think that actually plays a pretty big part in the Baptism question. As does the evangelical/southern baptist concern regarding when someone can be classified as "saved." I understand the more rational approach to trying to explain the process as "hearing the word, being changed by the spirit, making a decision to follow Christ, and then being baptized," and I do not believe that is something inherently wrong with attempting to discuss it that way, but I also think it too logically tries to explain away things that are more or less supposed to be mysteries. Dr. Jordan B. Cooper, a Lutheran theologian, makes the point that just because something is rational or logical does not necessarily mean that it is also biblical.
From our perspectives within linear time, I understand the desire to place conversion and regeneration on our plane of experience. However, I think it may make more sense of Scripture in totality, particularly with regard to baptism and its corresponding passages (1 Peter 3, Ezekiel 36, 1 Corinthians 6, Titus 3, John 3, and so on) to view it all as occurring simultaneously. For instance, God, from His perspective as the Creator of time and thus His placement both within it and outside of it, sees our "sinner's prayer" and also our baptism, so what is stopping those experiences from being--in some sense--simultaneously applied onto our lives? So from our point of view on Earth, within time, it does appear as if Baptism normatively follows conversion, but in reality the conversion/regeneration experience is more of a "both/and" situation or an answer of "yes" to the "was i saved after I prayed or after I was baptized?" question.
Hopefully that made sense. Wrote this hastily on my lunch break.
Something that I am still working through as a Baptist is the fact that baptism has been seen as regenerative throughout much (probably should just say "all") of church history. Reading through the various proof texts from scripture that advocates of baptismal regeneration put forth are also pretty convincing, in my opinion, that there is something that God does through the waters of baptism. To what extent though? I am still not sure.
In some of his videos, Gavin Ortlund proposes that baptism is similar to a crowning, where, such as in the case of Queen Elizabeth and the passing of her father, someone becomes King/Queen before the actual ceremony but then the ceremony itself occurs and that is what "really" makes them King/Queen. Something akin to that seems like an appropriate way to handle the sacrament of baptism. So it can be seen as regenerative, but not the primary or sole means of regeneration by itself.
I'm 100% with you... It's tough because it definitely does rest, to some degree, on a bunch of metaphysical and soteriological assumptions that I am still working through. It's a bit technical, but I am hoping to read through this paper more slowly sometime https://philpapers.org/rec/PAROBF. I'm also hoping to get to the "Baptist Sacramentalism" series of books eventually.
I definitely have appreciated Gavin Ortlund's content on this as well - especially his observation that a lot of scholars studying this question specifically seem to think that the early church saw baptism as both exclusively for professing believers and as regenerative.
I think it is (or at least it should be) a given that regeneration and the act of baptism are deeply related in some way and that the question really comes down to "in what way?"
While I still have a lot of questions here too (on the metaphysics especially), I have recently been content using this phrase - "Baptism is the New Testament 'sinner's prayer.'"
1 Peter 3:20–21
[20] because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. [21] Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (ESV)
So, Peter describes Baptism as something that "saves you," and then he clarifies in what way it saves you - as "an appeal to God for a clean conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Or in another words, it "saves you" in the way that a "sinner's prayer" saves you.
So, *when rightly practiced*, Baptism is not merely "public profession" that one has already placed their trust in Christ, it is actually HOW one biblically goes about repenting (Acts 2), trusting in Christ, calling upon the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13) being reconciled to God and becoming a Christian. So, to the question "what must we do to be saved?" the answer, "trust and repent in Christ" and the answer, "be baptized" are essentially synonymous.
In the same way that we would want to stay away from thinking that reciting words in a sinners prayer is what "causes" regeneration, I think we want to stay away from that with Baptism. On the other hand, I don't think we would be content to say that a prayer of repentance and asking for God's mercy is merely a "symbol" that someone is saved.
Side stepping the debates concerning "order of salvation" (regeneration causing conversion vs. "prevenient grace" enabled free will causing regeneration) etc., broadly protestant/reformational soteriologies acknowledge both 1. The necessity of the prior work of the Holy Spirit on the human heart and 2. The involvement or "participation" of the human will in salvation - (trust, repentance - "conversion"). I think this is where we should locate New Testament baptism - as the proper way that the human will participates in Spirit's work of salvation.
I just read the introduction to that article you linked. That sounds fantastic and I am going to add it to my reading list as well. And I really like how you link together Baptism and the Sinner's Prayer and are seeking to avoid classifying the sacrament as a mere public profession which, in my experience, is all too common with Evangelicalism/SBC culture.
I know you are wanting to partially side step the order of salvation debate, but I think that actually plays a pretty big part in the Baptism question. As does the evangelical/southern baptist concern regarding when someone can be classified as "saved." I understand the more rational approach to trying to explain the process as "hearing the word, being changed by the spirit, making a decision to follow Christ, and then being baptized," and I do not believe that is something inherently wrong with attempting to discuss it that way, but I also think it too logically tries to explain away things that are more or less supposed to be mysteries. Dr. Jordan B. Cooper, a Lutheran theologian, makes the point that just because something is rational or logical does not necessarily mean that it is also biblical.
From our perspectives within linear time, I understand the desire to place conversion and regeneration on our plane of experience. However, I think it may make more sense of Scripture in totality, particularly with regard to baptism and its corresponding passages (1 Peter 3, Ezekiel 36, 1 Corinthians 6, Titus 3, John 3, and so on) to view it all as occurring simultaneously. For instance, God, from His perspective as the Creator of time and thus His placement both within it and outside of it, sees our "sinner's prayer" and also our baptism, so what is stopping those experiences from being--in some sense--simultaneously applied onto our lives? So from our point of view on Earth, within time, it does appear as if Baptism normatively follows conversion, but in reality the conversion/regeneration experience is more of a "both/and" situation or an answer of "yes" to the "was i saved after I prayed or after I was baptized?" question.
Hopefully that made sense. Wrote this hastily on my lunch break.