Select Page

What other errors does baptismal regeneration promote?

by | Jan 15, 2020 | Baptism, Questions

In my discussions with people who hold to the idea that baptism is necessary for salvation, I’ve discovered various things over the years. Recently I had two in-depth conversations with members of the Church of Christ who said that baptism in water by immersion is necessary in order to have your sins forgiven. Now, I know the arguments they use and can easily refute their erring position. But one of the things I found interesting was how related doctrines were compromised in order to substantiate their baptismal regeneration view.

Here they are…

  1. Denial of justification by faith alone in Christ alone, but include the baptismal ceremony
  2. Denial of original sin, which relates to babies dying without being baptized
  3. Denial of total depravity, otherwise babies would need baptism
  4. Denial of federal headship, which relates to being crucified with Christ in Rom. 6:3-8
  5. Denial of the covenantal aspect of Christ’s redemptive work regarding the thief on the cross
  6. Denial of God’s election and predestination, which places salvation in their hands, not God’s
  7. Denial of Eternal Security, because salvation is obtained by faith and something they do

As I like to say, heresies are never alone. One heresy leads to another, and often clear biblical teaching in many areas must be compromised in order for people to hold onto their false teachings. Such is the case with my debate/discussion with Scott Rachui, the church of Christ adherent.

Let me expand on the issues above.

Denial of justification by faith alone in Christ alone, but include the baptismal ceremony

The Bible teaches that we are justified by faith, but by faith in any work that we do. Please consider the following verses

  • Rom. 3:28, “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.”
  • Rom. 4:1-5, “What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? ‘ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.’ 4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.”
  • Rom. 5:1, “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
  • Gal. 2:16, “nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.”

The Scriptures clearly teach justification by faith. Of course, that faith is in Christ. Therefore, it is by faith alone in Christ alone. After all, Paul tells us in Romans 4:5 that the one who does not work but believes, his faith is credited as righteousness. Paul had just told us in verse 3 that Abraham was justified by faith. When was he justified? It was before baptism and before circumcision. It was before any ceremony. Clearly, justification is by faith alone in Christ alone.

So, when I asked the baptismal regenerationist if we are justified by faith, he will say yes. I then ask when are we justified by faith? Is it when we have faith, or is it when were baptized? They say that is when we get baptized. I ask if faith precedes baptism. They say it does. I then respond that if they say that faith precedes baptism and we are justified by faith, then we must be justified by faith when we have faith, not when we get baptized; otherwise, it is not justification by faith.

The argument is simple, and to get out from underneath its weight, they will say that baptism is where the faith is manifest that the person is then justified. But of course, that is nothing more than ignoring the argument I raised in a continuation of their own error.

Denial of original sin, which relates to babies dying without being baptized

Original Sin is the teaching that Adams’s first sin in the Garden of Eden resulted in the fall of humankind. In other words, when Adam sinned, his nature became fallen, and we, as his descendants, inherited a sinful nature. Please consider the following scriptures.

  • Romans 5:12, “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.”
  • 1 Cor. 15:22, “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ, all will be made alive.”
  • Eph. 2:3, “Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.”
  • James 1:15, “Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death.”

The denial of original sin is also an affirmation of the heresy called Pelagianism, which is the teaching that when a person is born, he or she has no fallen nature, no tendency to sin. They then become fallen by sinning. But, if that were the case, why would babies die? James 1:15 says sin brings death. The effect of sin in the world is death. If a baby is sinless, how can death claim it? If they’re so innocent, how does death, which is the effect of sin, have its hold upon them?

Romans 5:12 says that “all sin.” Now course, we know from 1 Peter 2:22 that Jesus did not sin. Therefore, He is excluded. And since 1 Cor. 15:22 says that “in Adam, all die,” we must conclude that Adam, who is our federal head, represented us, and when he died, we died in him. I cover this in the next topic.

Denial of total depravity, otherwise babies would need baptism

It’s a common argument against baptismal regeneration us to ask about babies who die before being baptized. Do they go to heaven or hell? Logically, if water baptism is necessary for salvation, then all babies who die must go to hell. Otherwise, it isn’t necessary. But, I’ve discovered over the years that the solution to this problem is to deny the doctrine of total depravity. It is the teaching that sin has touched all of what we are: heart, mind, soul, body, emotions, etc., and as a result, the unbeliever will never turn to Christ of his own, sinful free will.

The scripture says we are born this way as Ephesians 2:3 implies when it says that we are “by nature children of wrath.” Furthermore, other Scriptures teach us that the unregenerate are deceitful (Jer. 17:9), full of evil (Mark 7:21-23), loves darkness rather than light (John 3:19), cannot come to God on his own (John 6:44), does not seek for God (Rom. 3:10-12), is helpless and ungodly (Rom. 5:6), is a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20; John 8:34), cannot receive spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14), is dead in his sins (Eph. 2:1), is by nature a child of wrath (Eph. 2:3), and is at enmity with God (Eph. 2:15).

That is why it is God who appoints people to eternal life (Acts 13:48), chooses who is to be holy and blameless (Eph. 1:4), predestines us to adoption (Eph. 1:5), calls according to His purpose (2 Tim. 1:9), chooses us for salvation (2 Thess. 2:13), grants the act of believing (Phil. 1:29), works faith in the believer (John 6:28-29), grants us repentance (2 Tim. 2:24-25), causes us to be born again (1 Pet. 1:3), makes us born again not by our will but by His will (John 1:12-13), draws people to Himself (John 6:44), grants that we come to Jesus (John 6:65), predestines us to salvation (Rom. 8:29-30), and he does all of this according to His purpose (Eph. 1:11).

Another reason I’ve spent the previous two full paragraphs dealing with this issue is that it is biblical. The Scriptures teach what they teach, and we must never submit them to our doctrinal preferences. This goes for all people, for all Christians. How much more for those who hold to the idea that baptism is necessary for salvation.

Nevertheless, those who hold to the idea that baptism is necessary for salvation also deny the fallenness of our natures because, among other reasons, if babies have fallen natures, then when they die, they would be subject to damnation. And, this would mean that they would have to be baptized to be saved, which of course, is a problem for those who hold to water baptism by immersion as a necessity for salvation, a baptism that must come after confession.

Denial of federal headship, which relates to being crucified with Christ in Rom. 6:3-8

Federal headship is the teaching that the male represents the descendants. We find this in varying verses of Scripture.

  • Romans 5:18, “So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.”
  • 1 Corinthians 15:22, “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.”
  • Hebrews 7:9–10, “And, so to speak, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes, 10 for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.”

We see from Romans 5:18 that Adam’s sin resulted in condemnation to all people. Likewise, in 1 Cor. 15:22, all died “in Adam.” In Heb. 7:9-10, we see that Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek while in the loins of his distant father Abraham. In each of these verses, we see the representation of one person for another. We see Adam representing us and Abraham representing Levi.

Federal headship is a necessary part of our salvation because Christ represented His people on the cross (1 Cor. 15:22).  In fact, we were crucified with Christ.

  • Romans 6:6, “knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;”

In order to bolster the idea that baptism is necessary for salvation, people bring up Romans 6:4, which says “we have been buried with him through baptism into his death…” The argument is that baptism is what identifies us with the death of Christ and warrants salvation. But of course, that is not what the text says. Besides, in the context, Romans 6:6 says that we are crucified with Christ. Who were the ones crucified with Christ, and when were the crucified? The answer is simple. Those who were crucified with Christ were those whom he represented on the cross. They were crucified with Christ when Christ was crucified. This is a difficult teaching for a lot of people, especially for those who hold to baptismal regeneration. But, it does not make it any less true.

Think about this.  If we were crucified with Christ when he was crucified, then that means we have died with Christ, which is exactly what the Scriptures teach.

  • Romans 6:8, “Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,”
  • Colossians 2:20, “If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as,”
  • Colossians 3:3, “For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.”
  • 2 Timothy 2:11, “It is a trustworthy statement: For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;”

When did we die with Christ? Was it when we were baptized or was it when Jesus was crucified? Obviously, it was when he was crucified – because that is what the Scriptures tell us. Furthermore, this must mean that our baptism is a public identification with having been crucified with Christ. It is not the means by which we die with Christ.

So, Federal headship must be sacrificed at the altar of baptismal regeneration.

Denial of the covenantal aspect of Christ’s redemptive work regarding the thief on the cross

The relationship between the thief on the cross and God’s covenant work is of vital importance in the topic of baptismal regeneration.

The thief was saved without baptism. There is no record of the thief on the cross being baptized, and yet Jesus said he would be with him in paradise (Luke 23:43). Since Jesus died before the thief on the cross (John 19:31-33), the new covenant had begun per the teaching of Hebrew 9:15-17. Therefore, the thief died in the new covenant. If the new covenant, according to those who hold to baptismal regeneration, requires baptism for salvation, then the thief was saved without being baptized. How is this possible according to their theology?

The most common answers to this I have heard are 1) that the thief had been baptized earlier even though it doesn’t say so anywhere in scripture; 2) he would’ve gotten baptized so, therefore, he could be saved; 3) the thief died under the old covenant and did not need to be baptized.

Since there is no mention of the thief being baptized at any time, we cannot seriously consider the first response as being valid. In the case of the second issue, the problem is that if water baptism by immersion is necessary for salvation, then it is not possible for the thief to have been saved without it. Otherwise, it isn’t necessary. So, saying that he would have gotten baptized contradicts the position that water baptism is necessary for salvation. The third option is simply not correct. The thief died under the new covenant.

Denial of God’s election and predestination, which places salvation in their hands, not God’s

I am not exactly sure why those who hold to baptismal regeneration also deny God’s election and predestination. I don’t see a direct connection, so I can only speculate. Perhaps it is because since they place salvation in part in their own hands through the combination of God’s grace and participating in a baptismal ceremony, then they might hold to the idea of salvation being dependent on their choice in their actions.

Since God’s election and predestination go against the idea that a person’s salvation is dependent upon their own choice and their own actions, that I could see why they would deny these Biblical teachings.

Election means to be chosen.  God also predestines.

  • Eph. 1:4-5, “just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love 5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will.” Acts 9:15, “But the Lord said to him, ‘Go, for he [Paul] is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel.’
  • Rom. 11:7, “What then? That which Israel is seeking for, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened.”
  • Col. 3:12, “And so, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.”
  • Rom. 8:29-30, “For whom he foreknew, he also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; and whom He predestined, th, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.”

As you can see from God’s word, God chooses and predestines people for salvation. I cannot argue with God’s word. If that’s what it says, then that’s what it says.

Denial of Eternal Security, because salvation is obtained by faith and something they do

I understand that there are different views on this position. Can Christians lose their salvation, or can we not? If you affirm that we can lose our salvation, I hope you would still consider reading the rest of this paper as well as consider the words of Christ in John 6:37-40. And, just to be sure, I am not saying that those who deny eternal security are not Christians. I am doing is saying that those who hold to baptismal regeneration universally, in my experience, also deny that we are secure in Christ.

I assume that this is because they hold to salvation by the grace of God and their participation in the baptismal ceremony. For them, salvation is attained by God’s grace and what they do in baptism. Salvation is due in part to their decision to be baptized. Since it is based on their decision to be baptized, this means that they can withhold salvation from themselves by what they don’t do. Therefore, it would seem logical to say that they obtain salvation by their choice of participating in the baptismal ceremony. So, since they obtain salvation by the grace of God along with their choice to participate in the baptismal ceremony, it is possible for them to reject God’s grace by what they do as well.

Conclusion

Heresy is never by itself. One error begets another. Those who hold to baptismal regeneration do not do so in a vacuum. They hold to other errors as well in order to further support their false teaching. My experience has been that they consistently also deny many other doctrines such as original sin, total depravity, federal headship, the covenantal aspect of Christ’s redemptive work in relationship to the thief on the cross, God’s election, predestination, and eternal security.

I can only hope and pray that those who believe in salvation by God’s grace and the baptismal ceremony would repent and come to faith in Christ.

SUPPORT CARM

Thank you for your interest in supporting CARM. We greatly appreciate your consideration!

SCHOOLS USER LOGIN

If you have any issues, please call the office at 385-246-1048 or email us at [email protected].

MATT SLICK LIVE RADIO

Call in with your questions at:

877-207-2276

3-4 p.m. PST; 4-5 p.m. MST;
6-7 p.m. EST

You May Also Like…