Who are the teachers of Baptismal Regeneration?

They Are Now Divided Among Themselves

Read also:

• Is Water Baptism Necessary For Salvation?
• Baptism - Immersion or Sprinkling, Does It Matter?
• Baptizing for The Dead

You may also like to read:

• Baptismal Regeneration By J. H. Todd

 

Creating Jargons To Create Air of Special Knowledge

One thing I have noticed about human organizations’ effort at making themselves special, is the skill at creating a niche by inventing special words and phrases.   We can call it jargons – special terms, with special meanings which you must accept in order to qualified or accepted as a member, to be recognized that you are separate from others.  You never see Jesus doing that, neither his apostles.  And so we see this in religious groups, and we see this also with professional bodies.  Auditors create their own special terms, lawyers have their collection of Latin words, doctors choose to use Greek, and so on.  I have digressed.

Baptismal regeneration is one such term.  When I wrote that piece earlier on about the false doctrine of “must baptize”, I did not know that they have already created this sophisticated-sounding term for it.  It means being regenerated again through water baptism. 

I say, how did these theologians come up with the idea that dunking a person into water, or sprinkling water on him can regenerate him?  When they were studying for their degrees, did they not learn that it is the spirit that quickens, not the water?  So much for theologians; but still, I do not write them off totally.  I can still learn a thing or two from them always,  either from the positive or negative perspective.  But then, I also learn much from people who do not have degrees.  You will be amazed by the wisdom of some of the Orang Asli tribals in the jungle, who have not even gone past Standard One in school. So much for theologians.

The Original Teachers of Baptismal Regeneration

Now, which are the churches that insist on this false doctrine?  The Roman Catholic church ( which I consider as somewhere between pagan and fringe ) apparently is the inventor of this doctrine. 

The Eastern Orthodox churches, from which the Roman Catholic church sprung out of ( they love to deny this!) also holds to this heresy.  And to this list you can also add the Oriental Orthodoxy and the Assyrian Church of the East.  Maybe the Roman Catholics are not the inventors of this heresy, but the Orthodox?  I guess more research may be needed, but it is of no essential importance to know, anyway.

Martin Luther taught this doctrine ( Martin Luther was no more in Roman Catholicism, but Roman Catholicism was still inside of him ).  However, Martin Luther appeared to have 2^nd thoughts about what he taught, because article 251 in Luther’s Small Catechism does state that water baptism may not be absolutely necessary.  Here again, I would like to point out that he deceptively wrote 2 contradictory stands, in his effort to put his feet on both sides.   I find false teachers, people like Joseph Prince, Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, the once-saved-forever-saved bunch,  and the likes often using this trick. Very slick.  You quote that part that suits the hearer, or when challenged on one, you can get out of it by moderating your position with the other stand.  Slick. Read how Martin Luther does it for yourself:

 

What Luther wrote:	What you should notice:
What does Baptism give or profit?— Answer. It works forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.	Here, he says that baptism gives eternal salvation to all who believe, does he not?
How can water do such great things?— Answer.  It is not the water indeed that does them, but the word of God which is in and with the water, and faith, which trusts such word of God in the water. For without the word of God the water is simple water and no baptism.	Now, here you find him saying somewhat the opposite of the above.  This is what I call deception. This way, when he is challenged on the above, he qualifies himself with this part.  If not challenged, the above becomes the rule.

 Abstracted from Luther’s Small Catechism

 

 

So too, the Anglican church ( Remember that the Anglicans came out of Roman Catholic church NOT because of any disagreement with doctrines, but because of political power, money and control ), and John Wesley, founder of the Methodist church also taught this heresy.  See The Works of John Wesley, Volume:10 Page:192  Wesley had come out of the Anglicans, which kept its Catholic habits for a long, long time, and still do.  Just look at some of their liturgies, priestly garb, candles and religious rituals event today!  But it might appear that the Methodist church today no longer agree with their founding father on this matter.

However, it must be said there factions in these church which have recognized that the teaching is wrong.  And so, we also have Lutheran, Methodist and Anglican churches that no longer believe in baptismal regeneration.  Hello! Both cannot be right! Wakey! Wakey!

Other Later Teachers

There are also cults, and fringe Christian groups that subscribe to this heresy.  Among them are the United Pentecostals ( which operates outside of the main Pentecostal movement ), the Mormons ( a very established cult, very respectable and often mistakenly accepted as Christian by the media and government bodies ).  It is known  that another fringe group, The Church of Christ International have also picked up on this teaching.

Conclusion

Now, do you know why the bible has put all those warnings in the New Testament against false teachers, false doctrines, doctrines of demons, vain philosophies of man, fables, etc, etc?   Or have you been comfortably ignoring those warnings?  Have you been thinking that the warnings were put in there to fill up the pages so that the bible can look fatter and better? 

It is about obedience, not salvation

Or have you already become numbed to discomforts and doubts of contradictory teachings in the churches, that you just choose to believe what you want to believe?  In which case, what you prefer is blind faith which is not true faith.

The truth is this: it is important to be baptized as a mark of obedience to the command of Jesus to be baptized; not that baptism by itself saves.  One is saved by belief, and the moment one believes, one is saved.  The moment one loses that belief, one loses his salvation ( and forget that crock teaching that says that a believer cannot lose his salvation.  Judas was lost, and he was even a apostle with anointing to do miracles ).

Jesus says in John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free."