2002 Issue 1 - Is Baptismal Regeneration Being Taught in the Reformed Community? - Counsel of Chalcedon

8/12/2019 2002 Issue 1 - Is Baptismal Regeneration Being Taught in the Reformed Community? - Counsel of Chalcedon

1/9

Is Baptismal

Regeneration

Being Taught in the

Reformed Community?

Mark D. Anthony,

Sr

1

Editor s

Note: The author

addresses here the

specific

substance

o ust one man s recent teaching. There

are,

however, several men

who are

teaching similar

views

within the

riformed community.

This group,

recognizable l Y its inclusion o doctrinal innovations

such as the

New

Perspective

on

Paul and Norman

Shepherd s Covenant Consciousness, have embraced

a

orm

o

baptismal regeneration. These men

mqy

not argue for t in exactlY the same wqy as

does

Steve

Wilkins,

with whose

teaching

this

arlicle

deals

specificallY, but their teachings

are

substantiallY in

agreement.

A

t the

Auburn

Avenue Pastor's

Conference

in

January of this year,

PCA

Pastor Steve Wilkins' announced

in his lecture The Legary o

the

Halfwqy Covenant,

...

reading the Bible this way,

and in

this sense,

we can speak of baptismal regeneration.,,2

What exactly did he mean when he used the

term baptismal regeneration? What did he

mean when he said reading the Bible this way,

and in this sense? He went

on

to clarify the

sense

in

which he was referring to baptismal

regeneration when he said, What I mean is

that

baptism unites us to Christ,

and

thus gives

us new life.

Meaning it this way and in this sense, his

statement approachs the

Roman

Catholic

doctrine of baptismal regeneration, which has

always been viewed as an aberrant teaching by

the Reformed churches because

of

its effect

of diminishing a cornerstone of Reformed

doctrine, justification by faith alone. The

Roman Catholic church teaches:

The sacrament [of baptism] is the door

of the Church

of

Christ and the entrance

into new life. We are reborn from the

state

of

slaves

of

sin into the freedom

of

the sons of God. Baptism incorporates

us into Christ's mystical body and makes

us partakers

of

all the privileges flowing

from the redemptive act of the Church's

Divine Founder.3

In contrast to Rome, the Westminster

Confession teaches:

Baptism is a sacrament of the New

Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,

not

only for the solemn admission of the

party baptized into the visible church,

but also to

be unto

him a sign and seal

of the covenant

of

grace,

of

his ingrafting

into Christ, of regeneration, of remission

of sins, and of his giving up

unto God

through Jesus Christ; to walk in newness

of life: which sacrament is, by Christ's

own appointment, to be continued in his

church until the end of the world. (WCF

XXVIII: I)

In

order to understand what the

Confession means in teaching that the

baptized are admitted into the visible

church, we read:

The catholick or universal church, which

is invisible, consists of the whole number

of the elect that have been, are, or shall be

gathered into one, under Christ the

head

thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the

fullness

of

them that filleth

all

in

all

(WCF

XXV:I)

The

visible church, which is also catholick

or

universal under the gospel,

not

confined

to one nation, as before under the law

consists of all those throughout the world

that

profess the true religion, together with

the COUNSEL o CH LCEDON

29


2/9

Is Baptismal Regeneration Being Taught

in

the Reformed Community?

their children; and is the kingdom of

the

Lord

J ~ u s Christ, the

house and

family of God,

out of which there is

no

ordinary possibility

of salvation. (WCF XXV:II)

The key differences between the Roman and

the

Reformed

views

of

baptism

are related

not

so

much s to what it

represents (its significance)

s

to what

it does (its efficacy).

Rome

teaches

that

baptism is

not

merely a sign and seal of union

with Christ,

but that

it is

the

means by which

the

Holy Spirit actually effects union with Christ,

engrafting its recipients

into the body

of Christ

(and thus into Christ Himself), and procuring for

them

all the privileges of that union, including

purification from

both

the stain and guilt of

sin.

For

Rome,

the

significance

of

baptism

is

its

effect.

The

Biblical

and Reformed

teaching

is

that

baptism signifies and seals these things, but

that

it

does not effect them.

Union and

purification

do

not

ordinarily happen at y, or throttgh baptism;

rather, baptism

signifies

and

seals the reality

of

union and

purification

whether

they already exist

or

are yet to exist.

It

is God, not man nor the act of

baptism itself, Who signifies

and

seals the reality

of His promise and work in

the

life of the elect

baptized. For the Reformed, the significance and

efficacy of

baptism

is

that

it is

God's

testimony

to and seal upon

the

reality

and

security of the

grace which He bestows in accordance with the

provisions of the

covenant

of grace. And this

grace is nothing less than union with the three

persons of

the Godhead

... 4 The Reformation

teaches

that

baptism,

s the point

of initiation

into

the

visible

church

and all its privileges, is

the

outward

or

visible sign

and

seal

of

that

which

the

Holy

Spirit accomplishes inwardly or invisibly

through

grace by faith alone, namely union with

Christ, purifying

from

the pollution of sin by

regeneration of

the

Spirit, and purifying from

the

guilt of sin by

the blood of

Christ. 5

Mr. Wilkins, like Rome, teaches

that

baptism

is the point of entrance into

the

church, the

3 0

the COUNSEL

o

CH LCEDON

actual

body

of Christ. To

be

fair, we

note that

Mr. Wilkins asserts at one

point in

his talk,

We

don't have to embrace Romanism. In fact, I

hope

you never will.

It's

a heresy, wrong, they are

mistaken. Mr. Wilkins obviously repudiates

the

complex

Roman

sacramental system. However,

on the

question

of

the efficacy

and purpose

of

baptism itself,

in

spite of his assertions to the

contrary, his teachings

amount

to

the

Romish

doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration and, as we

shall see, lead inevitably to a reformulation of the

Reformed doctrines of the perseverance of the

saints and justification by faith alone.

Mr. \Vilkins' lecture centers on

the

halfway

covenant. He uses this

term

to refer to a change

which he

asserts occurred

in

Reformed

churches

after the

Great

Awakening. This change,

in

his

view, consisted in the Reformed churches placing

inordinate importance

on

individual conversion.

As a result, Mr. Wilkins says, Reformed churches

began

not to regard baptized children

s

truly

in

the

covenant

until and unless they

demonstrated

a conversion experience. As Mr. Wilkins attests:

There

are many, many problems here.

But

I only want to focus on one which I think

perhaps is

the

central one. They completely

ignored the significance of baptism and

consequently misunderstood the nature of

salvation. Baptism was drained of all its

scriptural significance. And the Biblical

teaching of salvation coming to us by our

union

with

Christ was

lost

in its true sense.

Infant

baptism to

the

New England Puritans and to

most of their heirs in

modern

Protestantism

and

Presbyterianism is

nothing more and

was

nothing more than

a

wet

dedication

service.

That's

all

it

was.

It

did

nothing

for

the child.

It

did nothing

more than

bring the

child

into

what they called an ecclesiastical

covenant

which

was mereb symbolic and actt/alb

accomplished /lothing This is contrary

to the

scriptures. (Emphasis mine).


3/9

Is Baptismal Regeneration Being Taught in the Reformed Community?

While the accuracy of this view of church

history is itself suspect in some ways, we will

restrict this article to an examination ofMr. Wilkins

doctrinal conclusions and assertions.

In

contrast

with this halfway covenant wherein children of

believers are baptized

but not

yet admitted to the

Lord's

Table,

not

yet treated

as

elect,

and

not

yet

accepted

as

full members of Christ's church until

after a' conversion experience, Mr. Wilkins puts

forth what he proposes

as

the correct view, the

full covenant. He tells us that we must understand

that the Bible teaches us that baptism unites us

to Christ and to his body by the power of the

spirit. He interprets Paul as saying

in

Galatians

3:27 that at baptism, you are clothed with Christ

Jesus .... Union with Christ is a real, vital, blessed

union.

The

clothes make the man.

body the church. What efficacy attaches to

this observable action?

It is apparent that as a sign or seal it should

not

be identified with that which is signified

and sealed.

That

which signifies is

not

the

thing signified

and

that which seals is

not

the

thing sealed.

The

sign

or

seal presupposes

the existence of that which is signified or

sealed. Hence baptism is the sign and seal

of

a spiritual reality which

is

conceived of as

existing. Where that reality is absent the sign

or seal has no efficacy.

Equally pertinent is the observation that the

sign

With our

union with Christ, we have

all spiritual blessings. Mr. Wilkins

is

here saying that this union is effected

at baptism, and says elsewhere in his

talk that our death and resurrection

with Christ are effected through

...reading the

Bible

in

this way and in

this sense, we

can

or seal does

not

bring into existence

that which is signified

or

sealed.

It

does not effect union with Christ.

In

other words, baptism does

not

conveyor confer the grace which it

signifies ....

speak

of baptismal

God condescends to our weakness.

He not

only unites His people to

Christ but He also advertises that

baptism.

regeneration.

Steve

ilkins

Of course these verses do

not

teach that anything happens at or

through baptism. By interpreting them this way

Mr. Wilkins fails to understand the sacramental

language of the Bible.

6

As the Confession

teaches,

There is in every sacrament a spiritual

relation,

or

sacramental union, .between. the

sign and the thing signified: whence it comes to

pass, that the names and effects of the one are

attributed to the other. (WCF XXVII, II).

John

Murray makes the point:

The

rite of baptism consists in washing with

water in the name of the Father, and of the

Son, and

of

the Holy. Ghost.

It

involves,

therefore, the use of a visible element and

observable action. The meaning

of

this

washing with water is that it signifies and

seals a spiritual fact or relationship, namely,

union with Christ and membership in his

great truth by an ordinance which

portrays visibly to our senses the

reality

of

this grace.

It

is a testimony which

God

has been pleased to give to us so that we

may the better understand the high privilege

of union with the Father and the Son and the

Holy Spirit. This is the purpose

of

baptism

as a sign As seal it authenticates, confirms,

guarantees the reality and security of this

covenant grace.

7

Now, pack to Mr. Wilkins. By interpreting

Gal. 3:27

in

this way, Mr. Wilkins is introducting

the view that baptism

must

be viewed as the

entrance into the body of Christ, as opposed to

the halfway covenant, where entrance

is

gained

with a conversion experience. Recognizing

that

this is beginning to sound a little bit too

much like Rome, he adds they [peter and Paul]

are .not thinking like Roman Catholics. They are

IheCOUNSELofCH LCEDON

31


4/9


n


thinking like Christians who believe the Bible,

that the church is the body of Christ. However,

he then goes

on

to say

if

you are

not

in the body

of Christ, if you are not united to him, you are

lost. There

is

no salvation outside

of

Christ.

As a result

of

our

being

in Him,

and

receiving at

baptism

the promise

of God

through

the faithfulness

of

His Son, Mr. Wilkins next

teaches us that we are made recipients, then,

of ll that is His. And what is all that is His?

Mr. Wilkins answers

the

grace of God, grace

and truth. So, by this formulation,

the

grace of

God

is received at baptism We have the grace

of Christ, he says.

I f

we have it, we will be

enabled to live

s He

lived, denying ungodliness,

but only from a straw-man version. While

it

is a popularly held misconception

that

Rome

teaches that the application of the water magically

causes an ontological change

in

the recipient, it

is instructive to note that Rome in fact teaches

something different, something much more like

what

Mr. Wilkins asserts. Rather than teaching

that

baptismal regeneration is related to the rite

itself

or

to saying the right words

or

to some

mystical act performed by sanctified water, the

Roman Catholic catechism teaches instead:

God has bound salvation to the sacrament

of Baptism, but

He

himself

is

not

bound

by

his sacraments.... The Church has always

held the firm conviction that those who

suffer death for the sake

of

theiving soberly, and righteously

and godly in this present world,

confident that nothing can

separate us from His love.

Mr. Wilkins continues,

Children

are

joined

to Christ

by

their

baptisms

and must be

viewed and

treated

in

the

light of this reality.

faith without having received

Baptism are baptized by their

death for and with Christ. This

Baptism of blood, like the desire

for Baptism, brings about the

fruits of Baptism without being

numerating all that

it

means,

for him, to be in Christ y

Steve

ilkins

baptism Among a number

of things secured by

our

baptismal union

with Christ, he lists salvation, resurrection,

reconciliation, the love of God, sanctification,

wisdom, confidence, boldness, and answers to

our prayers.

He summarizes by saying,

In

him,

we have righteousness and are justified, we are

saved by his faithfulness. Mr. Wilkins errs in

asserting that recipients receive these benefits at

baptism

I t is in this context that we return

to

our

introductory quote of Mr. Wilkins where he

says,

And

you see reading the Bible

in

this

way and in this sense we can speak of baptismal

regeneration. To be fair, he goes on to say,

Not

in

the sense that there is some mystical

power in the water of baptism that automatically

transforms

men

if the water has been sufficiently

sanctified

...

nor is it saying that

God is bound

to

the water of bapt ism. Mr. Wilkins does seem

to be attempting to distance himself from Rome,

32

the COUNSEL

of

CH LCEDON

a sacrament

....

For catechumens

who die before their Baptism, their explicit

desire to receive it, together with repentance

for their sins, and charity, assures

them

the

salvation that they were not able to receive

through the sacrament. (Catholic Catechism,

Section II, Chap. I, Art. I, VI, The Necessity

of Baptism).

Thus, Mr. Wilkins is not alone in teaching that

there is

no

mystical power in the water and that

God is

not

bound by baptism.

Having failed to distinguish himself from

Rome,

he

continues:

What

I mean by this is we

can speak of it in the sense that by the blessing

of the Spirit, baptism unites us to Christ and his

church and

thus

in Him

gives us new life. By

common rules of grammar, we can legitimately

shor ten this sentence to, Baptism gives us new

life. And, Mr. Wilkins adds, by our baptism we

have been reborn,

in

this sense. Having died with

Christ, we have been raised with Him.


5/9


As if to wipe away any remaining doubt, he

declares:

Christ's baptism

meant that

the old things

were passed, the sin

and

the curse

of

the

law had passed away

and

all things had

become new.

The

same

is

true for

ll

who

are baptized.

You

die to the old covenant

relationship to the world, you are resurrected

to a newness

of

life. (Emphasis mine.)

As a result, Mr. Wilkins interprets Paul to be

saying live like your are

be what

you are

...

you

have been buried with

Him in

baptism, you have

been

raised now with Him, you have

been

united

to Christ, therefore, you are dead to sin. Don t

live

in

it anymore. As a further example, Mr.

Wilkins asserts, thus Jesus connects the new

birth with baptism. You see, for this reason,

you are

born of

water and

of

the spirit,

He

says

to Nicodemus

....

so

that the

water of baptism

and

the

work of

the Spirit are combined by

our

Savior. And, says Mr. Wilkins, Paul does the

same thing in

Titus 3:5

... and

Peter

then

goes on

and makes this blunt statement, 'so baptism

now

saves you,'

he

says ... comes right

out

.. says it.

Mr. Wilkins continues:

In I Peter 3, there is now an antitype which

saves us, baptism.

And then he

[peter] says,

Now

come on, not real, not just mere baptism,

not

water by itself, but by the resurrection of

Christ, it [baptism] saves us.

Not

the removal

of the filth

of

the flesh,

but

the answer of a

good conscience toward God through the

resurrection of Jesus Christ,

who

has gone

into heaven and is at the right

hand of God,

angels and authorities

and

power having been

made subject to Him.

And

you are

now in

Him

by virtue of baptism. Therefore, I will

just go ahead and say it,' Peter says, 'baptism

now

saves you.'

Now you see,

if our

system can't

accommodate Biblical language, we don t

throw

out the Bible, we change

our

system,

we have to modify the system. We don t

have to embrace Romanism. In fact, I

hope

you never will. It' s a heresy, wrong, they are

mistaken. But you have to embrace the Bible.

You

have to ask the question, All right what

does Peter mean?

And here,

in

his interpretation of what Peter

means, Mr. Wilkins summarizes his reformulation

of the Reformed view of baptism, its efficacy, and

how to view baptized covenant children:

Now, you see, given this perspective, there is

no

presumption necessary

when

it comes to

baptized people. Traditionally, the reformed

have said, we have to view

our

children

as presumptively elect or presumptively

regenerate and, therefore, Christian. f we

are willing to take the scriptures at face value

there is

no

presumption necessary. Just take

the Bible. And this is true, of course, because

by the baptism,

f y baptism

the Spirit joins us

to Christ since he is the elect one and the

Church

is

the elect people, we are joined to

his body. We therefore are elect. Since he is the

justified one,

we are justified in

him. Since

he

is

the beloved one, we are beloved in him. Since

he

was saved from sin in death

...

so are we.

(Emphases mine.)

This view, you see, solves many, a great

many

of

the problems that

we

have faced

in

the history

of

the church. The Half-Way

Covenant is completely unnecessary and

absolutely wrongheaded. Children are joined

to Christ by their baptisms and

must

be

viewed

and

treated

in the

light

of

this reality.

If

as

Mr. Wilkins is teaching, we are joined to

Christ at baptism

and

baptism effects

our

passage

into new life and

our

engrafting into Christ, then

what

is

our

assurance of remaining

in

Christ?

Credit

must

be given to Mr. Wilkins at this

point

for being completely faithful to the inevitable

the

COUNSEL

of CH LCEDON 33


6/9


results of

what he

s teaching. He puts it forth

this way: f hose who are in Christ do depart

from the way

of

obedience and fail

to

respond

to the loving admonition of the church, then

we will with great grief cut

them off

from Christ

and excommunication means that they are cut

off

from salvation.

He

continues later, saying

by acknowledging the momentous significance

of

baptism, the discipline

of

the church is

greatly strengthened. Covenant children must

understand plainly that salvation

s

in Christ

...

It s covenant, it is union with Christ.

You

depart

from Him, you don't have it. Mr. Wilkins is

not

here merely repeating the Reformed and Biblical

understanding that rejection of Christ amounts

to a testimony that a person never was engrafted

and

was never really

in

Christ.

He

is saying

something completely different. In his own

words:

It's a real relationship that we have and t

demands

perseverance to survive, just like any

relationship. .. f y u are not faithful to love

and honor and obey God, your relationship

will die.

Does that

mean

there was

no

real relationship? No, y u were rea4 y u were

unfaithful

and

y u

lost

what

y u

had.

The

kingdom will be taken from you if

y u

are unfaithful. That's the language

that Jesus uses to the unfaithful covenant

breaking apostatizing Jews and

it s

true still

to covenant people who apostatize, since the

kingdom belongs

to

Christ and no one who

s

estranged from Him can be in it. (Emphases

mine.)

Clearly, Mr. Wilkins is teaching that

perseverance in the covenant relies

on

obedience.

And he s teaching that those who fail to

persevere, who are

realfy

in Christ, can, through

unfaithfulness, realfy be put out of Christ. Rather

than resting in Christ, the covenant member is

left to rest in the works of man, maintaining

his relationship with God through obedience.

34

the

COUNSEL ofCH LCEDON

Where then is our assurance? In man, rather

than in Christ. This teaching strikes at the heart

of

the Gospel and at the heart of the Reformed

faith, diminishing the key Reformed doctrine

of

justification by faith alone.

Mr. Wilkins' reformulations

of

the doctrines

of

baptism, the perseverance of the saints, and

justification by faith alone, can be summarized

this way:

The Reformed churches have created a

halfway covenant that results in people

only being partially admitted to the church

until and unless they are converted. This

s unbiblical and is the result

of

a failure to

understand

the

significance

of

baptism and

the nature of salvation. Because of this,

the

biblical teaching of salvation coming

to us by our union with Christ was lost in

its true sense. We need to understand that

through baptism we are united with Christ

and therefore salvation has come to us and

we are to be fully admitted to the covenant,

both to its blessings and to its conditions,

requirements, and curses. f we are faithfully

obedient to

our

covenant membership, then

we will persevere and ultimately be justified.

f we are

not

faithful, we will be cut off from

the covenant though excommunication. Thus

the covenant and the discipline

of

the church

are strengthened.

Understanding Mr. Wilkins' perspective,

just-ification has

now

become a process that s

not completed until we stand before the Lord at

judgment, and can therefore never be considered

an accomplished fact

in

which we may place

our

trust in

this life.

Mr. Wilkins attacks Reformed churches for

ignoring

the

significance of baptism, draining

baptism

of

all its scriptural significance,

and

losing the Biblical teaching

of

salvation

coming

to

us by our union with Christ. As


7/9


in


we have already demonstrated in quotations

from the Westminster Confession

and

from

John Murray, this is

not

the case. Mr. Wilkins

teaches

that

Reformed Christians are looking

for

some

dramatic conversion experience in

their children, which

he hopes

they never see,

but that

they see their children simply

grown

up

believing. However,

the

Reformed Christians of

whom we are aware have always prayed

that

their

baptized children would never know a time when

they did

not

know and love Jesus

as

their savior.

How

is the desire to shepherd one's children into

a credible and self-conscious confession of the

LordJesus equivalent to a desire to see

a

dramatic

conversion experience?

He

creates a picture

of

Reformed brethren which, if it were true, would

be

sinful

and

wrong. However, the picture

he

paints is that

of

some group

of

Reformed people

of

which we are

not

aware, and

which would

be,

in any case, a conspicuously 11 11 Reformed group.

Such a church would benefit

more from

becoming

Reformed than from Mr. Wilkins' teachings. The

choice isn't between

poorly Reformed

and Mr.

Wilkins' teachings,

it

is between truly Reformed

doctrine and

reformulated

doctrine.

Mr. Wilkins further critiques Reformed

theologians for creating, in the past, more

and more steps in

the process of salvation,

breaking down something simple into something

unnecessarily complex via greek or hellenic

thinking. Mr. Wilkins is correct that salvation

must not be broken down into

steps

which

are

not

Biblically warranted and he offers several

examples of this. However,

he

fails to recognize

that there is Biblical warrant for observing the

application of salvation as a number of acts.

John Murray says it best:

When

we

think of

the

application of

redemption, we must not think

of

it as one

simple

and

indivisible act. t comprises a

series

of

acts

and

processes.

To

mention

some, we have calling, regeneration,

justification, adoption, sanctification,

glorification.

These

are all distinct,

and

not

one of

these can be defined

in

terms

of

the

other. Each has its own distinct meaning,

function,

and

purpose in the action and grace

of

God.

God

is

not

the

author

of confusion

and therefore he is the author

of

order. There

the COUNSEL o CH LCEDON 5


8/9


are

good

and conclusive reasons for thinking

that the various actions of the application

of redemption, some of which have been

mentiohed, take place

in

a certain order,

and

that order has been established by divine

appointment, wisdom, and grace.

8

Furthermore, Mr. Wilkins' approach does

more than merely avoid unbiblical separation

and abstraction of concepts; it blurs biblical and

necessary distinctions, especially

that

between

faith and works. R.C. Sproul, Sr. writes:

One of

the

most important

theological

distinctions we

must

make if we are to

achieve precision

of

formulation and clarity

of confession is the distinction between

distinction itself

and

separation .

Itis

one

thing to distinguish

one

thing from another,

quite another thing to separate them. We can

distinguish

body and

soul without separating

them; we can distinguish the two natures of

Christ without separating them. In the case

of

the latter to fail to distinguish would yield

the monophysite heresy and to go beyond

distinction to separation would yield the

Nestorian heresy. --Thus we must distinguish

but not separate the two natures. A point

Luther and his followers were never able

to grasp about the Christological aspect of

Calvin's view of the Lord' s Supper.) I think

t

is safe to say

that

a

host of

heresies

in

the

history

of

the Church have

been rooted in

the

failure to differentiate between a distinction

and a separation.

9

In teaching the necessity

of

faithful obedience

for the maintaining

of

covenant status, Mr. Wilkins

seems

to be

reacting to easy believism.

He

asserts

that

the Reformed community'S teaching

regarding justification by faith alone encourages

Christians to treat salvation as if it is a token they

can carry around

in

their pockets

to

remind them

they're saved, even if they're living hellaciously.

On this point, once again, the Reformed faith is

36 the COUNSEL

of

CH LCEDON

in

need of no revision.

John

Murray responds,

with words written

half

a century ago:

t

is

an

old and time-worn objection that

this doctrine (of justification by faith alone)

ministers to licence

and

looseness. Only

those

who

know

not

the power

of

the gospel

will plead such misconception. Justification

is by faith alone,

but no

by a faith

that

is

alone. Justification is not all that is embraced

in

the gospel

of

redeeming grace. Christ is

a complete Saviour and it is not justification

alone that the believing sinner possesses

in

him. And faith is

not

the only response

in

the heart of him who has entrusted himself to

Christ for salvation. Faith alone justifies but

a justified person with faith alone would be a

monstrosity which never exists

in the

kingdom

of

grace. Faith works itself

out

through love

cf.

Gal. 5:6).

And

faith without works is

dead cf. James 2:17-20). It is living faith that

justifies and living faith unites to Christ both

in the virtue of his death and in the power

of

his resurrection. No one has entrusted

himself

to

Christ for deliverance from the

guilt of sin who has

not

also entrusted himself

to him for deliverance from the power of sin:

What

shall we say then? Shall we continue

in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid.

How

shall we, that are dead to sin, live any

longer therein? (Rom.

6:1,2).10

Mr. Wilkins,

in

his lecture, attacks a straw

man version of the Reformed church, separates

himself from a straw-man version of the Roman

Catholic church and,

in

doing so, reformulates

doctrines which are at

the

heart of the gospel. Is

baptismal regeneration being taught within the

reformed community? Without doubt, it is.

Significant research was contributed to this article by

Matthew Alexander Bryan.

2 All quotes of Steve Wilkins in this paper are from


9/9


his lecture

The

Legacy

of the

Halfway Covenant

referenced

in

the opening paragraph. Audio versions of

the lecture are available from Mr. Wilkins' church http:

/ /www.auburnavenue.org/, or it can be downloaded from

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sermonID

=7602195353.

3 From the Catholic Encyclopedia entry for Baptism

on

www.newadvent.com

(http://www.newadvent.org/

cathen/02258b.htm).

4 John Murray,

Christiat Baptistll,

(philadelphia,

Pennsylvania,

The

Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing

Company, 1962) 90.

5 Ibid., 89.

6Joe Morecraft, III, Justification by Faith Alone:

The

Heart of

the

Gospel of

God; n Exposition

of

Galatians

2:15-3:14

in

The

Nell

SOllthem

Presf:yteriall

Review,

(Cumming, Georgia, Chalcedon Presbyterian Church,

Summer, 2002), footnote 26, pp. 84-85.

7 John

Murray,

Christiall Baptislll,

(philadelphia,

Pennsylvania, The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing

Company, 1962) 86-87.

8

John

Murray,

Redemptioll Accomplished

alldApplied,

(Grand Rapids, Michigan, Wm. B.

Eerdman's

Publishing

Company, 1955) 131.

9

RC. Sproul, Sr. to

Dr.

O. Palmer

Robertson

and Paul

Settle, December 12, 1979, in a letter written during the

Justification Controversy regarding

Norman

Shepherd's

teachings

at

Westmins ter Theological Seminary.

The

letter

was obtained from the

PCA

Historical Center

at

Covenant

Theological Seminary in St. Louis, Missouri where it is

housed

in

their Justification Controversy collection.

The

PCA

Historical Center web address is http:/ /

www.pcanet.org/history.

1

Ibid., 79, 80.

New eneva Radio

Listen

to

Joe

Morecraft

Greg

Bahnsen, R.c. Sproul, Jr., and

many

others on

New

Geneva

Radio, an internet radio

station.

NGR offers programming

for

your edification education

and entertainment. We strive

to present a variety of material

with 1

Corinthians 10:31

in

mind: ...whatever

you

do, do all

to the glory of God.

(NKJV)

On New Geneva Radio,

you ll hear ..

worship

services

sermons

lectures

psalms, hymns

and spiritual songs

discussions

commentary

readings

and much more ...

www.NewGenevaRadio.com

the COUNSEL o CH LCEDON 37

Documents

2002 Issue 1 - Is Baptismal Regeneration Being Taught in the Reformed Community? - Counsel of Chalcedon