PTSJ 1.1

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ptsj-11 1/24

Providence TheologicalSeminary JournalA Herald of New Covenant Theology

InLoving Memory

of Jackson &Barbara Boyett,

andCharles Sild

– ISSUE 1 – NOVEMBER 2014 –

– 1 Corinthians 15:58 –“...be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord” (NASB).

Inside This Issue:Why PTSJ? by Gary D. Long..................................

Historical Foreunners of New Covenant Theology (I) by Zachary S. Maxcey.......................

Baptism: the Pledge ofMembership in the NC by Jackson Boyett..............................

The Doctrine of Salvation (I) by William W. Sasser........................

....

....

....

.1

Important News & Events:Council on Biblical Theology, July 20-23, 2015 in Franklin, TN

New PTS Blog Series: “The Fundamentals of NCT”

Special SKYPE Classes for Groups: (Limited Availability)

The Trinity : 10 January – March 7, 201Islam : March 14 – May 9, 2015

Contact Us:Providence Theological Seminary

6720 Wild Indigo DriveColorado Springs, CO 80923

E-mail: [email protected]

PTS Website:http://www.ptsco.org/

PTS Blog Site:http://nct-blog.ptsco.org/

– NEW COVENAN HEOLOGY – A HEOLOGY OF FULFILLMEN –

Why ProvidenceTheological Seminary

Journal? by Gary D. Long

It has often been said by Baptiststhat the sixteenth-century ProtestantReformation was good in so far as it went,but that it was never completed. TheParticular Baptists of England and theirtheological successors have attempted tocomplete the Reformation through theoutworking of a Christ-centered emphasisupon the nature of the Church, which isChrist’s spiritual body expressed throughbaptism of believers only. This journal(PTSJ) is an attempt to help establish abiblical hermeneutic that will, in the spirit

of Aquila and Priscilla’s dealing withApollos (Acts 18:24-26), explain the wayof God more accurately than that found inthe theological systems of Covenant The-ology (CT) and Dispensational Theology(DT). The driving motive is “ Back to theBible .” The establishment of a better bibli-cal hermeneutic is what this journal andthe developing theological system of NewCovenant Theology (NCT) is about. Themajor objective of NCT is that itshermeneutic will help reform and bringdoctrinal unity in this sin-wrecked world

by helping to break down the middlewalls of doctrinal partition that existwithin and between CT and DT. The timehas now come to bring about thecompletion of the Reformation bytrumpeting yet again, sola Scriptura .

This reform, if it is to come about,must come from the development of thediscipline of biblical theology which hasthe theology of the Bible as its object.Such an approach stems from theteachings of the Bible itself rather than

systems of theology which are or professto be in accord with the Bible. It is in thislatter sense that the Christian Church hasgone astray to the degree that its systemsare not based upon the Bible itself.

The dif iculty with biblical theologylies in the fact that the Christian Churchhas continually made closed systemsout of theology when the Bible doesnot fully support any such humanly-developed closed system. Biblicaltheology, however, teaches that Christis the center of salvation history. Anysystem of theology, therefore, which doesnot base its method of interpretationupon Christ as the theological center ofhistory will not be as biblical as it shouldbe. But, since the prophetic Scriptureshave their ful ilment in the person andwork of Christ, biblical theology musttake as its starting point a Christ-centered interpretation of the Bible, inboth the Old and New Testaments. Itmust be based upon the way in which theNew Testament interprets the Old. Theprinciple of interpretation that therisen Christ sets forth in the gospel ofLuke for the Emmaus disciples mustbecome ours as it was for the Apostles.Christ’s redemptive exposition “in allthe scriptures” of “the things concern-ing Himself” must become the pattern

for our understanding of “Moses and allthe prophets” (Luke 24:27). How we goabout developing this pattern of biblicaltheology is where the dif iculty arisesand remains the challenge now and forthe future. “ Why PTSJ? ” The mission forPTSJ is to faithfully work to help meetthis challenge by an unwavering stancebased upon “ Back to the Bible ” by “solaScriptura ” all to the glory of God.

FINIS.

©

PTS Twitter Handle:@PTS_NCT

http://www.ptsco.org/THE_TRINITY.pdf

http://www.ptsco.org/Confronting_Islam.pdf

http://www.ptsco.org/

http://nct-blog.ptsco.org/



http://www.ptsco.org/Confronting_Islam.pdf

http://www.ptsco.org/THE_TRINITY.pdf

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


– PROVIDENCE HEOLOGICAL SEMINARY JOURNAL –SSUE 1– NOV 2014 PAG

PTS Website :http://www.ptsco.org/

PTS Blog Site :http://nct-blog.ptsco.org/

the new covenant: the promised everlasting covenant secured, ratied and established by the Person &Work o Jesus Christ that ullls all the covenants in the Old estament Scriptures; a covenant in which allbelievers have ull orgiveness o sins, are indwelt by the Spirit, and are empowered by the Spirit to pleaseGod; this covenant established the Church as Christ’s spiritual body.

Historical Forerunnersof New CovenantTheology – Part 1

Providence Theological SeminaryJournal (PTSJ) is a publication of Provi-dence Theological Seminary (PTS), whichis a tax exempt 501(c)3 corporation.Contributions to Providence TheologicalSeminary are deductible under section170 of the Code.

This journal is published on aquarterly basis and is unapologeticallydevoted to the biblical Gospel and NewCovenant Theology. No issue of this workwill include any paid advertisements orendorsements. We cordially welcome allthose who are likeminded to support theseminary through prayer and, if the Lordleads, inancial support.

The exhibition of an author’s articledoes not constitute an endorsement (onthe part of PTS) of every aspect of his orher theology. That being said, PTSJ willnever publish any article, whose content

does not irmly agree with the essentialsof biblical Christianity. Graphic design ofthe PTSJ is jointly credited to Ron Adairand Zachary Maxcey.

E-mail all editorial material andquestions to [email protected] andZachary Maxcey, the editor of the PTSJ, [email protected] .

Scripture quotations marked (NIV)are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEWINTERNATIONAL VERSION® Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984 by International BibleSociety. Used by Permission. All rightsreserved.

Scripture quotations marked “NKJV”are taken from the New King JamesVersion. Copyright © 1982 by ThomasNelson, Inc. Used by Permission. All rightsreserved.

Scripture quotations marked (ESV)are from The Holy Bible, English StandardVersion, copyright © 2001 by CrosswayBibles, a division of Good News Publish-

ers. Used by permission.

Scripture quotations marked (NASB)Scripture taken from the NEW AMERICANSTANDARD BIBLE, © Copyright The Lock-man Foundation 1960,1962, 1963, 1968,1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1988,1995. Used by permission.

(Continued on Page 3)

– HIER S EHE ICH, ICH KANN NICH ANDERS, GO HELFE MIR! AMEN! –

1Zachary S. Maxcey is a Master of Divinity graduate of Providence Theological Semi-nary (PTS). He also serves as the PTS Social Media Administrator and editor of ProvidenceTheological Seminary Journal . 2In general, Particular Baptists ascribe to believer’s baptism and a Calvinisticsoteriology, whereas General Baptists hold to believer’s baptism and an Arminiansoteriology.

3Anabaptists, meaning “re-baptizers,” comes from the combination of the Greek wordsana (“again”) and baptizō (“baptize”).

Perhaps some today will besurprised that a sincere, objectiveinvestigation of sixteenth-centuryAnabaptists 3 will uncover signi icantnon-soteriological commonalitiesexisting between New CovenantTheology proponents and the Swiss andSouth German Anabaptists. Since theearliest days of the Reformation, theAnabaptists have largely been character-ized as theological radicals and heretics.William Estep rightly observes: “Perhapsthere is no group within Christianhistory that has been judged as unfairly

The Swiss and South-German Anabaptists: Misjudged Heroes

of the Reformation

between advocates of New CovenantTheology and the sixteenth-centuryAnabaptists as well as the irst-generation seventeenth-century EnglishParticular Baptists. The irst majorsection will highlight the signi icantcommonalities between the Swiss andSouth German Anabaptists andproponents of New Covenant Theology,while the second will demonstrate thata relationship did exist between thoseAnabaptists and the irst-generationseventeenth-century English ParticularBaptists. The third major section willexamine the strong similarities betweenNew Covenant Theology and irst-generation seventeenth-century EnglishParticular Baptist Theology. The fourthsection will examine the theologicalshift of the second-generation EnglishParticular Baptists, while the inalsection will investigate the writings ofJohn Owen to determine whether or notproponents of New Covenant Theologycan legitimately claim this scholar-theologian as a theological forerunner.

by Zachary S. Maxcey 1

During the period of 1977 to 1980,New Covenant Theology began to emergeas a developing theological system. It isa theological system that endeavors tobreak down the walls of doctrinal parti-tion within and between DispensationalTheology and Covenant Theology. NewCovenant Theology seeks to accomplishthis goal by incorporating what it consid-ers to be the strengths of both systemswhile at the same time questioning thosepresuppositions which it considers to beinconsistent with the teaching of the Bible.

That being said, New Covenant Theologyis not developing in a theological vacuum.Like Dispensationalism or CovenantTheology, it also has its own historical andbiblical roots. What is the historical line-age of New Covenant Theology? Advocatesof New Covenant Theology claim thatthere is a demonstrable historical relation-ship between their own theological systemand the irst-generation seventeenth-century English Particular Baptists 2 (ca.1630-60 A.D.), who in turn were in part theological descendants of the sixteenth-century Anabaptists, especially regardingthe nature of the church.

The purpose of this article is toevince that a signi icant theological andhistorical relationship does exist

© PTS 2014.



http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_5/spurgeonnct%40gmail.com

http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_5/spurgeonnct%40gmail.com



8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


as the Anabaptists of the sixteenthcentury.” 4 Relying upon the biasedsecondary accounts of the CatholicChurch and magisterial reformers, 5 historians have largely misjudged them,highlighting instead the Rationalists, 6

Inspirationists, 7 and Münsterites 8 astypical representatives of mainstreamAnabaptism. 9

The Anabaptist movement wasborn in Zürich, Switzerland when

– PROVIDENCE HEOLOGICAL SEMINARY JOURNAL – PAGISSUE 1– NOV 2014

– 2 Timothy 2:15 –“Be diligent to present yoursel apprto God as a workman who does not to be ashamed, handling accurately

word o truth” (NASB).

new covenant theology: a theological system which stresses that Jesus Christ is the nexus & climax oGod’s plan in redemptive history, that the New estament Scriptures have interpretive priority over theOld estament Scriptures, and that the new covenant truly is a new arrangement between God and man;this system also strives to maintain the biblical tension o continuity and discontinuity ound in Scripture.

– HERE I S AND. I CAN DO NO O HER. GOD HELP ME. AMEN. –

(Historical Forerunners Continued from Page 2)

4William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story: An Introduction to Sixteenth-Century Anabaptism (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publish-ing Co., 1963; reprint 1975, 1996), 1. I highly encourage New Covenant believers of all denominations, backgrounds, and ages to read Estep’s Anabaptist Story for three reasons. First, it is important to educate believers that not all of the Anabaptists were radicals or heretics. Many six-

teenth-century Anabaptists were in fact orthodox in their beliefs, especially on the nature of the church. Historians have largely misjudged them,preferring to highlight the Münsterites or the Inspirationists as typical representatives of mainstream Anabaptism. Second, many Anabaptistbeliefs such as believer’s baptism and the regenerate nature of the Church serve as foundational distinctives of the Baptist movement, both in itsParticular and General forms. Third, there appears to be a relationship, both historical and doctrinal, between evangelical Anabaptism and manydifferent Christian groups such as the English Separatists, the English and American Baptists, and advocates of New Covenant Theology. 5The ‘magisterial’ reformers were the more prominent members of the Protestant Reformation, such as Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, PhilipMelancthon, Heinrich Bullinger, John Calvin, John Knox, and others. For examples of the magisterial response to the sixteenth-century Anabaptists,see John Calvin, Treatises against the Anabaptists and against the Libertines , trans. Benjamin W. Farley (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book, 1982) andJohn S. Oyer, Lutheran Reformers against Anabaptists (Paris, AR: Baptist Standard Bearer, 1964).

6See Estep, The Anabaptist Story , 23. He writes, “The rationalists, as the term implies, put primary emphasis on the place of reason in inter-preting the Scriptures. For the most part the evangelical rationalists were antitrinitarian, but they were antitrinitarian because they were rational-ists and not the reverse. Reason, therefore, and not Scripture or special revelation became for them the source of ultimate authority.”

7See Estep, The Anabaptist Story , 22. Estep writes, “For the inspirationists the Spirit took precedence over the Bible. Thus the immediate il-lumination of the Spirit became the norm for the inspirationist’s program of reform. The Zwickau prophets, Nicolaus Storch, and Thomas Münzter,

claimed special revelation, as did later inspirationists.” In general, the Inspirationist Anabaptists belittled the role of the Holy Scriptures in the lifeof a believer. Instead, they gave preeminence to the “guiding” role of the Holy Spirit, thus pitting the Spirit against His Word. This theologically-perilous and unbiblical approach allowed Inspirationist Anabaptists to be guided by their “spiritual” experiences rather than the Word of God. Itgoes without saying that the Holy Spirit never operates in a manner that contradicts the very Scriptures that He inspired.

8The Münsterites were radical members of the Anabaptist movement, whose infamous notoriety stems from the violent over-realizedeschatology which they espoused. This eschatology eventually resulted in the Münster Rebellion which was quickly and decisively crushed by theleaders of medieval Germany in 1535 A.D. 9Two factors primarily contribute to the misrepresentation of the Anabaptists. First, the more fringe elements of the Anabaptist movement,such as the Münsterites or the Inspirationists, have often been highlighted as the typical representatives of mainstream Anabaptism. For thesecond, see Estep, The Anabaptist Story , 1. Historical accounts frequently rely “heavily upon the highly partisan and quite unreliable accounts ofsixteenth-century Anabaptism in the writings of Ulrich Zwingli, Justus Menius, Heinrich Bullinger, and Christoph Fischer, to say nothing of themilder but just as erroneous accounts of Martin Luther and Philip Melanchthon.”

10 This group of students consisted of (but was not limited to) such men as Conrad Grebel and Felix Manz.11 Different spellings occur for Zwingli’s irst name. He is also called Ulrich perhaps after his father, Ulrich Zwingli.12 Paedobaptism is a theological term used to describe the practice of infant baptism.13 Estep, The Anabaptist Story , 12-13.14 Ibid.15 Ibid., 14.16 See Torsten Bergsten, Balthasar Hübmaier: Anabaptist Theologian and Martyr , ed. by William R. Estep, Jr. (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press,

1978), 39. Bergsten describes Hübmaier with the following words, “For a long time, Hubmaier has been given a place of honor in Baptist scholar-ship and fellowship. He is generally regarded as the most important Anabaptist leader. There is also a readiness to recognize in him a spiritualbrother who represented in all essentials the major principles of the English Baptist movement which emerged in the early seventeenth century.” 17 For more information concerning these prominent Anabaptists, see Estep, The Anabaptist Story , 29-235.

January 21, 1525 in “the home of FelixManz.” 14 “Anabaptism was born. With thisirst baptism, the earliest church of theSwiss Brethren was constituted.” 15 Fromits very beginnings, the Anabaptistmovement encountered hostility fromboth Roman Catholics and Protestants, in the form of expulsion, imprisonment,torture, and very often martyrdom. Leading members of the Swiss and SouthGerman strains of Anabaptism includeConrad Grebel, Felix Manz, GeorgeBlaurock, Michael Sattler, BalthasarHübmaier, 16 and Pilgram Marpeck. 17 The Origin of the Anabaptist

Movement

students 10 of Ulrich (Huldrych/Huldreich) 11 Zwingli, Zürich’s leadingreformer, were irrevocably convinced thatthe New Testament Scriptures advocatedthe practice of believer’s baptism, not paedobaptism .12 Estep writes: “The publicbreak between Zwingli and his erstwhiledisciples came with evident inality at afateful disputation in January, 1525. Thecouncil proclaimed Zwingli the victor anddenounced the radicals. The alternativeswere quite clear. The little group couldconform, leave Zürich, or face imprison-ment. It chose the last.” 13 Very soon after,this small band of like-minded men unitedtheir words with sincere action, each beingbaptized as a believer on the evening of (Continued on Page 6)

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


V TP T

S F P .

telos: a word o Greekorigin meaning end or goal.

Christotelic hermeneutics: a method o interpretation thaemphasizes that the Lord Jesus Christ is the ultimate goalor end o God’s Word and seeks to consistently interpret allScripture in view o this great truth.

– PROVIDENCE HEOLOGICAL SEMINARY JOURNAL – PAGSSUE 1– NOV 2014

– ELOS GAR NOMOU CHRIS OS EIS DIKAIOSUNEN PAN I O PIS EUON I –

Baptism: the Pledge ofMembership in

the New Covenant


He also was the instrument that Godused to bring the irst Gentiles into thechurch in the house of Cornelius. Andthere he called for water so that thosenew converts might be baptized. Eachof these incidents, which we will look atin greater detail, contributed to Peter’sauthority on the subject of baptism. Andwhen you add to that natural authorityhis apostolic authority, and the fact thathe was given the keys of the kingdomand so on, he was supremely quali iedto teach on this or any other subject onwhich the Lord instructed him. But wecannot help but notice Peter’spersonal and experiential credentials onthis subject of baptism.

Now what’s interesting about ourtext is not that Peter gives us a strangeand dif icult doctrine that some of youmay be hoping that I’m going to explain

about Jesus going and preaching to thespirits in prison. I’m not going to dealwith that today. In my opinion, you mayind the best explanation for that pas -sage in Wayne Grudem’s commentary,and his position is that when Noah wasbuilding the ark, Christ “in Spirit” waspreaching through Noah to unbelieverswho were on the earth then, but are nowspirits in prison – in hell. 1 Interesting asthat is, it’s not as interesting as Peter’sdescription of baptism. Why? BecausePeter is the only writer in the Bible who

calls baptism anything. He’s the onlywriter who labels baptism. He’s the only

by Jackson Boyett

(This article is an abridged versionof a message delivered at

the 2009 PTS Conference.)

Who is in the new covenant, whichwas promised by Jeremiah and is now ineffect? The question is not, “Who was inthe old covenant?” Who are the membersof the new covenant? My text today is1 Peter 3:18-22:

“For Christ also suffered once for sins,the righteous for the unrighteous, tobring you to God. He was put to deathin the body but made alive in the Spirit.19 After being made alive, he went andmade proclamation to the imprisonedspirits 20 to those who weredisobedient long ago when God waitedpatiently in the days of Noah while theark was being built. In it only a fewpeople, eight in all, were saved throughwater, 21 and this water symbolizesbaptism that now saves you also – notthe removal of dirt from the body butthe pledge of a clear conscience toward

God. It saves you by the resurrection ofJesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heavenand is at God’s right hand- with angels,authorities and powers in submission tohim” (NIV).

First, I want to say a word about Peterand his authority concerning baptism. Hewas, after all, present when Jesus utteredthe Great Commission, “Go therefore andmake disciples of all nations, baptizingthem in the name of the Father and of theSon and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them toobserve all that I have commanded you....”(ESV). Peter was the man who preachedthe irst Christian sermon on the day ofPentecost. And he ended that sermon witha command to the Jews under convictionthat they should repent and be baptized.

1Wayne Grudem, I Peter , The TyndaleTestament Commentaries (Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 1988), 204.

“...baptism is forbelievers only – for

those who have a goodconscience toward

God, the peopleJeremiah prophesiedwould be members of

the new covenant.”

writer who identi ies baptism as some -thing. Preachers and theologianscall it things. We call it a sacrament, oran ordinance, or an initiatory rite. InReformed circles it is most commonlycalled a sign, or the sign of the covenant.The Westminster Confession calls it aseal also. And I ind this absolutelyfascinating that, while it may indeed besome of those things, the Bible neveruses any of those terms to describe it. Those are all man-made terms.

Now we use such man-made termsfor convenience in communication – forexample, the term “Trinity,” which neveroccurs in Scripture, but which is,nonetheless, a term identifying a truedoctrine. So there’s nothing wrong withsome good man-made terms as long asthey re lect the situation accurately andlabel fairly and truthfully. We need truth

and accuracy in our labeling of theologicalconcepts. But I think it would do usgood to look closely at the one thing thatbaptism is speci ically called in the Bible,because it is never called anything otherthan this, “the pledge of a clear consciencetoward God” (NIV). Some of you haveseen another possible translation of thosewords in the ESV or the New AmericanStandard Bible, “an appeal to God for agood conscience” (NASB, ESV). For themoment, please grant the translation, “thepledge of a good conscience toward God,”and I’ll explain in due time why I reject theother rendering.

Now in calling baptism this (i.e. “thepledge”), Peter supports (1) what Jesustaught him, and (2) the understanding ofbaptism that he himself experienced andapplied, namely, that baptism is forbelievers only – for those who have agood conscience toward God, the peopleJeremiah prophesied would be membersof the new covenant.

This, of course, opens up the saddivision in the Reformed camp. ReformedBaptists hold to believer’s baptism only,and the rest of the Reformed churches donot. Naturally, we Baptists want unity in

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


– Matthew 17:5 –“Tis is My beloved Son, with

whom I am well-pleased;listen to Him!” (NASB).

divine covenant: a God-established,Sovereignly-imposed, solemn arrangement

stipulations, instituted in time, wherebyYahweh reely & graciously communeswith man.

semper re ormanda : Latin or “alwaysreforming ;” the Protestant theological maxdetailing the church’s need to constantlyreassess and con orm her theology to thetruth o Scripture.


– FOR CHRIS IS HE END OF HE LAW FOR RIGH EOUSNESS O EVEYRONE HA BELIEVE H –

the world of Reformed Christianity. Wedo not want our Presbyterian and otherReformed brothers to think that we arebumbling idiots when it comes to Scrip-ture. Many of them no doubt believe that

we are just not able to see into the Bibleas deeply as they do. C.H. Spurgeon, thegreat Baptist preacher who was raisedby parents and grandparents committedto infant baptism, said, “If we could indinfant baptism in the word of God, wewould adopt it. But we have looked wellthrough the Bible and cannot ind it, anddo not believe it is there; nor do we be-lieve that others can ind infant baptismin the Scriptures, unless they themselvesirst put it there.”

In other words, if we are going tolook at Scripture alone, not at tradition,nor even at the history of the church, wecannot come to any other conclusion thanthat baptism is only for believing mem-bers of the new covenant. I might add,however, that we Baptists do not come offso badly if we look at the history of thechurch. The earliest church manual, theDidache , which was written probably nolater than the year 125 A.D., has a long,involved prescription for how to baptize,and the baptism is clearly of a believer

and the method is immersion. Thereare no instructions for baptizing infantswhatsoever. Instead the catechumen isto be taught all of these things that are inthis church manual, and then he is to bebaptized in running water. If he cannotget that, use warm water, the manualsays. But the point is that, even thoughwe will not rest our arguments on churchhistory, we can say that the earliestpost-apostolic record clearly shows thatbaptism of believers by immersion wasthe practice of the church.

Now, again I say, Scripture is whatis important. It is Scripture that mustdictate our practice and belief concerningthis doctrine. But when I say that baptismis for believers only, I am saying again

(Baptism: NC Pledge Continued from Page 4)

that baptism is for members of the newcovenant. It is for those people describedin Jeremiah 31, and also in Hebrew 8:7-13. And Peter is teaching in this text thatbaptism is the pledge of membership inthe new covenant.

Now how do you get in the newcovenant? You get in the new covenant

through repentance and faith in the LordJesus Christ. You get in the new covenantbecause God has birthed you again, puthis law in your heart, you know him andhave eternal life and you have your sinsforgiven. And all of that is accomplishedfor you through the work of the LordJesus Christ in his atonement and in hissending of the Spirit. You receive all thatby faith and you become part of the newcovenant. But then, the next step, thevery next step of obedience according toScripture, is baptism. But it is for believ-

ers only.

In our church [DayspringFellowship

– http://dsf.org/ ] weactually withhold the Lord’s supper untilthe new believer has committed himselfto the Lord in baptism, and submitted tothis pledge of a good conscience towardGod. This leads to some interestingsituations. One thing it leads to is thesubmission of many believers who wantto take communion, but who havestubbornly refused to be obedient toJesus and be baptized....Christians shouldnot delay in being baptized and should bebaptized before partaking of the Lord’s

Supper. I don’t believe that you shouldhave the privilege of the Lord’s table untilthe issue about your baptism has beensettled in your heart. Now, in fencing thetable, we do not press the necessity ofbeliever’s baptism as such, because we

“But when I say thatbaptism is for believersonly, I am saying again

that baptism is formembers of the new

covenant.”

know that among our Reformed friendsthat this is a very strongly held and deep-ly felt issue that touches the consciencesof our brothers and sisters in Christ. Wedo not deny the Lord’s Supper to some-one who has only been “baptized” as aninfant and who feels strongly about it.And so we simply ask that a person con-sider himself a baptized Christian accord-

ing to his conscience. But, oh, do we workhard to try to change the conscience!

Consider this description of baptism:the pledge of membership in the new

covenant. We’re going to look at thespeci ic designation of baptism as apledge. And then we’re going to see howthis is consistent with Peter’s under-standing of baptism. And then, inally,we’ll see how this understanding ofbaptism is necessary if reformation of thechurch is to continue in our own day.

First, we had better see about thistranslation. Certainly the translation, “anappeal to God for a good conscience” ispermissible. Not only is this the senseof the ESV and NASB, it is the preferredtranslation of other exceptional scholarsWhy would I disagree with suchtrustworthy authorities? Well, irst, theword for “pledge” or “appeal” is onlyused here in the New Testament. It’s theword eperotema . The verb form of it isindeed “to make a request, a demand, oran appeal” (See Matt. 16:1). So translat-ing the noun as an “appeal” makes sense.The problem is the usage of the word inthe papyri, where its meaning is plain.It’s a word that comes from the businessand legal world, and it means “a pledge toabide by the terms of a contract.”

© PTS 2014.


http://dsf.org/

http://dsf.org/

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


Spirit baptism: the New Covenant min-istry o the Holy Spirit begun at Pentecost(and continued in its apostolic extensions)that created the Church, the spiritual Bodyo Christ.

sola scriptura : Latin or “Scripture aloneProtestant theological maxim encapsulatinthe truth that Scripture (which is the inspirin allible, & inerrant Word o God) is theauthority o aith & practice or the believe

The Fundamentals ofNew Covenant Theology

– Part 1 –

Many have rightly described NewCovenant Theology (NCT) as a via media ,that is to say, a middle way between the

two theological paradigms which domi-nate evangelical Protestantism : Dispensa-tional Theology and Covenant Theology.Advocates of NCT maintain that CovenantTheology overemphasizes the continuityof Scripture, while Dispensational Theol-ogy overemphasizes the discontinuity ofScripture. In contradistinction, NCT strivesto maintain the ‘continuity-discontinuity’tension which signi icantly pervades theHoly Writ by means of both Christocentrichermeneutics and a biblical theology.

NCT acknowledges that God hasone overarching redemptive purpose. Forexample, Ephesians 1:10 declares thatthe elect were “predestined according toHis [God’s] purpose who works all thingsafter the counsel of His will” (NASB).Furthermore, the Apostle Paul states thatthe Church reveals God’s manifold wisdomand that this revelation “was in accordancewith the eternal purpose which He carriedout in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Eph. 3:10-11, NASB). Elsewhere, Paul teaches thatthe Lord saved His people and called them“with a holy calling, not according to our

works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in ChristJesus from all eternity” (2 Tim. 1:9, NASB).Unlike Covenant Theology, however,

Editor’s Note: This Series IsCurrently Featured on

the PTS Blog Site.



– DOMINE DA QUOD JUBES E JUBE QUOD VIS –


“the New Testament, in particular thelife and teachings of Christ” to be “theinal authority for the Christian life andthe faith and order of the church.” 20 Concerning Hübmaier, Estep writes:“...Hübmaier...did honestly attempt todiscover what the Scriptures taught andto exegete them faithfully. It is alsoevident that the New Testamentbecame for him the sole authorityfor the Christian life and the life ofthe church.” 21 Fourth, mainstreamAnabaptists interpreted the Scriptureswith a Christocentric hermeneutic.For example, Estep writes, “While theytended to interpret the Scriptures in aliteral sense, they were Christocentric.It was Christ who in the actualformulation of the faith became theultimate authority to which theyappealed.” 22 Fifth, they sought to inter-

pret the Old Testament Scriptures in thelight of the New Testament. Estep states:

Although they did not reject the Oldestament in a Marcionite ashion, i t

was never allowed to take precedenceover the New estament or to becomenormative or the Christian aith.Teirs was a New estamenthermeneutic that assumed aprogression in the biblical revelationthat culminated in the Christ-event.Tere ore the Old estament, althoughuse ul and ofen quoted, could neverstand alone, unqualied by the Newestament [emphasis mine] .23

Elsewhere, he writes concerning PilgramMarpeck’s hermeneutic:

Marpeck’s most creative contribution

18 Sola Scriptura is a Latin phrase, meaning “by the Scriptures alone,” which has servedas a prominent rallying cry for Protestant theologians since the days of the Reformation. SolaScriptura was used by Protestants to indicate that the Scriptures are the sole authority of faithand practice for the Christian.

19 Estep, The Anabaptist Story, 190.20

Ibid., 22.21 Ibid., 97. See also Bergsten, Balthasar Hübmaier , 275. Bergsten writes, “When theAnabaptists rejected infant baptism, they were acting in accordance with Zwingli’s originalunderstanding of Scripture. But since Zwingli was not prepared to draw this conclusion fromthe New Testament, he [Hübmaier] felt obliged to change his hermeneutics.” 22 Ibid., 22.

23 Ibid.

The irst strong commonalitywhich exists between New CovenantTheology and the Swiss and SouthGerman strains of Anabaptism involvesthe doctrine and interpretation ofScripture. First, like most ProtestantReformers, these Anabaptists employedthe principle of sola Scriptura .18 Estepnotes the following:

The one sure touchstone of theReformation and clear line ofdemarcation between RomanCatholics and Reformers was theauthority of the Scriptures. Withinthe Reformation no group tookmore seriously the principle of sola Scriptura in matters ofdoctrine and discipline than didthe true Anabaptists. In thisregard the Reformation stanceof the Anabaptists is unequivocal.The authoritative position of theScriptures among the sixteenth-

century Anabaptists was apparentfrom the beginning. The Biblebecame and remained for themthe supreme judicature by whichall human opinions were to betried [emphasis mine] .19

Second, like other Reformers, theyadvocated the study of the Scriptures intheir original languages, Greek, Hebrew,and Aramaic. Third, the “Swiss andSouth German Anabaptists” considered

Anabaptist Teachingsregarding the Scriptures

Follow ProvidenceTheological Seminary

on Twitter:

@PTS_NCT

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


– Luke 24:44b –“…all things which are written

about Me in the Law o Moses andthe Prophets and the Psalms must

be ullled” (NASB).

covenant theology: a theological system stressing the elements o continuity between theOld & New estament Scriptures; this system holds the concept o covenant to be the central,uni ying theme o God’s Word – specically its covenant o works / covenant o graceschema; among its other distinctives are God’s one redemptive plan, the Decalogue as God’seternal, moral law, and Sunday as a Christian Sabbath; also known as Re ormed Teology.

NCT ardently af irms that God’s eternal pur -pose is not to be understood as a covenant(e.g. the over-arching covenant of grace ofCovenant Theology). Proponents of NCTassert that Covenant Theology’s covenant of

grace is an unnecessary theological deduc-tion, as Scripture does not describe God’seternal purpose (Greek: prothesis ; Eph.1:10, 3:10-11; 2 Tim. 1:9) as a covenant(diathēkē ). Many supporters of NCT alsorefer to God’s eternal purpose as ‘God’skingdom purpose’, referencing Matthew6:10: “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done,on earth as it is in heaven” (NASB) (See GaryD. Long, NCT: Time for a More Accurate Way ,Amazon.com, 2013). As is to be expected,NCT differs with Dispensational Theology’stwo redemptive plans for the Church andIsrael.

NCT maintains that God’s eternal pur-pose is not only worked out progressively inthe biblical covenants of the Old Testamentbut also ultimately ful illed in the Lord JesusChrist and the New Covenant. In essence,these covenants furnish the redemptive-historical framework through which thebiblical narrative is steadily advanced. Thecovenants of Scripture realize their telos(i.e. the end, goal) in Christ Jesus and thecovenant of which He is the mediator –namely, the New Covenant. It is worth

noting that the biblical covenants distinctlymanifest the Scriptural ‘continuity-discon-tinuity’ tension – particularly, with regardto how they are to be understood in light ofone another.

(Fundamentals of NCT Continued from Page 6)


– LORD, GRAN WHA HOU COMMAND AND COMMAND WHA HOU WIL –

24 Ibid., 126.25 Again, paedobaptism is a theological term used to describe the practice of infant baptism.

26 Estep, The Anabaptist Story , 201. 27 Ibid., 206.

to Anabaptist thought was his viewof the Scriptures. While holdingthe Scriptures to be the Word of God,he made a distinction between thepurpose of the Old Testament andthat of the New. As the foundationmust be distinguished from thehouse, the Old Testament must bedistinguished from the New. TheNew Testament was centered in Jesus Christ and alone wasauthoritative for the Brethren. Tohold that the Old Testament wasequally authoritative for theChristian was to abolish thedistinction between the two.Failure to distinguish between the

Old and New Testaments leads tothe most dire consequences. Marpeck attributed the peasants’revolt, Zwingli’s death, and theexcesses of the Münsterites to thiscause. Making the Old Testamentnormative for the Christian life isto follow the Scriptures only in part.In Marpeck’s eyes the pope, Luther, Zwingli, and the ‘false Anabaptists’were all guilty of this fundamentalerror [emphasis mine] .24

Proponents of New Covenant Theologystand in agreement with the Swiss andSouth German Anabaptists regarding thisinterpretation of Scripture.


principle of sola Scriptura , led Anabap-tists to reject paedobaptism 25 in favor ofbeliever’s baptism . Estep correctly notes,“Believer’s baptism was for the Anabaptiststhe logical implementation of theReformation principle of sola ScripturaAlmost as soon as the Anabaptist move-ment could be distinguished within thecontext of the Reformation itself, believers’baptism became the major issue.” 26 Lathe succinctly summarizes the typicalAnabaptist view of baptism:

In opposition to the usual argumentsfor infant baptism the Brethren setforth their position, underscoring thebasic insights of Anabaptism. Firstthe nature of baptism rules out the possibility of infant baptism. NewTestament baptism requires priorconviction for, and repentance of sin,and faith in Christ. Baptism is viewedas a symbol of initiation into thechurch and sign of the new life whichthe believer has in Christ. “In otherwords, baptism is to be administeredonly after receiving the Holy Spirit;and children, though they are notnecessarily condemned, do nothave the Holy Spirit.”

Second, baptism is a symboland not a sacrament. It has nomeaning where faith in Christ isabsent. Third, Christ has set for us

an example through his ownbaptism. Fourth, through the GreatCommission, he has explicitlycommanded us to teach and baptize.Fifth, baptism is not analogous tocircumcision [emphasis mine]. 27

The Anabaptist acceptance andpractice of believer’s baptism led to a new,distinctive view of the Church, which fundamentally differed from that of the

Anabaptist Views regarding Baptismand the Nature of the Church

The second similarity between NewCovenant Theology and the Swiss andSouth German strains of Anabaptisminvolves the practice of believer’s baptism.Their study of the Scriptures in the

original languages, coupled with the (Continued on Page 8)

© PTS 2014.

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


dispensational theology: a theological system that stresses the elements o discontinuitybetween the Old & New estament Scriptures; this system divides redemptive history into anumber o distinct time periods known as dispensations; among its other distinctives are itssharp distinction between Israel and the Church, a literal millennial kingdom, a pretribulationrapture, and a restoration o national Israel.


– PIS EUSON EPI ON KURION IHSOUN KAI SO HESE SU –


28 Ibid., 245.29 B. R. White, The English Baptists of the 17 TH Century (Didcot, England: The Baptist Historical Society, 1996), 15.

30 Estep, The Anabaptist Story , 271.31 White, The English Baptists , 17. See also Bergsten, Balthasar Hübmaier , 46. Bergsten states, “…Baptist scholars have frequently regarded

him as the forerunner of Baptist and Free Church movements of more recent times. On this question, one can say that at the most Hübmaier canbe regarded as a prototype of the Baptist movement. However, there can be no talk of a direct historical and doctrinal continuity between thereformer at Waldshut and his Baptist sympathizers of later times.” 32 Estep, The Anabaptist Story , 267.

American Baptists, and advocates of NewCovenant Theology.

The Relationship between the Anabaptists and First-GenerationSeventeenth-Century EnglishParticular Baptists

Although the Anabaptist movement

originated in Zürich, Switzerland, it quick-ly spread into such areas as Germany andHolland. Under the guidance of MennoSimons, a prominent and instrumentalDutch Anabaptist, the movement thrivedand became irmly entrenched in Dutchterritory. Moreover, Holland served as the

predominant fountainhead of Reformationthought, which included Anabaptist theol-ogy, into medieval England. B. R.

White con irms the presence ofAnabaptists in England as early as thereign of Henry VIII (1509 – 1547): “Longbefore John Smyth [1570 – 1612] andThomas Helwys [1575 – 1616] there hadbeen ‘Anabaptists’ (that is, ‘re-baptizers’)in England. Although Henry VIII hadcaught a few and burned some, most, ifnot all, of these had been foreigners.” 29

“New Covenant Theologyadherents certainly agree with

the Swiss and South German Anabaptists with regard to the

practice of believer’s baptismand the teaching that theChurch is a body composed

solely of regenerate believerswho have identi ied with the

Lord Jesus Christ in believer’sbaptism.”

Roman Catholics and magisterialReformers. Because they believed thatbaptism was only for committed,confessing believers, the Anabaptistsresultantly believed that the New

Testament Church is a body composedsolely of regenerate believers who hadidenti ied with the Lord Jesus Christin believer’s baptism. Estep describesHübmaier’s view regarding the natureof the true church:

The irst mark of the true church,according to Hübmaier, isregeneration. Regeneration mustprecede membership. Of course,in Anabaptist thought there canbe no scriptural baptism withoutthe prior experience ofregeneration, and no churchmembership without baptism. It, therefore, follows that regenera-

tion must be an accomplished factbefore one is enrolled in the visiblechurch [emphasis mine] .28

New Covenant Theology adherentscertainly agree with the Swiss andSouth German Anabaptists regardingthe practice of believer’s baptism andthe teaching that the Church is a bodycomposed solely of regeneratebelievers who have identi ied with theLord Jesus Christ in believer’s baptism.These signi icant commonalities indi -cate a relationship between the Swissand South German Anabaptists andmany other Christian groups such as theEnglish Separatists, the English and

Although most historians willconcede that there was an Anabaptistpresence in medieval England, few arewilling to argue in favor of a relationshipbetween the Anabaptists and the irst-generation English Particular Baptists.Estep describes this unwillingness: “Therelationship of continental Anabaptismto early English Baptist has long been

subject to debate. However, in recentyears it seems to be the vogue to discreditany viewpoint that posits an Anabaptist-Baptist historical relation.” 30 Represent-ing this recent approach, White arguesagainst such:

It is certainly more plausible toargue for the likelihood of in luencefrom some Anabaptists uponseventeenth-century English Baptistbeginnings than it is fromAnabaptism upon the earlier

Separatists. Even so, it should benoted that two careful studiesseeking to estimate the in luenceof Anabaptism upon both Generaland Calvinistic Baptists originsfound that no signi icant in luencecould be decisively proved. 31

Even Estep, who is favorable to theAnabaptists, denies a direct relationshipbetween the Anabaptists and the irst-generation English Particular Baptists. Hewrites, “To claim that Baptists…are direc

descendants of the Anabaptists is toassume that similarity of belief provescausal connections. Such relationship isassumed from something other thanhistorical evidence. However, this isnot to deny the pervasive in luence ofsixteenth-century Anabaptism upon suc-ceeding generations but to point up thetask of the historian [emphasis mine] .”







8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


– 2 Corinthians 1:20 –“For as many as may be the promise

o God, in Him they are yes;where ore also by Him is our Amen tthe glory o God through us” (NASB

the old covenant: the conditional treaty which Yahweh established at Mount Sinaiwith the descendants o Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the covenant synonymous withthe Law o Moses; this covenant established Israel as a geo-political entity and wastemporary in terms o its duration; this covenantal arrangement was abrogated byChrist’s Person & Work and subsequently replaced by the new covenant.


– BELIEVE ON HE LORD JESUS CHRIS , AND HOU SHAL BE SAVED –


The event whereby the irst-generation 33 seventeenth-centuryEnglish Particular Baptists bothsurfaced historically and assertedthemselves theologically was thepublication of the 1644 First London

Baptist Confession (FLBC). White notes,“The Calvinistic Baptists irst appearedas a self-conscious group with the pub-lication of their Confession in London in1644.” 34 The vast majority of the 1644FLBC is derived from the 1596 TrueConfession of Faith (TCF), a Congrega-tionalist confession authored by FrancisJohnson, thus indicating that “the basicorientation of the Particular Baptistsclearly was and remained non-separa-tist Congregational Calvinist, and notAnabaptist.” 35 Surely, if any in luenceexisted between the Anabaptists andthe irst-generation Particular Baptistsof England, such a relationship wouldbe demonstrable from the 1644 FirstLondon Baptist Confession (FLBC). Doesthe Confession actually support arelationship? Indeed, it does. Forexample, Article XL of the 1644 FLBCsigni icantly deviates from the 1596TCF’s understanding of believer’sbaptism:

The way and manner of the1dispensing of this Ordinance, theScripture holds out to be dippingor plunging the whole body underwater: it being a sign, must answerthe thing signi ied, which are these:irst, the 2washing the whole soul inthe blood of Christ: Secondly, thatinterest the Saints have in the3death, burial, and resurrection;thirdly, together with a 4con irma-tion of our faith, that as certainlyas the body is buried under water,

33 The irst-generation seventeenth-century English Particular Baptists encompass the time period of ca. 1630-1660 A.D.34 White, The English Baptists , 59.

35 Glen H. Stassen, “Anabaptist In luence in the Origin of the Particular Baptist,” The Menonnite Quarterly 36:4 (1962): 324. 36 Te Confession of Faith of those Churches which are commonly (though falsely) called Anabaptists (London: 1644), Article XL [modern spelling ancapitalization original]. 37 Stassen, “Anabaptist Inuence,” 337. 38 Ibid., 341-343.

and rises again, so certainly shallthe bodies of the Saints be raised bythe power of Christ, in the day of theresurrection, to reign with Christ….

The word Baptize, signifying to dipunder water, yet as with convenientgarments both upon the administra-

tor and subject with all modesty.1Matt. 3:16; John 3:23; Acts 8:38;2Rev. 1:5 & 7:14 with Heb. 10:22;3Rom. 6:3, 4, 5; 4I Cor. 15:28, 29

[modern spelling mine]. 36

Glen Stassen states:

The central motif of the Baptistinnovation is an interpretation ofbaptism which is discontinuous notonly from the Congregational doctrineof baptism, but from all theCongregational doctrines. Theconvictions which it presupposes areabsent from Congregational

thought…. The central convictioninvolved in the new interpretationof baptism is the concentration onthe death, burial, and resurrectionof Christ [emphasis mine] .37

How do we account for this signi icantdifference between the 1596 TCF and the1644 FLBC?

Stassen convincingly demonstratesthat the Christological emphasis in the1644 FLBC’s de inition of baptism isstrongly representative of Dutch Anabap-tist thought. He writes:

Menno Simons’ Foundation-Book exactly ful ills all the requirementsfor explaining every detail of theBaptist innovations….TheFoundation-Book was likely to havebeen available to the Baptists, bothbecause of its widespreaddistribution and because it was thebook which shaped the basicdoctrines of the Mennonites. The

frequency with which it wasrepublished is phenomenal. Its Dutchpublication dates before 1640 are1539, 1558, 1562, 1565, 1567, 1579[2], 1583, 1613, 1616 and two undatededitions published in German in 1575….

The overall emphases of the Foundation Book are strikingly similar to the

emphases of the Baptist innovations.Menno stresses discipleship, repent-

ance, faith, baptism, the Lord’s Supper,Christ as Lord and example, along withan appeal to the magistracy. The sectionon baptism is even more striking in its similarity to the core of the Baptist pattern. The emphases are almostidentical. The order of their presenta-

tion is almost identical. The Scripture passages which are men-

tioned are almost identical. Thealmost complete identity can be seenreadily in the following outline whichindicates in order the chief points and

Scripture passages in Menno’s andthe Baptist’s sections on baptism.…

Then Menno succinctly states the signi icance of being baptized. Eachaspect of the Baptist patternappears, and the sequence isidentical: The ordinance of the Lord,hearing, believing, professing faith,discipleship, death, burial, andresurrection with Christ. The Scripture Menno quotes is the same Scripture which the Baptists quote [emphasis mine] .38

Stassen concludes that there is a signi icantrelationship between the Anabaptists andthe irst-generation seventeenth-centuryEnglish Particular Baptists:

The Baptists, as we have seen,incorporated Menno’s stress onobedience, but they did so in a more


8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


recapitulation: a orm o theologicalparallelism and repetition which ea-tures prominently in biblical prophecy.

analogia dei : Latin or “ the analogyof faith;” an interpretive axiom wherebless clear passages o Scripture are intepreted by clearer biblical passages.

– PROVIDENCE HEOLOGICAL SEMINARY JOURNAL – PAGESSUE 1– NOV 2014

– PAS GAR HOS AN EPIKALESE AI O ONOMA KURIOU SO HESE AI –


39 Ibid., 345-348.40 FLBC (1644), Introduction. The 1644 edition of the confession was signed by ifteen men including William Kif in, Samuel Richardson,

John Spilsbery, Thomas Patience, Thomas Skippard, Thomas Munday, Thomas Gore and Thomas Killcop. 41 White, The English Baptists , 24-5. White notes, “The smear label ‘Anabaptist’, which was attached to the Baptists by contemporaries, wasitself a term guaranteed to link them with the atrocities which, as all men knew though few knew precisely, had been committed by a violentgroup of Anabaptists at Münster a century before.” The smear label was especially true in the strong attacks made by Daniel Featley, a brilliantliberal clergyman of the Church of England, who wrote a scurrilous work against the 1644 FLBC. See William L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions ofFaith (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1959; reprint 1969), 147. 42 Ibid., 148. 43 Benjamin Cox was a seventeenth-century Particular Baptist who wrote an insightful appendix to the 1646 FLBC.

the Particular Baptists did of icially distance themselves from the Anabaptistmovement: “The CONFESSION OF FAITHof those CHURCHES which are commonly(though falsely) called ANABAPTISTS.” 40 The irst-generation English ParticularBaptists rejected the term ‘Anabaptist’(literally “re-baptizer”) for three reasons.First , they, like the Anabaptists, believed

that only believer’s baptism, not infantbaptism, was true baptism. Second , theirst-generation English Particular Bap -tists sought to distance themselves fromthe infamous excesses of the Rationalists,Inspirationists, and Münsterites whichhad come to characterize the entire Ana-baptist movement. 41 Third , they did notcharacterize themselves as Anabaptist,as they were not in complete doctrineagreement with them, especially con-cerning free will, communalism, refusalto take oaths, and the doctrine of original

sin.42 For example, the irst-generationEnglish Particular Baptists were Calvinis-tic in their soteriology, while the Anabap-tists held to a more semi-Pelagian viewof salvation.

Although the Particular Baptists didof icially distance themselves from theAnabaptist movement, this fact does not disprove a relationship between them

Calvinist manner....They remaincompletely within Calvinism, butare in luenced by Menno.… TheBaptists are Calvinists whoincorporate Menno’s emphases

where they it into the Calvinist framework, and reject thoseaspects which do not it. Theyignore Menno’s distinctionbetween inward and outwardbaptism and instead speak of thebaptism of Christ, meaning Hisdeath, burial, and resurrection,and God working by that same power in us….To believe that thisis mere coincidence is extremelydif icult. They stress the same Scripture passages, the sameaspects of baptism in the same sequence, except that discipleshipis placed differently ....We nowsee how it was possible for theBaptists to have been in luencedby an Anabaptist and yet not adopt“the distinctive features ofAnabaptist life and thought”….Theevidence seems to suggest thatthe Baptists did in fact remainCalvinists while being in luenced

by a Mennonite who, if he was notMenno himself, was a disciple sotrue that the difference is hard todiscern [emphasis mine] .39

Some may attempt to counter Stas-sen’s conclusion by arguing that the irst-generation English Particular Baptistsalways sought to distance themselvesfrom the Anabaptists. The introductorywords of the 1644 FLBC do verify that

and the Anabaptists with regard tothe nature of the church and the Lawof God for at least three reasons. First ,Anabaptist theology, especially in itsDutch strain, entered medieval Englandthrough Holland. Second , the irst-gen -eration seventeenth-century ParticularBaptists of England clearly held viewsregarding baptism and the nature of thechurch which were nearly identical tothose of the Anabaptists. Third , the 1644FLBC replicates many doctrinal explana-tions and theological emphases found inMenno Simons’ Foundation-Book . Fourthit is likely that Benjamin Cox’s 43 descrip-tion of New Covenant law is derived fromthe Anabaptists as well. These four factsespecially the last two, indicate that theAnabaptists had a signi icant in luenceupon the irst-generation seventeenth-century English Particular Baptists.

4

FINIS.

Here ends Part 1 of “HistoricalForeunners of New Covenant

Theology” by Zachary S.Maxcey. The second half of

this article will be publishedin the February 2015 issue ofthe Providence Theological

Seminary Journal.

© PTS 2014.

– Acts 3:24 –“...likewise, all the prophets who

have spoken, rom Samuel and hissuccessors onward, also announced

these days” (NASB).

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


– John 5:46–“For i you believed Moses,

you would believe Me; or hewrote o Me” (NASB).

sola gratia : Latin or “by grace alone;”the Protestant axiom which conciselycaptures the truth that God’s unmerited av(not man’s will or effort) alone initiates,secures, & applies salvation to His elect.

sola de : Latin or “by faith alone;”the Protestant theological maximencapsulating the biblical truththat believers are justied be ore Godby aith in Christ not by works.

– PROVIDENCE HEOLOGICAL SEMINARY JOURNAL – PAGEISSUE 1– NOV 2014

– FOR WHOSOEVER SHALL CALL UPON HE NAME OF HE LORD SHALL BE SAVED –


When you and I sign contracts today,even if we are downloading software onour computers, there is a place wherewe say, in effect “I agree to the aboveterms of the contract.” There will be a lotof binding technical language, and thenright below that, if it’s a paper contractthere will be a line and an “X” where wesign our name. If it’s a contract with thesoftware company, we click on the but-ton that says, “I agree.” When we sign orclick we are agreeing to that language. InPeter’s day this last part of binding you tothe contract was not done on the contractitself. It was done with a verbal questionand answer before a witness, and thatmade the contract legal and binding. Thequestion would be asked, “Do you accept

the terms of this contract and bindyourself to observe them?” The witnesswould hear you answer, “Yes,” and thatmade the contract valid. Well, thetechnical term for that question andresponse was this word, eperotema –Peter’s word here. So, Peter is usingbusiness language that describes anexecutor or party to a contract going tohis business deal either with the money,or with the intent to render a service formoney. The party is prepared before hearrives because of a previous understand-

ing or situation. Peter is saying that, inthe same way, when you are baptized, youcome with a clear conscience towardsGod and you say, “Yes” to God by yourbaptism. You are af irming that you are anew creature in Christ Jesus. You areaf irming that your sins have beenforgiven. You are af irming that, becauseyou are justi ied by grace through faith,you have a good conscience before God.

Dr. Duane Garrett, professor of OldTestament Interpretation at The South-

ern Baptist Theological Seminary inLouisville, gives an example of the kindof pledge of oneself to God that has beenexpressed by believers from their goodconsciences – it’s from the 1662 Book of

“Peter is saying that, in thesame way, when you are

baptized, you come with aclear conscience towardsGod and you say, “Yes” toGod by your baptism. You

are af irming that you are anew creature in Christ Jesus.You are af irming that yoursins have been forgiven. Youare af irming that, becauseyou are justi ied by grace

through faith, you have a goodconscience before God.”

Common Prayer, and it’s a more formalversion of the questions we ask in ourchurch.

Q. Dost thou renounce the devil andhis works, the vain pomp and gloryof the world, with all covetousdesires of the same, and the carnaldesires of the lesh, so that thou wilt

not follow, nor be led by them? A. I renounce them all. 2

This is an example of someonepledging oneself to be in agreementwith God, and it is pledging from a goodconscience, rather than asking for a goodconscience. In our text, the word “con-science” is in the genitive case. It can be asubjective genitive (“of” or “from” a goodconscience”) or it can be objective (“for”a good consicnece). My reason for choos-ing “of” a good conscience) is that aChristian already has a good consciencebefore his baptism; that’s because hissins have been forgiven. He need notappeal for a good conscience. He alreadyhas that because he has been regener-ated, justi ied, and forgiven through theblood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

2Thomas R. Schreiner & Shawn D.Wright, Beliver’s Baptism: Sign of the NewCovenant in Christ (Nashville: B&H Aca-demic, 2006), 277.

Now under the old covenant, theMosaic covenant, you could never havea good conscience. It was impossible tohave a good conscience before God.Consider Hebrews chapter 9, beginningwith verse 6. The writer to the Hebrewsis talking about the worship of the taber-nacle and he says, concerning all the tab-ernacle furniture and amenities: “These

preparations having thus been made, thepriests go regularly into the irst section[of the tabernacle] performing their ritualduties. But into the second only the highpriest goes, and he but once a year, andnot without taking blood, which he offersfor himself and for the unintentional sinsof the people. By this the Holy Spirit indi-cates that the way into the holy places isnot yet opened as long as the irst sectionis still standing [which is symbolic for thepresent age]. According to this arrange-ment, gifts and sacri ices are offeredthat cannot perfect the conscience of theworshiper, but deal only with food anddrink and various washings, regulationsfor the body imposed until the time ofreformation” (ESV). What is this saying?It is saying that the Jew under the oldcovenant could certainly hope that the of-ferings were, in some way ef iciacious, insome way helpful, in some way pleasingto God. But he could never have the kindof clear conscience that you and I havewhen we come to the Lord Jesus Christ onthe basis of 1 John 1:9, which says, “If weconfess our sins, he is faithful and just toforgive us our sins and to cleanse us fromall unrighteousness” (ESV).

Why is God just to do that? Why isGod just to cleanse you from all unright-eousness and forgive your sins when Heis a God who will by no means clear theguilty? The reason is that He presentedJesus Christ as a substitute sinner. AndHe by no means cleared Him. He laid onHim the transgressions of us all. And it


8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


coram Deo: Latin or “ in the Presence ofGod ;” the Protestant theological maximwhich summarizes the biblical truth thata believer’s li e is to glori y and honorGod in all things and at all times.

ad ontes : Latin or “ to the sources;” aphrase originating rom Rennaisancehumanism , which the Protestant Re ormerharnessed to convey the idea o studyingGod’s Word in its original languages.


– SALUS SEMPER SOLA GRA IA SOLA FIDE SOLO CHRIS O –



V TP T

S F P .

is unjust for him to punish the same sintwice, irst in the person of our Lord andthen in us! So if we have already beenpunished in our representative and ourlife is hidden with Christ in God, then God

(I say it reverently)must

forgive us (that’sHis rule, not ours). He must forgive us. Hecan not do anything other than forgive usbecause it is just to forgive us of our sinsand and to cleanse us from allunrighteousness; you can rise fromprayer to God confessing your sins saying,“There is no condemnation for me. I amin Christ Jesus, and I have a clear con-science before my God!”

The writer to Hebrews goes on to sayin verse 11, “But when Christ appeared asa high priest of the good things that havecome, then through the greater and moreperfect tent (not made with hands, thatis, not of this creation) he entered oncefor all into the holy places, not by meansof the blood of goats and calves but bymeans of his own blood, thus securingan eternal redemption. For if the bloodof goats and bulls and the sprinkling ofde iled persons with the ashes of a heifer,sanctify for the puri ication of the lesh,”[and that is what the writer has just said,that all these things are external sorts

of cleansing] “how much more will theblood of Christ, who through the eternalSpirit offered Himself without blemishto God, purge your conscience from deadworks to serve the living God?” (ESV).Therefore he is the mediator of a newcovenant, so that those who are calledmay receive the promised eternal inherit-ance, since a death has occurred thatredeems them from the transgressionscommitted under the irst covenant. Theway we are tempted to handle our con-science, of course, is to do dead works.

That’s the way our Catholic friends han-dle their conscience. They ind out whatdead works to do, and they do those deadworks. And that is the way, so often, webehave when we have sinned. All of

a sudden we think we have to do thingsto make up for that. But all of those thingsthat we do can never atone. “Thou mustsave and Thou alone.” What we have todo is keep coming back constantly to thecrosss, to the blood of Jesus to cleanse usfrom all sin, and understand that it is hisblood that purges our conscience.

So, let me just ask you, how is yourconscience? Can you actually say, “Jesusdied for my sins, for every wicked thingI have ever done, said or thought – andevery wicked thing that I will ever think,say or do? My salvation is in Christ alone.My righteousness is His imputed right-eousness to me. He is my Lord. I am inHim. And therefore God pronounces merighteous all the time. God has not ceasedto pronounce me righteous even when Ihave sinned since my conversion!” Do youbelieve that? That is the gospel, brothers

and sisters! It is the most amazing thingin the world! When you sin, you mustrepent of it and confess, but you plead anatonement that has already been made.And you can say, “I have repented. I have

come back to the Lord. I have confessedmy sin to Him. And now He forgives meand my conscience is clear.”

So Peter is saying in our text todayin 1 Peter 3 that baptism does not savein any sense when it is a mere externalwashing. All you do is remove dirt fromthe body! You don’t go into the baptisteryjust to get clean. Something inside hasto have happened. Something in yournature has to have changed. The only truebaptism is one that comes from a good

conscience. And here is the question.Where do you and I get a good consciencetowards God when we are dead intrespasses and sins, walking according tothe course of this world, according to

© PTS 2014.

the prince of the power of the air, whichis what we were before we becameChristians? How can you and I possiblyget a good conscience toward God? TheBible describes the thoughts and inten-tions of men’s hearts as only evil continu-ally. How can such people get a good con-scious toward God? The apostle Paul said,“The natural man does not receive thethings of the Spirit of God, neither can heknow them, because they are foolishnessto him” (1 Cor. 2:14, author’s translation)Where is that man going to get a goodconscience towards God?

Clearly, the cleansing of the con-science must be done by the blood ofChrist received in faith and repentance.And faith and repentance can only comefrom a regenerate heart, the heart of onewho has been born again by the HolySpirit. And all these blessings were pro-

cured for the people of God through theresurrection of Jesus Christ. And that’sPeter’s phrase in verse 21. He says thatthis baptism saves “through the resur-rection of Jesus Christ, who has gone intoheaven and is at the right hand of God”(ESV). It says in Romans 4:25 that Jesus“who was delivered up for our trespassesand raised for our justi ication ” (ESV).That is saying that the reason He wasraised from the dead is because youracquittal was accomplished. Your justi-ication was ready to be applied to you.He was raised because your justi icationhad been achieved in His atonement.Messiah was cut off, but not for Himself.He couldn’t stay dead because it wasimpossible for death to hold Him. He waswithout sin. He died as a substitute forothers. And so He was raised from thedead, and that resurrection demonstratesthat the atonement succeeded, that it wasfor others and not for Himself. God wasdeclaring Jesus to be the Son of God withpower!

Now when you were raised in Him,Paul says in Ephesians 2 that you have

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


– Matthew 5:17 –“Do not think that I came to

abolish the Law or theProphets; I did not come to abol-

ish, but to ulll” (NASB).

solo evangelio: Latin or “by the gospel athe Protestant axiom that concisely conveythat the Gospel alone is the power o Godsalvation and that it is the duty & honor oevery believer to share the Gospel in li e, wand deed.

solo cruce: Latin or “by the cross alone;”the Protestant theological maximwhich encapsulates the biblical truththat salvation is only ound in Christ’spenal substitutionary death on the cross.


– SALVA ION IS ALWAYS BY GRACE ALONE HROUGH FAI H ALONE IN CHRIS ALONE –


been raised together with Him, all theway up to the heavenly places. Sointimate is the connection between Jesus’death and God’s regarding you as havingdied, and between Jesus’ resurrection

and God’s regarding you as having beenraised that Paul can say, “If Christ is notrisen, your faith is futile; you are still inyour sins!” (NKJ). But the resurrectionproves that you who believe are not inyour sins. You are now new creatures.Your consciences are cleansed. You arechildren of God. You are saved. You aremembers of the new covenant. You haveGod’s law written in your heart. Youknow the Lord from the least of you tothe greatest. And your sins are forgiven!

None of these things come throughbaptism. Baptism simply pictures howyou receive these blessings through theunion with Christ. When we are baptizedby immersion, we are showing forth thedeath of the believer to his former life,as one united to Jesus in his death andresurrection. Baptism is a death, a burialand a resurrection enacted. So, what hap-pens is that the candidate is put into thewater and there is the death. And thenthere is a split-second when you don’t seethe candidate any more, and the burial is

pictured, showing that the old man, theman in Adam, has passed away. And thencomes the resurrection as the personemerges, confessing by that action that heor she is a new creature in Christ, unitedto him in his death, burial and resurrec-tion. Now, union with Christ is accom-plished, vitally, in time, at conversion, be-fore the baptism takes place. The baptismjust pictures it. The baptism displays it,just as the Lord’s Supper, again, displaysthe death of Jesus.

Why then does Peter say that bap-tism saves you? You know perfectly wellthat baptism does not save you. “Not anyworks of righteousness which [you] have

done, but according to His mercy Godsaved [you], by the washing of regenera-tion and renewing of the Holy Spirit”(Tit. 3:5). Regeneration is the washingthat saves you, but not baptism. So, howcan Peter say, “Baptism, which corre-sponds to Noah’s family being saved,now saves” (ESV)? It might help to knowthe literal translation of what he wrote:“there is also an antitype which nowsaves us – baptism.” I think the key tounderstanding what he’s saying is toconcentrate on that word “antitype.”That word means that he’s making aparallel statement to the description ofNoah’s family in the ark in the time of thejudgment by the lood. In other words,the only sense in which baptism savesus is simply as an analogy to that otherrescue, when the family was rescued byGod from destruction. A type in Scriptureis a pattern or example. An antitype isa corresponding pattern or example. Sothe King James translation is pretty goodhere. It calls baptism “the like igure.” Thelike igure of what? The like igure of twothings, actually. The like igure not onlyof the death, burial and resurrection ofJesus, but also the like igure of the arkas the ark was inundated in the waters ofjudgment. Those waters were dangerous,they represented the judgment of God,and yet the ark and its passengers were

delivered. And so what Peter is simply

saying here is in terms of an analogy oran example. Baptism is also a kind deliv-erance. It “saves” only in its analogy as anantitype with the waters of Noah’s ark.

The person with the good conscienceis already saved when he or she isbaptized, or else the good consciencewouldn’t be there! And this text, whichseems to play right into the hands ofthose who believe and preach baptismalregeneration, is actually one of the worstenemies of those who preach thatdoctrine. Why? Because anyone whopreaches baptismal regeneration ispreaching, in some way or another, theneed for such regeneration. In otherwords, the sinner needs to be born again.Whether it’s those who baptize babiesand then proclaim them to be Christians;or whether it’s folks in the Churches ofChrist who believe that grace is impartedin the baptismal waters and that’s whenregeneration happens – either way youhave a right to go to such people and say,“Wait a minute! Scriptural baptism is thepledge of a good conscience. How didyour sinful baby get a good conscience?Or how did your sinful candidate forbaptism get a good conscience? Howcould they possible have a good con-science before they’re baptized if baptismsupposedly gives them the goodconscience?” So, don’t be alarmed be-cause Peter just tosses off this remarkthat “baptism saves us.” Don’t be afraidto go here with a proponent of baptismalregeneration, because the text is teachingexactly the opposite.

Now, we’ve seen that the good con-science only can apply to those whoseconsciences have been cleansed by theblood of Jesus. That means believers.And so, let’s ask, or verify, that believer’sbaptism or ‘baptism of the new covenant’is what Peter knew and experienced. Con-sider the words of our Lord in the GreatCommission. Peter was there when Jesusgave the words, and you know them well,they are at the end of Matthew in Mat-thew 28:18. Jesus starts by saying, “Allauthority has been given to Me in heavenand on earth.” He is boldly proclaimingHis Kingship, His Lordship, and He has


“Regenerationis the washing

that savesyou...notbaptism.”

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


biblical theology: a theological approachthat seeks to determine the theologicalteaching and distinctives o the individualbiblical authors and understand them in lighto the progressive revelation o God’s Word.

systematic theology : a theological approathat seeks to distill and systematize into aconsistent, logical ramework all that theentire canon o Scripture teaches on anyparticular theological subject or topic.


– KIRKEKAMPF NICH KULURKAMPF` –



for his servants. He says in verse 19, “Gotherefore and make disciples of all thenations, baptizing them in the name ofthe Father and of the Son and of the HolySpirit, teaching them to observe all things

that I have commanded you; and behold,I am with you always, even to the end ofthe age.” He commanded that disciplesare who should be baptized. That reallyshould settle this issue. He did not sayanything about baptizing them and theirseed, their children.

Now reformed Christians whobaptize children agree that there is nodirect command to baptize the childrenof believers. But, they say, there is nocommand that forbids it either. I beg todiffer. Can we baptize adult unbelievers ?There is no command directly forbiddingit, is there? No, not in terms of “Thoushalt not.” But, because of the positivecommand about who should be baptized,the negative of that command must beassumed. That means that there is acommand that forbids you to baptize anadult unbeliever. It’s this one. It forbids it.It says, “Make disciples of all nations, bap-tizing them [i.e. the disciples]” (ESV). Youcan’t be baptized until you are a disciple,by virtue of the fact that this de ines who

is to be baptized. Therefore, those whoare not de ined here should be under -stood to be excluded. When Paul says,“Husbands, love your wives as Christloved the church” (NIV), do you say, “Well,sure, I’m supposed to do that, but thatdoesn’t prevent me from loving anotherwoman as Christ loved the church, doesit?” And when he says, “Wives, submityourselves to your husbands” (NIV), isthat saying that the wife is supposedto submit herself to every man? No, ofcourse not. Just because there is not an

explicit text forbidding candidates forbaptism does not mean that we cannotconclude from the speci ic candidates inthe commandment who is not supposed

to be a candidate. If the command had notmeant “these and no other,” Jesus wouldhave said so.

So now consider Peter’s own experi-ences with baptism. Look at Penetcost inActs 2:34-37. There he is preaching and,all of a sudden, his sermon is virtuallyinterrupted. They heard this, they were

cut to the heart. They said to Peter andthe rest of the apostles, “Men and breth-ren, what shall we do?” And Peter said tothem, “Repent, and let every one of yoube baptized in the name of Jesus Christ”(NIV). The presupposition is epi , whichmeans “upon.” It is saying that this com-mand is based on the authority of Jesus.It’s not denying the Trinity, or con lictingwith Jesus’ words in the Great Commis-sion. Moreover, it says, “For the remissionof sins.” The word, “for” is eis , which

means “in reference to.” So when Petersays, “Be baptized...for the remission ofsins” (NKJ), he’s saying, “for the remissionof sins which you will have alreadyreceived before your baptism, and youshall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.For this promise is to you and to yourchildren, and to all who are afar off, asmany as the Lord our God will call” (NKJ).Our paedobaptist friends love to quote,“For the promise is to you and to yourchildren” (NKJ). But they don’t quote therest of it: “to all who are afar off , as manyas the Lord our God will call ” (NKJ). Thatdescribes

“He [i.e. Christ]commanded that

disciples are who shouldbe baptized. That reallyshould settle this issue.He did not say anythingabout baptizing themand their seed, their

children.”

who the proper subjects of baptism are.It’s clear that they are those whom theLord calls effectually, Jews and Gentiles,who will give evidence of their callingin faith and repentance, and who are tobe baptized. The ‘children’ to whom thispromise is made will need to personallyful ill the conditions of faith and repent -ance in response to their calling from

God. The graciousness of the promise liesin the fact that the children and subse-quent generations from all over the worldwill have the opportunity to hear, repent,and believe in the Lord Jesus, and be bap-tized as believers.

You see the same thing in Cornelius’house, where Peter had the privilegeof speaking the gospel to the Gentilesand seeing them saved. In Acts 10:44we read, “While Peter was still speakingthese words, the Holy Spirit fell upon allthose who heard the word. And thoseof the circumcision who believed wereastonished, as many as came with Peter,”(those are the Jews) “because the gift ofthe Holy Spirit had been poured out onthe Gentiles also. For they heard themspeak with tongues and magnify God.Then Peter answered, ‘Can anyone forbidwater, that these should not be baptizedwho have received the Holy Spirit just aswe have?” (NKJ). That is baptism in a nut-shell. One verse, verse 47. All those whohave God’s law in their hearts. All thosewho know the Lord. All those whose sinsare forgiven.

This was not only Peter’s experience.It was Philip’s experience in Samaria andwith the Ethiopian eunuch. It was Paul’sexperience. It’s the pattern in the book ofActs.

Now so far, all of our paedobaptistbrothers and sisters will agree with whatI’ve said. They’re not going to argue withthe book of Acts. No doubt they argue

with my contention that infant baptism isspeci ically forbidden by virtue of the fact


on Twitter:

@PTS_NCT

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1



– A S RUGGLE FOR HE CHURCH, NO A S RUGGLE FOR HE CUL URE –

– John 5:39 –“You search the Scriptures, because

you think that in them you haveeternal li e; and it is these that bear

witness o Me” (NASB).

soli Deo gloria: Latin or “ to God alone the glory ;” the Protestant theological maxwhich denotes that everything that mandoes should be done or the express purpo bringing glory to God not himsel .

solo Christo: Latin or “by Christ alone;”the Protestant axiom that conciselyconveys the biblical truth that salvation isound only in the Lord Jesus Christ, thesole mediator between God and man.


that Jesus says it is for disciples. But theycertainly have the right to ask this: whatabout the household baptisms in thebook of Acts? Let us take the most famousexample in Acts 16. Start with verse 31,

when Paul said to the Philippian jailer,“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and youwill be saved, you and your household”(NKJ). What’s he saying there? Is he say-ing that all your household is going tobe saved because of your belief? No. Hewould never say that. The Bible doesn’tteach that. He is simply saying, “you andyour household can be saved and will besaved on the same condition, that youbelieve on the Lord Jesus Christ. Andanybody in your household who believeson Jesus will also be saved.” Verse 32

says, “Then they spoke the word of God tohim and all who were in the house” (NKJ).So everybody in the household heardthe word of God. “And he took them thesame hour of the night and washed theirstripes. And immediately he and all of hisfamily were baptized” (NKJ). “Now whenhe had brought them into his house, heset food before them; and he rejoiced,having believed in God with all hishousehold” (NKJ). There is no evidencehere that there were any infants present.No infants are mentioned. But we maybe sure of one thing: if any infants werepresent they heard the word of God,they believed the word of God, and werebaptized and rejoiced with their father!The other household baptisms I will notgo into. They’re mentioned in Acts 16:15and 1 Corinthians 1:16. And, again, no in-fants are mentioned. Arguments for theirpresence are arguments from a deafening silence.

But now here is the dif icult issue.Someone else may ask, “What about theconnection between circumcision as thesign of the covenant in the Old Testamentand baptism as the sign of the newcovenant. Surely as infants once were

circumcised under the Abrahamic cov-enant and subsequent covenants, theyshould be baptized in the new covenant.”This is the most formidable argument forinfant baptism, and the one that has beenso enticing over the years to peoplelearning about the Reformed faith, topeople who read Calvin, the Puritans andthe Westminster Confession of the Faith.

The irst point that must be madeis that the relationship of circumcisionto baptism is based on a third thing. Andthat thing is what circumcision pointsto – regeneration. Circumcision is ful-illed in regeneration. Circumcision wasa sign given to Abraham. It’s called a signand a seal. And it was given not only to

Abraham, but also to his seed after him.It was symbolic of cleansing . But in God’scommands to Israel about circumcision ofthe heart we see what circumcision of thebody typi ied. Deuteronomy 10:16 says,“Therefore circumcise the foreskin ofyour heart, and be stiff-necked no longer”(NKJ). The command is, “Make your hearttoward Me match your body.” Jeremiah4:4 says essentially the same thing.

Is there a connection between cir-cumcision and baptism, so that the latterhas replaced the former, as most of theReformed churches claim? There is a rela-tionship, but it is not one of replacement.

Again, what relationship there is comesthrough the reality that both things aresignifying, which is regeneration. Letus go to the classic “proof text,” Colos-sians 2:11 and 12, “In him also you werecircumcised with a circumcision madewithout hands” (NKJ) – that means thecircumcision that is of the Spirit, of theheart. “By putting off the body of the

lesh, by the circumcision of Christ” (NKJ).Now what that is saying is that Jesus hascircumcised the heart of every single oneof us in the new covenant. And then Paulgoes on to say you are “buried with Himin baptism, in which you were also raisedwith Him through faith in the workingof God, who raised Him from the dead”(NKJ). So what’s the relationship? Simplythis: what circumcision pointed toward ,baptism points back to . But baptismnever points toward it. Insofar ascircumcision pointed toward the ful ill -ment of regeneration, baptism is doneafter regeneration has occurred. Theheart circumcised by Christ, the heartthat now knows the Lord, his law and hisforgiveness, the new covenant heart isnow the one which submits to baptism.

The second thing to say about thecircumcision/baptism argument is thatthere is not the remotest connectionmade between the rituals anywhere inthe Bible. In other words, yes, Colossiansspeaks of circumcision of the heart andbaptism; but no text brings togetherphysical circumcision and baptism.There’s not the remotest connectionmade between the two rituals anywherein the Bible. Nobody ever teaches thatbaptism answers to circumcision andthey could have . Paul had the perfect op-portunity when he wrote to the Galatianswho were being troubled by Judaizerswho said, “Unless you have been circum-cised you cannot be saved.” If Paul hadbelieved the classic Covenant Theology of

most Reformed churches, he could have


© PTS 2014.

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


Israel: the temporary geo-political entity,comprised o both believing & unbelievingethnic descendants o Abraham, Isaac, andJacob; the people o God established by theold covenant enacted at Mount Sinai.

the Church : spiritual body o Christ, comprised oboth believing Jews & believing Gentiles, that wasrst ormed in history when the Spirit was pouredout at Pentecost; the people o God established by new covenant secured & ratied by Christ Jesus.


– ECCLESIA REFORMA A SEMPER REFORMANDA SECUNDUM VERBUM DEI –





simply written, “Dear foolish Galatians,you don’t understand. Circumcision hasbeen ful illed in baptism. Sincerely, Paul.”Furthermore the same issue necessitatedcalling the council at Jerusalem. When

it convened, where were the covenanttheologians to say, “Wait a minute. Cir-cumcision has been ful illed by baptism.Meeting adjourned?” The fact is, the Bibledoes not teach this. It is a tradition of men.It is a man-made tradition drawn from“good and necessary deductions,” fromlogic, from sentiment even, but not fromthe pages of Scripture. “To the law andto the testimony!” If they do not speakaccording to this word, there may be lightin them on many other subjects on whichwe agree, but there is no light in them onthis one.

The third thing to say is that in theAbrahamic and subsequent covenants,you became part of the people of Godby birth. All you had to do was be born!Under the new covenant how do youbecome part of the people of God? Bybeing born again ! It’s just this simple.Circumcision was for the born; baptismis for the born again. Whose is the lastbirth recorded in the Bible? To whom dothe last genealogies in the Bible belong?

We don’t have any more after those ofJesus. Our Lord Jesus Christ who is theSeed to whom the Abrahamic promiseswere made has come. And those who areunited to that Seed, by faith, receive theblessings promised to Abraham. “If youare Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seedand heirs according to the promise” (Gal.3:29, NKJ), and “those who are of faith areblessed with believing Abraham (Gal. 3:9,NKJ). It’s no longer by birth. Paul wrote,“In Christ Jesus neither circumcision noruncircumcision avails anything, but a newcreation.” (Gal. 6:15, NKJ).

The fourth thing to say about thecircumcision/baptism argument is thatchildren of believers are holy, in the sense

of “set apart,” without being baptizedas infants. They are already holy in thatsense, and there is nothing that you cando about it! They may wind up in hellbut their judgment will likely be moresevere because they were holy! Theywere simply born to at least one believerand that alone suf iced to set them apart.1 Corinthians 7:14 says, “The unbeliev-ing husband is sancti ied by the wife,the unbelieving wife is sancti ied by thehusband; otherwise your children wouldbe unclean, but now they are holy” (NKJ).Paul is clearly teaching that children ofbelievers have special privileges; thatthey are set apart from this sinful world;that they have the great opportunitiesthat come from being connected to aChristian parent. However, the same

blessings are true of an unbelieving hus-band. We wouldn’t baptize the unbeliev-ing husband because he’s holy would we?And yet he’s holy too! We would say he’sgot to repent and believe. But the child issupposedly holy and therefore is sup-posed to be baptized, when baptism isnot even mentioned in the passage! Theyalready have the blessing. There’s noth-ing that they would receive in baptismthat they don’t already have. They’realready holy.

The ifth thing to say is somethingnot to say. Don’t say this: that baptism isthe sign of the new covenant! While mythesis is that baptism is the pledge ofmembership in the new covenant, it is

not the sign of the new covenant. If yousay that it is, you open yourself up to thebrilliant, but unscriptural comparisonsbetween circumcision and baptism. Ifyou want to get twisted into a doctrinalpretzel, allow the point to one of ourpaedobaptist brothers or sisters that yes,baptism is the sign of the covenant. Theirnostrils will lare. Their eyes will lash.And they’ll bring you in to the discussionof the analogy of baptism and circum-cision. My point is this: we have gotto deprogram ourselves from a theo-logical covenant that is not mentionedin Scripture and a baptism that is not asign of that covenant, not even, strictlyspeaking, the sign of the new covenant.It’s just not called that, ever. What is thesign of the new covenant? Jesus told us.He said, “This cup is the new covenant inmy blood” (Luke 22:20, NKJ). And isn’t ititting that before one can partake of thatsign he/she must examine himself? Thatis something infants cannot do. The verysign of the new covenant insists that therequirements of membership have beenful illed: God’s law in the heart, know -ing God without being taught, and sinscompletely forgiven. Because infants bynature cannot enjoy these blessings apartfrom a demonstrable work of grace, theyare not members of the new covenant.They are not proper subjects to make its pledge (baptism) or receive its sign (com

munion). I say, as I said, at the beginning,it is a question of who is in the covenant.

Infant baptism is, therefore, notfound in Scripture. I have often wishedthat it were. I have often wished some-times, as Spurgeon himself wished,that we Baptists could get away fromthe stigma of being odd and differentand separate from the majority of thechurch in the world. But infant baptismis not found in Scripture. And not only isit not found in Scripture and therefore

we cannot do it, it seriously distorts thesacrament of baptism because it cannotrepresent union with Christ. Nor can it be

© PTS 2014.





8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


the Noahic Covenant: the covenant wheGod covenantally promised to Noah, hisdescendants, and all living creatures that hwould never again destroy the whole earthmeans o a ood; the sign o this covenant the rainbow.


– HE CHURCH REFORMED & ALWAYS REFORMING ACCORDING O GOD’S WORD –

solo Spiritu: Latin or “by the Spiritalone;” a theological maxim summarizingthe theological truth that the Spirit aloneilluminates believers to truly understandGod’s Word & empowers believers to livegodly lives in Christ Jesus.


the pledge of a good conscience towardGod received by repentance and faith.And not only that, it is a false ritual that,in many cases, prevents the exercise ofthe true one. Pastors of Christians whoreceived infant baptism will sometimesdeny Scriptural believer’s baptism tothose same members once they aretruly converted. Churches who praticepaedobaptism, will, ironically, practiceproper baptism to adult proselytes whoask for it, but deny it to their own lifelongmembers when they themselves are bornagain! Surely this is the major area thatthe Reformers refused to reform. Theywould not bring infant baptism out ofCatholicism except so far as to say that itdoesn’t regenerate. Surely here is where

the reformation of the church must con-tinue, brothers and sisters.

My last point is a brief one: baptismrightly administered upon evidence ofnew covenant blessings has many ben-e its. This has great practical applicationfor the church. First, of course, those whohave been baptized at infancy believe,because they have been taught, thatthey don’t need it, that it doesn’t need tohappen once they personally believe onJesus. The second thing is that so many

people are taught that salvation is bygrace through faith and therefore theyconclude that they don’t need to do theactual act of obedience of being baptized.So it’s neglected by those who perhapsfear the doctrine of baptism too much!

But here are the blessings that itbrings to the church, the things we needto see in our day and age. First, it af irmsto the one getting baptized his unionwith Christ. He says, in His baptism,“I’m united to Jesus. I died with Him. Iwas buried with Him. I’m raised withHim. I was there when they cruci ied myLord.” Second, it pictures the gospel tothe congregation, encouraging them andstrengthening their faith. Third, itpublicly marks out, as much as anything

can, the redeemed people of God, andtherefore proclaims them to be thechurch. And it prevents, as much asanything can, the confusion betweenreal and false Christians, the growthof wheat and tares together that char-acterizes Christendom, particularly inthose countries where infant baptism isuniversally practiced. Lastly, it encour-ages true conversions. Why? Because it isa fearful thing to come to the water. It is afearful thing to come to the baptistery. It’sa humbling thing to come and have thisdone in the presence of your new fam-ily. It encourages true conversions and itguards the Lord’s Supper from those whoare disobedient and who refuse to followthe Lord’s example and command.

Hebrews 10:19 is an exhortation tobelievers and it is wonderful. It’s an ex-hortation to come together into the verythrone room of God, into the presence ofour heavenly Father, with the way pavedfor us by our merciful High Priest. It’s aninvitation to do the most wonderful thingthat you can do as a Christian, to drawnigh to God. And I want to say that thispassage alone should make the case thatthe subject of baptism is in need of refor-mation. Because it’s a call to experience ablessing that only those who have been

“...baptism rightlyadministered upon

evidence of newcovenant blessings has

many bene its. Thishas great practicalapplication for the

church.”

scripturally baptized can fully enter. It isfrankly hard for me to see how anyonewho has only been baptized as an infantcan feel as though he meets the require-ment for this blessing. This may seem likea hard saying, but it is based on the wordof God.

I have seen so often the beginning

of this blessing. Having baptized somany people in my life, I wouldn’t tradeanything for the sight of the joy of thosecandidates when they come out of thewater. To see their joy, to see their happi-ness, to see the glow that is on their facesis a wonderful experience. Somethingsublime happens as they obey the Lord.They are so happy after their baptism.And so, as I say, this is a call to experi-ence a blessing that only those who havebeen scripturally baptized can fully enter.“Therefore, brothers, since we havecon idence to enter the holy places by theblood of Jesus, by the new and living waywhich He opened for us, through the cur-tain, that is, through His lesh, and sincewe have a great priest over the house ofGod. Let us draw near with a true heartin full assurance of faith, with our heartssprinkled clean from an evil conscienceand our bodies washed with pure water ”(ESV).

FINIS.

Editor’s Note: On November 29, 2011,the Lord called home his devoted serv-ants, Jackson Boyett (the author of thisarticle) and his wife Barbara. Their liveswere a sure testimony of the grace andgoodness of our Lord Jesus Christ. SoliDeo Gloria.

© PTS 2014.

– Jeremiah 31:31 –“Behold, the days come, saith the

LORD, that I will make a new cov-enant with the house o Israel, andwith the house o Judah” (NASB).

© PTS 2014.

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


the Abrahamic Covenant : the royal grant covenant outlined in Genesis 12, 15, 17 inwhich God covenantally promised to Abraham a seed , a nation , and a land; thesecovenant promises where ullled in the Old estament types o Isaac, the nation oIsrael, and the land o Canaan; this covenant is ultimately ullled in the New Covenant via the antitypes o Christ (& His elect), the Church, and the new heavens & new earth.


– CHRIS US DOMINUS HODIE RESURREXI –

1William W. Sasser currently serves

as Pastor of Grace Church in Franklin, TN.2All Scripture citations are from the

King James Version (KJV) unless otherwiseindicated.


ing of the names of all who would be-saved in time (Rev. 17:8; Luke 10:20). Myfriend, God leaves nothing regarding Hisglory to chance, and the glory of God isbound up in the salvation of His people.Will you not come to Christ in faith, andpartake of this GREAT salvation? “Neitheris there salvation in any other: for thereis none other name under heaven givenamong men, whereby we must be saved”(Acts 4:12).

Regeneration: A Supernatural Act

Our English word, regeneration , isderived from a Latin word which means“born again, born a second time,” or“generated again.” In Titus 3:5 we aretold that one is saved “by the washing ofregeneration.” The Greek word translat-ed “regeneration,” is palingenesias , from palin , meaning “again,” and genesis , mea

ing “birth.” In John 3:7 the same truth ispresented, though in slightly differentlanguage: “ye must be born again” is liter-ally born ( gennaō ) from above (anōthenAgain, in Ephesians 2:1, Paul declares tothe believers in the church at Ephesusthat they had been “dead in trespassesand sins,” but that God had quickened,i.e., made them alive ( zōopoieō ). Finally,2 Corinthians 5:17 tells us that everyonewho is in Christ is a new creature, liter-ally, “a new creation.” From such versesone can understand that regeneration isa supernatural act of God, whereby Hegives spiritual life to one who is abso-lutely without it, that is, who is spirituallydead.

Regeneration & Spiritual Death

According to the Scriptures, the irstman, Adam, was told that disobedienceto the express command of God wouldresult in a state of death (Gen. 2:15-17).We know from the record that, althoughAdam did disobey, he lived for manyyears before his body died (Gen. 5:5).But why did his body die? His body diedbecause the very instant he disobeyed

“God thought it, wrought it, bought it,and sought it.” That is, it was God whoconceived of salvation. It was God whoworked out how salvation would actuallybe brought to pass. It was God whopurchased salvation, in a manner consist-ent with His own holy and perfect lawand justice. And, it was God who soughtout, called and applied salvation to allwho are the recipients of it. As David saidconcerning the salvation of Israel, “Forthey got not the land in possession bytheir own sword, neither did their ownarm save them: but Thy right hand, andThine arm, and the light of Thy counte-nance, because Thou hadst a favor untothem” (Psa. 44:3). And, as the Lord saidin Isaiah, “I looked, and there was noneto help; and I wondered that there wasnone to uphold: therefore Mine own armbrought salvation unto Me; and My fury,it upheld Me” (Isa. 63:5).

Make no mistake here, my dearfriend, salvation is of the Lord (Jonah2:9)! If ever we ind ourselves as helplessas was Jonah, when he was in the belly ofthe great ish, we too shall confess,“ salvation is of the Lord!”

The Scope of Salvation

The word “salvation,” soteria in theGreek, means, “deliverance, safety, orpreservation.” But the doctrine of salva-tion encompasses all time and eternity,and utilizes the wisdom and power ofall three Persons of the Godhead. Thatis, salvation had its beginning in eternitypast, and extends into eternity future. Assuch, the doctrine of salvation includesthe actions taken by all the Persons of theGodhead relative to securing a people forthe glory of God: namely, election by theFather, the Suretyship of the Son, and thecalling, regenerating, sealing andcomforting work of the Holy Spirit.

The salvation of God’s people wasno afterthought. It was purposed andplanned before the foundation of theworld in every detail, even to the record

The Doctrine of Salvation

– Part 1 – by William W. Sasser 1

The longest word in any language iseternity ; the darkest and most dreadfulword is hell ; the sweetest word is Christ ;but the greatest word is salvation . Thewriter to the Hebrews asked, “How shallwe escape, if we neglect so GREAT salva-tion” (Heb. 2:3)? 2 The Greek word trans-lated “salvation,” soteria , denotes deliver-ance or preservation. It is commonlyused when referring to deliverance fromsin. This is what is intended by the ques-tion, “What must I do to be saved” (Acts16:30)? However, as we shall see, salva-tion is much more than deliverance only.It includes what our great God did ineternity past; what He has done in time;what He has done with us; what He shalldo with us in the future, and what shallbe done in the eternal future.

Salvation is in, by, and throughChrist. As Peter said, “Neither is theresalvation in any other: for there is noneother name under heaven given amongmen, whereby we must be saved” (Acts4:12). This is why we preach the gospel.

“It is the power of God unto salvation toeveryone that believeth” (Rom. 1:16).

The Cause of Salvation

The cause of salvation may be expressed in one word: God ! Salvation waspurposed by the Almighty God beforethe creation of the world, executed andsustained in time, and shall be consum-mated in eternity. As someone has said,

V TP T

S F P .

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


the Davidic Covenant: the royal grant covenant outlined in 2 Samuel 7 in which God covenantallypromised to David a son, a throne, a kingdom, and a temple; these covenant promises where ullledin the Old estament type o Solomon who sat upon David’s throne over Israel and built God’s templein Jerusalem; this covenant is ultimately ullled in the New Covenant via the antitype o Jesus Christ(David’s greater son) who presently sits upon God the Father’s throne over His everlasting kingdomand built God’s true temples (i.e. His resurrected body, the Church, and the individual believer).


– CHRIS HE LORD IS RISEN ODAY –

– Ezekiel 36:27 –“And I will put My Sp

within you, and cause yto walk in my statutes,

ye shall keep my judgmand do them” (NASB


(Doctrine of Salvation Continued from Page 18)

God he died spiritually....Adam’s spir-itual death evidenced itself in that hebecame afraid of God, and sought to hidefrom Him (Gen. 3:8-10). God’s remedyfor spiritual death is regeneration. By

His power the Spirit of God renews, orregenerates, the “old man,” thus makinghim a “new man” (Rom.6:6; Eph. 4:22-24; Col. 3:9-10). Such a person is said tobe a new creation in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17),born again (John 3:3,7), or spirituallyalive (Eph. 2:1). It is only the regener-ated person who possesses salvation.

Regeneration & the Spirit

To be regenerated is to be madealive, to be born again, to be made a new

creation, to be spiritually resurrectedfrom the dead. Regeneration is the workof the Spirit alone. It cannot be producedby any act of man, whether that act ismoral or religious (Titus 3:5). It can-not be executed, caused, or in any waybrought about by the will of man, thelesh of man, or the procreative powersof man. It can only be effected only by theSovereign Spirit of God (John 1:12-13).

Our Lord said to Nicodemus, “Yemust be born again” (John 3:7), not “Ye

must born yourself again.” Such languageindicates that the one who is regeneratedis passive in the matter, not active. Thatis, the one who is regenerated does notin any way participate in the regenera-tion process. Rather, he or she is actedupon by another, namely the Spirit ofGod. Certainly no one would argue thatthey effected their natural birth, and onlypride, or ignorance – or both – causesmen to usurp the work of the Spirit inthe new birth.

Repentance, Faith & Regeneration When the writers of Scripture speakof “being saved,” they are usuallyemphasizing the necessity of faith and

repentance, two gifts of the Spirit whichare experienced and exercised by the onebeing saved. It is God who does the sav-ing, but it is the individual being savedwho is doing the repenting and believ-ing. But when the Word of God speaks of“being born again,” the emphasis is onthe activity and work of the Spirit alone.In this latter case, it is God only who isacting, not the one being born again.One who is regenerated by the Spirit hassalvation, and one who has salvationrepents and believes. But it is regenera-tion which comes irst, not faith andrepentance. This is necessarily sobecause, before regeneration, one isdead spiritually (Eph. 2:1), and we allknow that dead persons cannot performspiritual acts.

The Necessity of Regeneration

Our Lord Jesus Christ told Nicode-mus, “Ye must be born again” (John 3:7).The fact emphasized is the absolutenecessity of regeneration for all whowould enter heaven; the new birth isnot optional: “Ye must be born again!”Regeneration is a universal necessity.All whose hope is salvation must be bornagain. The word translated “Ye” is plural.That is, our Lord was not speaking toNicodemus only, but to all who are inthe same spiritual condition as Nicode-mus. Secondly, regeneration is a critical necessity: “ Except a man be born again,he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John3:3). Thirdly, regeneration is a moral necessity. The reason men are immoral isbecause they are separated from the life

of God, which life is one of righteousnessand holiness. By the New Birth, the Spiritof God changes an individual by takingup residence. That is, the bodies, souls,and minds of regenerated persons

become the temple of the Lord (2 Cor.6:16). Having the Holy Spirit, one isdrawn toward holiness, righteousnessand right conduct. Fourthly, regenerationis a mental necessity. Sin has darkenedthe mind, causing men to become vainin their imaginations, and unable tounderstand the things which are spir-itual (Rom. 1:21; Eph.1:17-18). Becauseof sin’s devastating effect upon the mindand heart, men have become children ofwrath, seeking only to follow and ful illthe lusts of the lesh (Eph. 2:1-3). In fact,we are said to be dead in trespasses andsins (Eph. 2:1). Now the only way a deadperson could serve God is if he or shewere made alive, which is precisely whatthe New Birth accomplishes. He that isdead in sin is dead toward God. How-ever, he that is regenerated, or born fromabove, is made alive to God. He is thus

able to know God’s will, to do God’s Hiswill, and to enter His kingdom by faith.

The Cause of Regeneration& Salvation

Any person who is seeking salvationknows the importance of regeneration;Ye must be born again does not expressan option, but an absolute necessity. Butwhat is the cause of salvation? What isthe basis without which there could beno salvation? At this point many becomeconfused. Let me suggest four causes ofsalvation.

The ef icacious cause of salvationis the will of God. Had God not willed tosave a people, salvation would not bepossible. Thus James declares, “of Hisown will begat He us” (Jas. 1:18). Paul,expressing the same truth from the op-posite perspective, says, “it is not of himthat willeth, nor of him that runneth, butof God that showeth mercy” (Rom. 9:16).

The meritorious cause of salvation

is the blood of Christ. The Bible is clearthat without the shedding of blood is no remission of sin (Heb. 9:22). That is, God

© PTS 2014.

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


circumcision : the sign o the covenant which Yahweh orged with Abraham; all Israelitemales were to be physically circumcised on the eighth day afer being born; anyIsraelite male who was not physically circumcised was cut off rom the people o Israel;the New estament Scriptures teach that circumcision was given as “a seal o the right-eousness o the aith” that Abraham had; the New estament parallel o Old estamentcircumcision is circumcision of the heart (i.e. regeneration), not water baptism.


– IN HIM YOU WERE ALSO CIRCUMCISED WI H A CIRCUMCISION MADE WI HOU HANDS –



– Luke 24:27 –“And beginning with Moses and

with all the prophets, He explainedto them the things concerning Him-

sel in all the Scriptures” (NASB).

in reformation, but reformation cannotcause the new birth, and must not besubstituted for it.

It is error to substitute churchmembership for regeneration, fatalerror. But in fact, rated on a scale of oneto ten, church membership is perhapsthe most common substitute of all. Satan

is working full time to slip men andwomen imitations and counterfeits of thenew birth, and in this area he has beenvery successful. Added to this demonicdeception is the natural depravity anddeceitfulness of the human heart. Manybelieve they are children of God becauseof what they have done, and because ofwhat they have professed. But admissioninto the local church must not beequated with admission into the king-dom of Christ. “ Ye must be born again!”

Some of the most fearful wordsrecorded in scripture, are the words ourLord will utter to many who will havedone many things in the name and forthe sake of Jesus Christ. No doubt, manyof them will be church members. Manywill say to me in that day, “Lord, Lord,have we not prophesied in thy name?and in thy name have cast out devils?and in thy name done many wonder-ful works? And then will I profess untothem, I never knew you: depart from Me,ye that work iniquity” (Matt. 7:22-23).

My church member friend, as ThomasBoston said, “if we art not born again, allour outward reformation is naught. Wehave shut the door, but the thief is still inthe house.”

Another substitute for regenera-tion is doing the best one can . Oftenin a visitation the minister is informed,“Preacher, I do the best I can, and that isall God requires of anyone.” One may besurprised how widespread this think-ing may be. Those individuals with this

contention are often confronted witha searching question such as, “ Can youhonestly say that you have done the best

argues, however, that since no one canboast before God, all who are saved can-not have been saved by works. Again, inTitus 3:5, it is written, “Not by works ofrighteousness which we have done, butaccording to his mercy he saved us, bythe washing of regeneration, and renew-ing of the Holy Ghost.” The basis of oursalvation is pure, sovereign mercy. Themeans by which this salvation is given, orapplied, is regeneration, which is solelythe work of the Holy Spirit and not thework of the one who is regenerated.

Another common substitute for re-generation is reformation . That is, manypeople “turn over a new leaf” to ind thefavor of God. They have somehow swal-lowed the idea that change is synony-mous with the new birth. It is true thatthe new birth effects radical change, butit is not true that changing one’s con-duct effects the new birth. Being savedis not a matter of one making up one’smind “to become a Christian,” rather,salvation results from a mighty work ofGod within an individual, which causeschange. The acts of faith and repentanceare beyond natural human ability. Theyare gifts of God (Eph. 2:8-9; Acts 11:18).Thus, savingly believing on Jesus Christis not a matter of the human will, but amatter of the heart: “For with the heartman believeth unto righteousness; andwith the mouth confession is made untosalvation” (Rom.10:9). Here is just theproblem. How can the natural man, i.e.,the unregenerate person, believe withthe heart, when, according to the Bible,“the heart is deceitful above all things,and desperately wicked” (Jer. 17:9)? Howcan the natural mind love Him againstwhom it is enmity, for, again, the Bibledeclares that, “the carnal mind is enmityagainst God: for it is not subject to thelaw of God, neither indeed can be” (Rom.8:7). Answer: God must change the

heart. This is precisely what happens inthe new birth. As our Lord said, “Verily,verily, I say unto thee, Except a man beborn again, he cannot see the kingdom ofGod” (John 3:3). The new birth will result

saves no one whose sins are not paidfor, because sin not paid for cannot bejustly put away. God has said that He will“by no means clear the guilty” (Exod.34:7). Jesus Christ paid for sin through

His death at Calvary. Thus, the sheddingof His blood is the meritorious cause ofsalvation.

The agential cause of salvation isthe Holy Spirit. That is, the Holy Spirit,by His regenerating work, is the agent ofsalvation. “Except a man be born of theSpirit, he cannot enter the kingdom ofGod” (John 1:13; 3:5 6:63).

The instrumental cause of salvationis the Word of God. We are “born again,

not of corruptible seed, but of incorrupt-ible, by the word of God, which livethand abideth forever” (1 Pet.1:23). It isthe written Word of God which the Spirituses in salvation, not the word of menusing logic and psychology (Psa. 33:4-9;Gen. 1:6-7; Heb. 11:3; 2 Pet. 3:5).

Substitutes for Regeneration

Although our Lord has said, “ Yemust be born again ,” nevertheless menand devils have deceived many by substi-

tuting something else for regeneration.Of course, such salvation is spurious, thatis, false, phony, or counterfeit. There aremany common substitutes of regenera-tion. We shall consider some of them.

Good works are often substitutedfor regeneration. Although every child ofGod does good works, yet no one is savedby them. Paul wrote, in Ephesians 2:8-9,“For by grace are ye saved through faith;and that not of yourselves: it is the gift ofGod: Not of works, lest any man should

boast.” Could anything be clearer? Weare not saved by works but by grace.Even our faith is a gift of God. If we weresaved by works, we could boast. Paul

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


sabbath: the sign o the covenant which Yahweh orged with Israel at Mount Sinai; all Israelites werecovenantally bound to rest rom all manner o work on the Sabbath, the seventh day o the week; inaddition to the weekly Sabbath, the Law o Moses also outlined special Sabbaths (associated with certainJewish east days), the sabbatical year, and the jubilee year; the New estament Scriptures teach that theLord Jesus Christ is the antitype o the Sabbath and that it is in Christ that believers nd their truespiritual rest; as a result, Christians are not obligated to keep the Sabbath under the New Covenant.


– HE SABBA H: A SHADOW OF HINGS O COME, BU HE BODY IS OF CHRIS –



you can do? ” Of course, in reality, noone does the best that he or she can do.If there is any room for improvement,at any time, now or in the future, suchan one is only bearing witness against

himself, viz., that he or she has not donethe best he can do.

The fact of the matter is, salvationis not a result of man’s efforts, even if hehas done his very best. Besides, the Bibledeclares, “verily, every man at his beststate is altogether vanity” (Psalm 39:5).And the Lord Jesus taught His disciples,“So likewise ye, when ye shall have doneall those things which are commandedyou, say, We are unpro itable servants:we have done that which was our duty to

do” (Luke 17:10). Think about it: if one could savehimself by doing his best, would theFather have sent His Son into the worldto save us? Why should Christ take leshin order to suffer if we can save our-selves? My friend, God does not requirethe best you can do, for the best you andI can do is fall short of what is required -ABSOLUTE PERFECTION (Rom. 3:9-23).Rather, God requires the best that HE cando. It took the doing and dying of God to

save us. Jesus Christ is God in the lesh,He did all that God required. Trust Him!

Another substitute for regenerationis sincerity . Many are the people whosay “if one is just sincere, this is all thatmatters.” Of course this is not only poorreasoning, and indicates great ignoranceof the character and demands of a holyGod, but it is also untrue and dangerous.It is untrue because sincerity is not allthat matters, it is not even the primarything that matters, and it is dangerousbecause if sincerity is all that one has,one has nothing with which to stand ac-ceptably before the Lord. The Scripturesteach that God requires a second birth ofall who would enter heaven.

Suppose that one picked up a coca-cola bottle and drank the contents,sincerely believing that he or she wasdrinking coke. But suppose that, insteadof coke, the bottle contained poison.Would sincerity nullify the poison?Would sincerity prevent suffering anddeath? Of course not, no more than sin-cerity will nullify the poisonous effectsof sin and make one pleasing to God.Nicodemus was a sincere man, but hewas told, “ Ye must be born again! ” Saulof Tarsus was so sincere that he killedpeople for his faith, yet he had nosalvation because he did not knowChrist, he was not born again. EveryChristian is sincere, but sincerity doesnot make one a Christian. Do not makethe mistake, my reader, of substitutingyour sincerity for regeneration.

Yet another substitute for regenera-tion is the Golden Rule . There are manyin our society whose salvation is, if youwill do unto your neighbor as you wouldhave your neighbor do unto you, you willcertainly be saved and go to heaven. It istrue that our Lord taught His disciplesto love their neighbor, but He did notstop there. He said, “Thou shalt love thyneighbor as thyself” (Matt. 19:19). Fur-ther, no where did our Lord teach that allone must do to be saved is to love one’sneighbor. The truth of the matter is, thatunless, and until, one is given a new na-ture, i.e., born again, one can really loveno one but himself or herself. The onlyperson who has ever loved his neighboras himself is Jesus Christ.

The weakness of the argument, thatkeeping the so-called golden rule is allthat is necessary to please God, is two-fold: it denies the spiritual inability ofman, and it fails to recognize the holinessof God, as manifest by God’s law. Thelaw demands not just that one love, butthat one love perfectly. The law of Goddemands perfection perpetually in word,thought, and deed. Any deviation in prin-ciple or degree brings condemnation.Such demands, which are fair, righteous,

and just, are too lofty for sinful man.

The fact of the matter is that onemust irst love God before one can lovehis neighbor. But if one would be saved,let him love and serve God’s Son. He isthe best neighbor a sinner ever had.

Yet another substitute for regen-eration is the human will . Really thereshould be no question about this com-monly taught error. The Bible is veryclear that all who are born again areborn,” not of blood [natural descent],nor of the will of the lesh [sexual union],nor of the will of man [human decision],but of God” (John 1:13); and again, “ Sothen it is not of him that willeth [humandecision], nor of him that runneth [human action], but of God that shewethmercy [sovereign grace].” Regeneration isnot caused by the human will, but by the

divine will: “ Of his own will begathe us with the word of truth” (Jas. 1:18).The human will does not cause,contribute to, or control regenerationany more than it caused, contributed to,or controlled natural generation. Ourirst birth was not dependent upon ourwill, and neither is the new birth.

According to the Word of God,every individual is born into this worldSPIRITUALLY DEAD (Eph. 2:1). Justas one who is physically dead will not

respond to any physical stimuli, so onewho is spiritually dead will not respondto spiritual stimuli. One who is deadcannot hear, see, think or move. To do sowould evidence life. Similarly, one whois dead in trespasses and sins cannotperform any spiritual act. All action fol-lows life. First there is life, then thereis action. Life is imparted in, by, andthrough the regenerating power of theHoly Spirit. Life manifests itself throughthe actions of the regenerated one, viz.,turning from sin and self [repentance],

turning to and trusting in Christ [faith],and a desire to live in a way that is pleas-ing to Christ [obedience].

– John 1:45b –“We have ound him, owhom Moses in the law

and the prophets, didwrite, Jesus o Nazareth

the son o Joseph” (NAS

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


baptism : one o two ordinances instituted by Christ or observance in the Church; New esta-ment baptism is not the sign o the new covenant; water baptism by immersion is to be administered only to pro essing believers, since the New estament clearly teaches (1) that baptism is“the pledge o a good conscience” toward God and (2) that individuals are to be baptized aferbecoming disciples o Christ; baptism is not salvic but symbolizes the believer’s union withChrist in His death, burial, and resurrection via Spirit regeneration.


– BELIEVER’S BAP ISM: HE PLEDGE OF A GOOD CONSCIENCE OWARD GOD –

– Colossians 1:18 –Christ “is also head o the body, thechurch; and He is the beginning, therst-born rom the dead; so that He

Himsel might come to have rstplace in everything” (NASB).



Christ,” is strictly a man-made doctrinewhich originated with Charles Finney,an evangelist of a century ago.

While it is true that the human willis involved in coming to Christ, it is nottrue that making a decision puts oneinto Christ. I could decide to be sevenfeet tall, but this will not cause me to be

seven feet tall. Similarly, to decide to beborn again does not cause me to be bornagain. The new birth does not rest upona decision, neither is it occasioned orcontrolled by a decision. The truth is,that the new birth is other than adecision, and more than a decision. If thenew birth is a direct work of the HolySpirit, in which He resurrects one who isdead in sin to new life, the ascent of themind, or decision of the will, is second-ary and not primary. That is, before thegiving of life by the Spirit, the will is asdead in sin as the heart, the emotionsand the conscience. Just as a deadperson cannot will himself/herself tolive, neither can one who is spirituallydead will life into himself/herself.Nicodemus willed to seek Christ, butChrist told him, “ Ye must be born again” (John 3:3,7). Christ did not tellNicodemus that if he would make adecision he would be born again.Rather, He told him that the new birthwas a result of the work and will of thesovereign Spirit (John 3:8).

According to the Word of God, theSpirit, through the hearing of the taughtword, creates faith in the soul by whichone believes (Rom. 10:17). As such, faithis not so much a decision to believe as itis a calling on the Lord for salvation. Tobe sure, “whosoever shall call upon thename of the Lord shall be saved” (Rom.10:13), not “whosoever decides forJesus.”

The Nature of Regeneration

Regeneration is a divine work. Sincethis is true, it is quite necessarily a

Spirit conviction, and must not be con-fused with regeneration. To do so wouldbe eternally fatal .

Of all the substitutes for regenera-tion, perhaps the most common one isbaptism . All sorts of ideas about theef icacy of baptism exist. Some teachthat the water actually washes sins away,

although everyone knows that sin is aprinciple that is within each individual.But how is it possible that an externalsubstance , such as water, could washaway an internal principle , such as sin?Others think that baptism is a mysticalact which places one into the mysticalbody of Christ, thus effecting salvation. Ifthis were true, however, salvation wouldnot be of grace, but the result of an actcarried out by one who is dead intrespasses and sins, or at least effectedby the one performing the baptism.

It is not water baptism which putsone into the Christ, but Holy Spirit regen-eration. Paul said that salvation is, “ Notby works of righteousness which we havedone, but according to his mercy he savedus, by the washing of regeneration, andrenewing of the Holy Ghost” (Titus 3:5).

Baptism in water is a profession offaith, and an act of obedience to JesusChrist (Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:16). It isnot an act which creates faith, or whichregenerates, or which puts one intoChrist. If one is not already in Christbefore one is in the water, then waterbaptism means nothing, for one who isnot in Christ cannot confess Christ. Insuch a case, baptism in water can only bea ritual substituted for regeneration.

The most popular substitute for re-generation is decisionism . Most contem-porary preaching and teaching appealsto the unbeliever to “ make your decision for Christ .” This is not only confusing, itis wrong. No where in all of the Bible,

Old Testament or New, does any prophet,apostle, disciple, or even Christ Himself,make such an appeal. The truth is thatdecisionism, or “making a decision for

My friends, the thrice Holy God isthe cause of our salvation; it is He whohas saved us, and not we ourselves. Donot make the fatal mistake of thinkingthat you caused your own salvation.

Rather, look to Christ and give God theglory.

Yet another substitute for regen-eration is conviction . Many mistakeconviction for regeneration. Althoughconviction is certainly experienced by allwho come to Christ, and even by thosewho are regenerated, it is not to be con-fused with the new birth. The Bible listsmany individuals who were convictedof sin, but never converted to the Savior.Pharaoh said, “ I have sinned” (Exod.

9:27), Balaam said, “ I have sinned” (Num.22:34), so also did king Saul, Achan andJudas (1 Sam. 15:24; Josh. 7:20; Matt.27:4), but there is no evidence that anyof them were ever converted.

Sometimes conviction is a result ofthe work of the conscience. Sometimesconviction is caused by hearing theWord of God, and sometimes one isconvicted by the speech of another.But conviction which accompaniessalvation is produced by the Holy Spirit.

The main differences between thesekinds of convictions and the convictingwork of the Spirit is two fold. First, HolySpirit conviction focuses on the fact thatone’s sins are against God . David said,“ Against thee, thee only, have I sinned,and done this evil in thy sight: that thoumightest be justi ied when thouspeakest, and be clear when thou judgest”(Psa. 51:4). David knew that his problemwas with God, not his family or fellowman. Secondly, Holy Spirit convictionbrings one to call upon the Lord for

salvation . The Holy Spirit does notconvince one of sin for conviction’ssake, but in order to bring one to faith inChrist. Conviction that does not, at somepoint, result in conversion is not Holy

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1


the Lord”s Supper: one o two ordinances instituted by Jesus Christ or observance in the Church; inthis particular ordinance, the unleavened bread symbolizes Christ’s body broken on the cross, whilethe wine symbolizes Christ’s blood poured out or the orgiveness o the sins o God’s elect; the cup othe Lord’s Supper is the sign o the new covenant which Yahweh secured, ratied and established in thePerson & Work o Christ Jesus ; by their regular observance o this new covenant ordinance, believersproclaim the Lord’s death until His Second Coming.


– HIS CUP IS HE NEW COVENAN IN MY BLOOD –

– Matthew 28:18 –“And Jesus came up an

spoke to them, saying, ‘authority has been giveto Me in heaven and o

earth” (NASB).


Here ends Part 1 of“The Doctrine of Salvation” byWilliam W. Sasser. The secondportion of this article will be

published in the February2015 issue of the Providence

Theological Seminary Journal.

mysterious work. Being a work of mys-tery, it cannot be fully understood, eitherin its nature or extent. The Lord Jesustold Nicodemus, “Ye must be born again”(John 3:3,7), but He did not tell him how.

Why is this? Could it be because the onewho is born again is not active when ithappens, but entirely passive? We wouldnot say that one was active in causingone’s irst birth, would we? Of coursenot! How, then, can one participate incausing oneself to be “born from above,”as the word anōthen literally means? Butone need not be familiar with pediatricsto understand the passivity of the onewho is born again, simply look carefullyat the phrase. Does Christ say, “ Ye mustborn yourself again ,” or does He say, “ Yemust BE born again ?” In the irst case thesubject is active, but in the second case,the subject is acted upon.

So, in the irst place, we must un -derstand that it is God who is the causeof the new birth, not man. Since it is abirth from heaven, it must necessarilybe caused by the Father of Heaven. “Thatwhich is born of the lesh is lesh; andthat which is born of the Spirit is spirit”(John 3:6). A birth from above mustcome from above. A spiritual birth must

come from the Spirit of God.In regeneration, an impartation of

life transpires. This life is ethereal, orheavenly, and spiritual. According to theApostle Peter, those who are regeneratedpartake of the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4).Paul says that regeneration creates a“new man,” which is renewed in knowl-edge after the image of Christ (Col. 3:10);and that if any man be in Christ, he is a“new creation” (2 Cor 5:17). Regenera-tion, then, is a direct, miraculous impar-

tation of spiritual life. This new life is notthe result of the works of the lesh, butcreated in the soul of man by the powerof God the Spirit. God has given mangreat knowledge, power and ability,

but man cannot create new life withinhimself. Regeneration is the work of Godalone.

According to the Word of God, mandoes not possess the moral, physical orspiritual ability to submit unto, orsavingly believe on Christ (Rom. 8:7;1 Cor. 2:14). The reason for this spiritual

inability is spiritual death, i.e., man is“dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1).We all agree that one who is dead cando nothing. It is in regeneration that onereceives spiritual life, and thus spiritualability. Thus, life precedes repentanceand faith. Faith does not produce life,but life gives birth to faith. The crying,hunger, etc. , of a new born child, does notcause it to be born, but logically followsits birth. In the same way, crying to Godfor salvation, and hunger for the Word ofGod, does not cause one to be born again,but logically follows the new birth.

In regeneration an enlightening ofthe mind occurs. When Adam sinnedagainst God...Adam was left in spiritualdarkness. The spiritually unenlightenedmind is called “the carnal mind,” becausethe lesh drives it, and because it is notsubject to the things of the Spirit. AsPaul says, “the carnal mind is enmityagainst God: for it is not subject to thelaw of God, neither indeed can be”(Rom. 8:7). Further, the mind that is

carnal is blinded, not only by the lesh,but by the devil. It is written, “ But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that arelost: In whom the god of this world hathblinded the minds of them which believenot, lest the light of the glorious gospelof Christ, who is the image of God, shouldshine unto them” (2 Cor. 4:3-4).

In regeneration one is given super-natural, heavenly, divine and spirituallight. The enlightened mind enables oneto know the hope that is in the calling of

the gospel (Eph. 1:18); the things thatare freely given to the believer throughJesus Christ (1 Cor. 2:11-12); and thelight of the knowledge of God’s glory inJesus Christ (2 Cor. 4:6).

In regeneration a change of hearttakes place. According to the Scriptures,the heart of man is like a stone, i.e., cold,hard, barren and lifeless. But the newbirth takes away the stony heart andreplaces it with what is called, “a heart oflesh.” As the Lord says in Ezekiel 36:36,“A new heart also will I give you, and

a new spirit will I put within you: andI will take away the stony heart out ofyour lesh, and I will give you an heart oflesh.” And what shall be the result of thisheart operation? What effect will it haveupon the individual who undergoes thisspiritual surgery? “I will put my spiritwithin you, and cause you to walk in mystatutes, and ye shall keep my judgments,and do them” (Ezek. 36:26-27).

Regeneration involves a completechange of nature, a new heart. The Spirit

of God, as it were, performs heart sur-gery. He does not merely do a couple ofarterial bypasses, or replace a few faultyheart valves. He completely removes theold stony heart, replacing it with a heartof lesh. By “heart of lesh” is meant anew nature, that is, one spiritually alive,zealous for the Lord, spiritually fruitful,and sensitive to the leading of the Lord’sWord and Spirit. My friend, do you have anew heart?

FINIS.

© PTS 2014.

8/10/2019 PTSJ 1.1



V TP T

S


© PTS 2014.

© PTS 2014.


on Twitter:



Documents

PTSJ 1.1