@Gary Bednarz also, he believed infant baptism was valid he was just worried about them having too much time to commit mortal sins

The reality is that the Baptist position did not exist until the Anabaptists.

@@UltraX34 what about the waldesians?

tertullian taught that sins after baptism weren't forgiven and those who weren't married shouldn't be baptized he convinced Constantine to delay baptism

​@SantiagoAaronGarcia still very late in the game, historically

It was around the 24 minute mark of his video if you are curious

Most translations say “born again” (v.3), which is perfectly fine. But, I think “born from above” is also a very acceptable and more literal [and more preferable] rendering of the Greek (γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν). Personally, I see very little reason to think “water” simply refers to birth, or to amniotic fluid…which is primarily consists of the baby’s urine. So to say “water” refers to that is basically making Jesus say “unless one is born of piss and Spirit” 😅 And really it doesn’t make much sense to think of it as that because it would also mean Jesus is just saying “whoever is simply born.” Well duh, obviously everyone is born. No one has a pre-mortal existence, except in God’s Divine Foreknowledge. It just doesn’t seem like a necessary distinction for Jesus to make, unless He really isn’t saying that. Now, most people get concerned about interpreting John 3:5 in a baptismally centric way because many people die believing and unbaptized. What I wonder is, who can say God does not still baptize those kind of believers in the hereafter? I mean, when we say “I baptize you…”, we really mean Christ is the One baptizing. So God is really the One doing the work, not us. In St. John’s Apocalypse, in the same way old churches put the baptismal font at the beginning of the sanctuary as the boundary-marker of entering into something heavenly, the new heaven and earth seems surrounded with a crystal river of water flowing from the throne of God (Rev. 22:1-5). The waters are still the boundary. And since no impure thing can enter (21:27), I think it’s safe to say that God may indeed still drag some through those waters by His Word. 🌊🔥😎🔥🌊

When we look at the discourse with Nicodemus (John 3:1-21) and the discourse with the woman at the well (John 4:1-42) there is such a juxtaposition between them. It is beautiful. Yet both discourses centre on water and spirit. Interesting that within context, together they are sandwiching a baptism narrative (John 3:22-36)

@@j.sethfrazer ye must be born again is a prescription. This implies that you ought to be born of water and spirit (thus the water is not baby urine). The water is water, it's the washing we require to enter into God's kingdom which was instituted after the NC was established in Jesus blood shed on the cross.

It's Ethiopian. They have some really beautiful sacred art.

@@DrJordanBCooper found it. Truly fascinating

@@DrJordanBCooper Thanks

Born of water and the Holy Spirit John 3:1-7 There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.” Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ NKJV So what does it mean to be born again? Nicodemus a Pharisee came to Jesus at night privately. He knew that Jesus was a man of God because of the signs He had preformed. He realized that He had to be, because no one could do these signs if God were not with Him. Jesus replied "Most Assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Nicodemus misunderstood Jesus, thinking that He meant one needed to physically go back into his mother's womb, and be reborn as a baby all over again. So Jesus replied more clearly saying, "Most Assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of WATER AND THE SPIRIT, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.' So what does being born again mean? What is Water and the Spirit? The early church saw this fullfilled in water baptism, and receiving of the Holy Spirit. To be born again is indeed an inward change of the heart towards God, a change of our old way of life (old self) for a new way of life (new self), that is putting off our sins, and walking in newness of life, thus a spiritual resurrection from the deadness of sin. But this is confirmed to us in baptism and reception of the Holy Spirit. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." This is a contrast between physical natural birth vs. birth from the Holy Spirit. All of course are naturally born, but some are regenerated by the Holy Spirit while others are not. Those NOT born of the Spirit by repentance and faith in Christ, and confirmed in water baptism, are of the flesh, and are fallen children of Adam. But those who repent and believe the gospel receive justification and forgiveness of sins, and are thus born of the Spirit, and they receive water baptism as a confirmation, and thus they are born of water and the Spirit. Is this required to receive adoption as children of God? Yes, otherwise those outside are not children of God, but are children of Adam, and are not saved. Paul in Romans 6 uses similar language concerning baptism. Romans 6:1-6 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been BAPTIZED INTO CHRIST JESUS WERE BAPTIZED INTO HIS DEATH? WE WERE BURIED THEREFORE WITH HIM BY BAPTISM INTO DEATH, IN ORDER THAT, JUST AS CHRIST WAS RAISED FROM THE DEAD BY THE GLORY OF THE FATHER, WE TOO MIGHT WALK IN NEWNESS OF LIFE. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our OLD SELF was crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. ESV This is clearly and plainly talking about regeneration in baptism. A rebirth! A spiritual dying to sin, and a spiritual resurrection from the deadness of sin, thus a rebirth (being born again). Colossians 2:11-13 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses. NKJV Again very similar language. Baptism is the fulfillment of old testament circumcision. Instead of removing the forskin from a male child under the law, all people now remove the body of sin by a spiritual circumcision of Christ in baptism. A spiritual rebirth. Paul is clearly reiterating John 3:1-7. Not something we do, but God does for us. Ephesians 2:1-9 AND YOU WERE DEAD IN THE TRESPASSES AND SINS in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience- among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But GOD, BEING RICH IN MERCY, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, MADE US ALIVE TOGETHER WITH CHRIST -BY GRACE YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED - AND RAISED US UP WITH HIM and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. FOR BY GRACE YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED THROUGH FAITH. And this is not your own doing; it is the GIFT OF GOD, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. ESV Once again very similar language. This is plainly about regeneration. Verses 1-7 are abundantly clear. We once lived in sin, doing our own wills, following the the prince of the power of the air ( Satan). We were once children of wrath like the rest of unbelieving mankind. We were dead in sin, and God being rich in mercy, made us alive together with Christ ( regeneration) having forgiven us all our sins. Notice Paul says in context of that...:BY GRACE YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED" So salvation is not merely just isolated to the idea that because believe we are saved, but also to the fact we are SAVED FROM OUR SINS, see Matthew 1:21. Yes we are saved by grace alone, though faith alone in Christ, but notice that verses 8-9 are also apart of the context of ALL of Ephesians 2. Yes we are saved by believing in Christ, by God's grace apart from our own merits, but we are saved by God's grace in regeneration from sin as well. This is all Gods work, not ours, we did nothing to deserve it. We cannot merit salvation. It is God who is rich in mercy, and because of His great love with which He loved us, that we are saved by grace through faith, and are regenerated, as baptism is not our work, but God's work to us. Grace is a gift, and faith is a gift, given to us. So does this mean that if someone repents and believes in Christ, and they are prevented from baptism [through no fault of their own], that they are lost? No! If someone is unable to be baptized, due to an untimely death, or due to repentance on their deathbed, or they are somehow physically hindered from baptism, THEN THEY WILL STILL BE SAVED! Or if a person repents and believes, but does not KNOW that he must be baptized...[he simply does not know any better]. Will he still be saved? Yes, I believe so! What condemns a person is being ABLE TO BE BAPTIZED, AND WILLFULLY REFUSING TO. Titus 3:3-7 For we ourselves we're once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another. But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, HE SAVED US, NOT BECAUSE OF WORKS done by us in righteousness, but according to his OWN MERCY, BY THE WASHING OF REGENERATION AND RENEWAL OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being JUSTIFIED BY HIS GRACE we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. ESV Once again same language as in, John 3:1-7 Romans 6:1-6, Ephesians 2:1-9, and Colossians 2:11-13. Scripture must interpret scripture. And this is plain and clear by an intellectually honest reading. So what about those from the old testament before Christ came? They weren't baptized right? Indeed they weren't. So are they unsaved? NO! THEY ARE SAVED, and because they believed, they benefited from the sacrifice of Christ. They were prevented from baptism, because there was no baptism yet. And they are saved because scripture says so. See Matthew 27:52-53. Nevertheless the norm is, outside of certain exceptions, To believe and be baptized.

Is baptism necessary for salvation? Matthew 28:16-20 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen. NKJV Mark 16:15-16 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. NKJV Christ Jesus our Lord commended the eleven apostles to go into all the world and make disciples of all the nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and to teach them to observe all things that He has commanded. And whoever would believe and be baptized would be saved! We are saved by the preaching of the word, and by baptism, because of the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ! But does plain water in and of itself save? No! But the word of promise attached to it does! The Jews at pentecost, after hearing the gospel, ask Peter what they should do, and the first thing Peter said was... "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” Acts 2:38-39 NKJV Be baptized FOR the remission of sins! The promise is to us, and our children! Paul was told by Ananias in Acts 22:16... "And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." NKJV Baptism washes us from our sins! Paul had ran into twelve disciples at Ephesus during his ministry, and he asked them if they had received the Holy Spirit. And they said "No, and that they never heard of the Holy Spirit." So he asked them, "Into what baptism were you baptized?" He asked this because there were twelve men who believe in the Lord, but had not received the Holy Spirit yet. In Acts 19:1-7, it says, "And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.” Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Now the men were about twelve in all." NKJV So for our mainline Protestant Evangelical friends who deny the need for baptism, Why did these twelve men need to be baptized into Christ? How come they never heard of the Holy Spirit? They believed right? So how come they didn't have the Holy Spirit after they believed? Obviously the baptism of John wasn't good enough. And Paul asked them, "Into then what were you baptized?" This seems a rather strange question to ask. Since the Holy Spirit is connected to baptism, these twelve men needed to be baptized into Christ. But our evangelical friends may point to Acts 10:44-48, saying, that Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit before baptism after they heard the gospel and believed! This is true, they did! But why did they? And does one exception change the norm? The scriptures tell us why. Reading Acts 10 in context reveals up to that point that the gospel had not reached the gentiles yet. And God had revealed to Peter in a vision that He had cleansed all people. Acts 11:1-18 reveals that God had given the Holy Spirit to the gentiles show the Jews that He accepted them as well. Read Acts 11 in context, but specifically verses 15-18. In Acts 15:7-9, its says, And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. NKJV At the first council of Jerusalem, Peter reiterated this, that God demonstrated that He had accepted the gentiles to show the Jews that they were to be saved as well. What does God promise in baptism? He promises rebirth [ the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit], forgiveness of sins, salvation, eternal life, grace, justification, and faith. It is an appeal to God for a good conscience. We are saved by grace through faith in Christ, as baptism is God's work and promise to us, not our work. Does this deny justification by faith alone in Christ alone? No, it grants it! When an infant is baptized, they receive forgiveness of sins [from original sin], rebirth [born of water and the Spirit], salvation, eternal life, faith, and justification. And an unbaptize adult who repents and comes to faith in Christ, will be forgiven, justified, saved, given eternal life, and regenerated, and then they must be baptized in water baptism as a confirmation of God's mercy, and ones rebirth. Baptism for an adult confirms and completes their rebirth, because a true born again christian is reborn inwardly by faith in the Word of God, and outwardly in baptism. This means that by their repentance and faith in Christ, by God's grace, baptism confirms their salvation, and forgiveness of sins. And if one refuses baptism after they have come to faith in Christ, they may not be saved. But that is left to God's judgement, not ours. Is baptism necessary for salvation? Yes! But it is NOT absolutely necessary. As there exceptions. An example would be the thief on the cross who was prevented from baptism, but still was saved by grace through faith, and of no work of his own, see, Luke 23:32-34, 39-43. Does an adult need re-baptism, if he or she fell away, and came back? No! An adult who was baptized in the Triune name, of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, does not need re-baptized, as baptism only needs to occur once.

Matthew 3:13-17 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” ESV Acts 2:37-39 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” NKJV Acts 22:16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’ NKJV 1 Peter 3:21-22 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. ESV John 3:3-7 Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ NKJV Titus 3:4-7 But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. ESV Justin Martyr 148-155 AD “Whoever are convinced and believe that what they are taught and told by us is the truth, and professes to be able to live accordingly, is instructed to pray and to beseech God in fasting for the remission of their former sins, while we pray and fast with them. Then they are led by us to a place where there is water, and they are reborn in the same kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were reborn: In the name of God, the Lord and Father of all, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they receive the washing of water. For Christ said, ‘Unless you be reborn, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.’…The reason for doing this, we have learned from the Apostles” (The First Apology 61:14-17 [inter A.D. 148-155]). Theophilus 181 AD “Moreover, those things which were created from the waters were blessed by God, so that this might also be a sign that men would at a future time receive repentance and remission of sins through water and the bath of regeneration-all who proceed to the truth and are born again and receive a blessing from God” (To Autolycus 12:16 [A.D. 181]). Clement of Alexandria 202 AD When we are baptized we are enlightened. Being enlightened, we are adopted as sons. Adopted as sons, we are made perfect. Made perfect, we become immortal… ‘and sons of the Most High’ [Ps. 81:6]. This work is variously called grace, illumination, perfection, and washing. It is a washing by which we are cleansed of sins, a gift of grace by which the punishments due our sins are remitted, an illumination by which we behold that holy light of salvation-that is, by which we see God clearly, and we call that perfection which leaves nothing lacking. Indeed, if a man know God, what more does he need? Certainly, it were out of place to call that which is not complete a true gift of God’s grace. Because God is perfect the gifts he bestows are perfect” (The Instructor of Children, 1:6:26:1 [ante A.D. 202]).

Every verse says baptism saves. It saves in that it unites us to the death and resurrection of Christ. It is grace, not law.

Baptism is God's work, since God is present in baptism John 3:5 Col 2:12, Titus 3:5 as is the Word Eph 5:25-26. Baptism portrays the Gospel of Christ's death, burial and resurrection Ronans 6:3-5.

Two main things to say: Begome Oriental Orthodox :) (I'm a former baptist) and the world will probably end in 2028 given the information in scripture in conjunction with world events... unity will only be reached during the time of trouble (Daniel's 70th week).

Key. There were no credobaptists until the Anabaptists. Simple historical example: Imagine tbe Southern Baptist Convention, out of nowhere, had 2/3 of their churches start baptizing infants while claiming to still be Baptist. Do you really think there would be no synod, no meeting, no debate over what is happening? Of course not. But the idea that the early church was credobaptist requires such a thing to have happened, and yet it didn't.

@@UltraX34 Perhaps you would disagree with him too, but just FYI, Dr. Cooper would disagree with you. He concedes in this video that there were credobaptists (defined as those who waited until children could speak for themselves) in the early church, but argues that their reasons for being credobaptist were because they believed strongly in the saving efficacy of baptism. As best as I can tell, this fact is undisputable. In the previous video, Dr. Cooper discussed Tertullian, who is clearly a proponent of credobaptism (to the point of writing against infant baptism). The questions in this debate, at least from a historical standpoint, are not whether there were credobaptists the early church. Rather, they are (1) which view of baptism was more popular, and (2) when infant baptism became normative, was this a good thing? Previous to Dr. Cooper's last video, I would have added "(3) is there any evidence that there was infant baptism at all in the early church," but I thought his case was pretty convincing, so I'll leave that one out. ;)

@@BaeGeeN258 no, he's not actually conceding anything. Those people aren't *really* Credobaptist, because if you read them (such as Tertullian's treatise on the soul where he says the reason Christian children are sanctified in 1 Corinthians 7:14 is because they are baptized) you see they affirm the validity of infant baptism. So while you have people delaying infant baptism, they all affirm it's validity. That's the real debate. Cause a Baptist would say an infant baptism is not a valid baptism. These People would NOT say that. And also, they generally had extremely legalistic views of apostasy (such as if you committed a certain mortal sin you likely couldn't repent, using Hebrews 6:4-6). This was what drove their PREFERENCE of postponing baptism. They never claimed it was wrong.

@@BaeGeeN258 and this is what the Baptist misses in the debate - the postponing view was the RESULT of paedobaptism being a normative practice, it was not a side by side practice with infant baptism. All the earliest sources say it is a normal thing to baptize infants (such as Hyppolytus), and some of them have links to apostles (Irenaeus).

Yes

@@HunterShawMusic Yes, as in Acts 10, which shows Spiritual baptism occurred PRior to water baptism? As the Scripture shows, the Bible, God's Word?

well, given all the unregenerate allegedly baptismally regenerated people, the metonym view makes sense.

@@aGoyforJesus baptism can be resisted, much like the Spirit, much like the word, but we don’t say _they_ aren’t regenerative

@Byron Wash You’re right. Dr. Ortland is indeed more sacramental. I guess to Dr. Cooper a Baptist is a Baptist is a Baptist! I kind of understand. I consider myself more of a credobaptist Presbyterian. Baptists are normally incredibly anti-sacramental. Almost as if they don’t really believe in miracles. Dr. Cooper somehow equates “getting saved” with goose bumps and ecstatic emotions. Born again believers have a whole range of experiences, the only commonality being genuine faith and repentance. Does Dr. Cooper have a problem with faith and repentance?

@Byron Wash St. Augustine in his confessions describes his baptism as regenerative. But, ever so clearly, the real climax of his salvation experience is his heartfelt Tolle Lege conversion. He spills ten times as much ink on it. He dispatches the baptism with a single line.

@@HannahClapham yes on both posts It seems this is a critique of a Baptist view , not necessarily what Dr Ortland is stating. In fact many Baptist would have issues with Dr. Ortland’s views as of late. It seems he is trying to reconcile the Baptist view back to church history and trying to properly reform it, which I applaud. You are correct that St Augustine affirms regeneration while still affirming the totality of salvation. So Dr. Ortland is right on this tract. Plus he is engaging with the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox view , not Lutheran. This will be a very good discussion I’m the upcoming weeks. I look forward to it

@@bjw8806 I really like Dr. Cooper and have learned more from him about Lutheranism than I did in 27 years of being a Lutheran. But this entry must be one of his weakest. Baptism is clearly symbol and metonymy and participation and something mystical/efficacious. The question is how much of each and the relationship between them. He needs to listen more carefully to Dr. Ortland. Also, and uncharacteristically, he makes a lot of errors. I could go through them, but I just don't have time right now. I thought it kind of funny. He said that no one would come to Gavin's conclusions if one were not a Baptist. Well, I'm not a Baptist, but Gavin's take on things has always made more sense to me...even as a Lutheran.

@@ericcarlson9885 I agree. I think the way Dr . Ortland presents his case allows for more non sacramental Protestants to become sacramental while being faithful to their tradition. It seems as though Dr. Cooper was focused more on the Baptist tradition rather than Gavin’s position. And I enjoy Dr. Cooper’s position often. Even when I disagree he makes a great points that must be evaluated seriously.

Thanks. I've mostly encountered this reference in older sources, and I haven't looked into the scholarship regarding authorship (or, more likely, I have at some point and don't recall).

@@DrJordanBCooper Thanks for the response. One thing I'd like to understand better is the teaching concerning unbaptized infant salvation, both by Lutherans and others. You touched on this a bit at the end of the video, but less than I was hoping. I think Dr. Ortlund did make a compelling point about the traditional understanding of baptism, and how Protestant paedobaptists claim the backing of tradition but reject that aspect of the tradition. I would love it if you could speak to that more in the future, or point me in a good direction for personal study. By the way, from some articles I read on The Calvinist International website, I was under the impression that the Reformed also broadly affirmed the salvation of unbaptized infants? Certainly it seems like modern Calvinists of the Princeton school affirm it: calvinistinternational.com/?s=salvation+of+infants

I think the best argument would be all the unregenerate baptized people walking around

@@aGoyforJesus come on man....at least do your homework on the other side's argument...

@@ab5879 I'm aware of how they argue. People can reject their baptism. I find the argument unpersuasive and ignores things like "those who are born of God overcome the world." There being a bunch of born of God people who don't overcome the world doesn't make sense. But what I think happened, historically and to people who hold to the position currently, is that the position was widespread and then those passages that don't fit into automatic baptismal regeneration get explained away. It also would seem this belief took root prior to a large number of unregenerate pagans entering the church for political or social considerations.

@@aGoyforJesus so you would say that the most straight forward reading of 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, Ephesians 5:26, Acts 22:16 does not explicitly tie baptism with the remission of sins - salvation? If you believe that the world can be completely overcome in this life, must one completely overcome to be saved? If one sins after coming to salvation, have they lost their salvation?

@@ab5879 //so you would say that the most straight forward reading of 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, Ephesians 5:26, Acts 22:16 does not explicitly tie baptism with the remission of sins - salvation?// The way I would put it is that the automatic baptismal regeneration reading is a straightforward reading, but once other passages and realities are brought to bear on the topic it makes that interpretation not the best one. An understanding that we have a sign that points to a greater reality so when one speaks of the sign one is often speaking of the greater reality it points to. We have the additional wrinkle that there is a baptism of the Spirit etc which is different than the sacrament itself, so if I just see the word "baptism" I don't have to insert "the sacrament" automatically. Baptism existed prior to Christ's ministry and it seems to be understood by the Jewish culture it was born into. And it seems to comport better with a sign and seal view than an automatic baptismal regeneration view. //If you believe that the world can be completely overcome in this life, must one completely overcome to be saved? If one sins after coming to salvation, have they lost their salvation?// Well, whatever "those who are born of God overcomes the world" means in 1 John 5, I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean that they die and go to hell after they are born of God.

And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. -Acts 3:19 :) :)

Also you have to reject original sin and that children are inherently sinful

...too bad the coc is way off on other things...

@thethikboy. I found this presentation equally excruciating. I think it is inescapable that the biblical text is setting forth a metonymy. Scripture doesn’t merely say that baptism now saves you. It also says that faith now saves you. It says that repentance now saves you. It uses each by itself. It uses just about every possible combination of the three. Not only that, but the analogies Cooper points to do the exact same thing. Noah and his family were saved through water by the exercise of faith and obedience. The Israelites, likewise. Saved from the returning waters of the Red Sea, held back by faith and obedience. The three are inextricably joined. And Cooper inadvertently says as much. The people were cut to the heart (converted), repented, and then were baptized. We see this, as well, with Paul, with Cornelius, with the Philippian jailer, with the Ethiopian eunuch. And, for that matter, with St. Augustine. It most certainly IS a biblical and an historical model that Cooper inexplicably denies.

@@hanssvineklev648 What's inescapable is that the Scripture literally calls baptism the anti-type. excluding it from being a trope. It's the Flood that's the precursor. Because salvation is accomplished through faith doesn't make baptism a metonymy. Nowhere does scripture say repentance saves. No, not combinations but means..

@@thethikboy. Really?? Did you remove the Acts of the Apostles from your Bible? “And Peter said to them, ‘Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’” It’s very, very clear from Scripture that without faith and repentance (or the action of the Holy Spirit, for that matter), baptism just gets you wet.

@@hanssvineklev648 "Repent and be baptized" does not exclude faith or include repentance as efficacious for salvation. True repentance requires faith. I repeat. the phrase 'repentance saves' is not in Scripture, like 'baptism saves". Besides Repentance is a gift of God just like faith.

@@thethikboy. I’m sorry, but it most certainly does say that: This is what the Sovereign Lord, the Holy One of Israel, says: “In repentance and rest is your salvation, in quietness and trust is your strength, but you would have none of it. Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death. When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, “So then, even to Gentiles, God has granted repentance that leads to life.” Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will. Look, you’re demonstrably wrong about Scripture. What is clear, however, is that faith, repentance, and baptism are inextricably bound together. I wouldn’t even call it a metonymy. Baptism, in order for it to BE baptism, has to include faith and repentance.

Hey, I'm a student of the RM and have a very informed understanding of Christian Doctrine from the first century. If you want to talk about biblical teaching, I would be glad to correspond with you. Blessings! There are several resources you might find helpful.

This is straight up special pleading, you can’t honestly think that this is a good objection to infant baptism. You’re the one starting with a conclusion and reading it into the text. “Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them” (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16) To say that children who can’t speak for themselves logically would include infants. That is 2 years old or less. To limit it to children who have social anxiety or some other mental health issue is in fact a dishonest take on this text. Also, for what it’s worth. Your child should not be baptized if they couldn’t make their own profession of faith. They should have waited until they were older and less afraid to do so. Helping in this case could invalidate their baptism in the eyes of other credobaptist.