Baptism Discussion with Dr. Tony Costa

Well hello everyone and welcome to the Reform Rookie video podcast. It's good to have you with us this evening.

Tonight I have a special guest, Dr. Tony Costa, but before we start our discussion I just want to let you know if you want to learn about Reformed theology on a beginner level please go to www .reformedrookie

.com On that website you'll have access to the videos that we put up. We also have a

YouTube channel if you go to youtube .com slash C slash Reform Rookie we have about a hundred and fifty or so videos about all different topics including the doctrines of grace.

We're going through a series on spiritual depression and Proverbs. We also have a podcast that you can find on iTunes or Anchor podcast.

You just type it in online. Reform Rookie and we're going through a series on, Pastor Chris is going through a series on Leviticus and it's very very good.

So if you want to avail yourself to Reformed theology or learning a little bit more about it please again go to www .reformedrookie

.com You'll find the blog there then you can go to the YouTube channel or the podcast. And with that I just want to introduce a friend of ours, our church and our ministry and a dear brother in Christ.

This is Dr. Tony Costa who's a professor at Toronto Baptist Seminary in Canada.

He's a dear friend to our family at Hope Reformed Baptist Church. Welcome Dr. Tony.

It's a pleasure to be with you Anthony. Good to see you again. So we had a debate set up on does water baptism save and it was set up for October 31st which is

Reformation Day and unfortunately due to COVID we had to postpone. We still don't have a date rescheduled.

So what I wanted to do Dr. Tony is bring you on, discuss the different topics about baptism that probably would have been hit in the debate and I sent you an outline.

I want to talk about baptismal regeneration you know what that is then talk about infant baptism and believers baptism.

So first maybe we can go through who supports each one of those views maybe discuss some of the scriptures behind them and then see what the early church fathers had to say about those views so that we can come to some sort of understanding.

So start with baptismal regeneration for the people who don't know anything about not just reformed theology just theology in general what is baptismal regeneration?

Yeah baptismal regeneration is the view that says that when someone is baptized the act of baptism regenerates the person.

So that baptism the act of baptism has the power to regenerate the person. Now some people say well it's

God who does it through the sacrament or God does it through the ordinance but what it suggests is that baptism in and of itself when it's utilized by the minister or a child or an adult it brings about the effect of regeneration and so Roman Catholics hold to this view

Lutherans believe it or not at least we can talk a little bit more about this but Luther post 1525 went in that direction very strongly baptism regeneration is also held by the

Eastern Orthodox Church and basically all the churches of the East so I'm talking about the

Coptic Church and and the Assyrian Orthodox Church the Syriac Orthodox Church and there is a doctrine in Roman Catholicism called ex opere operato which means out of the very work the work is done so the very act of baptism brings about the regeneration of the child most cases it's the child and they believe that the child becomes a child of God going from a child of the flesh to become a child of God through the process of baptism.

So that actually would bring about the person's salvation basically. Correct. So the priest or the minister would baptize the child and at that moment that person would be quote -unquote born again.

Correct correct yeah and not just born again but in their view the child has all their sins remitted so original sin is wiped out by baptism and the child is believed to be adopted into the family of God at that point and the child grows in in the so called the graces the sacraments that they have to go through but this is no guarantee at least in the

Roman Catholic Church there is no guarantee that your baptism regeneration will guarantee that you'll be saved at the end because Rome teaches that you can lose your salvation through through a mortal sin.

Mm -hmm So wouldn't also one of the Pentecostals hold to that? Yeah one of the

Pentecostals that the only difference is one of the Pentecostals would say that first of all the baptismal formula is not

Trinitarian they don't believe that you baptize in the name of the Trinitarian God they believe in baptism in the name of Jesus or they called the

Jesus only movement so they believe that unless you're not only baptized in water in the name of Jesus but unless you speak in tongues as well you cannot be saved.

So one of the Pentecostalism would hold to a view of baptism regeneration as well.

So now I think obviously they're gonna put forth some scriptures that would point to the fact that like first Peter 321 baptism which corresponds to this now saves you not as the removal of dirt from the body but an appeal to God for a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Right. So doesn't that verse say that baptism is what saves you? Well it doesn't really say that baptism actually saves you the language is very important here because words mean what they mean in context and so in first Peter 321

Peter uses the Greek word antitupon which is our word antitype and so an antitype is something that represents something else by symbol so the sacrifices of the

Old Testament in the book of Leviticus and I'm sure Pastor Chris will mention this but the sacrifices in the book of Leviticus are antitypes of the true representation of Christ's Atonement on the cross so the animal sacrifices as the book of Hebrews points out could never take away sin it could never remove sin it couldn't expiate sin it could cover sin temporarily but it pointed forward to that great sacrifice that the

Lamb of God himself would take upon himself and he would take away the sins of the world so the animal sacrifices in and of themselves did not really forgive their sin it simply temporarily covered them but they were shadows if you will of the ultimate reality just like the

Sabbath was a shadow of the absolute rest and the complete rest that we have in the

Lord Jesus so what Peter says in first Peter 321 is talking about the flood and he talks about the days of Noah and we need to understand that the waters of the flood did two things it destroyed the ungodly world and it kept the ark afloat it it saved the family of Noah while at the same time destroying the ungodly generation but it was

God who put him in the ark and it was God who closed the ark and the ark is a picture of Jesus it's a it's an antitype of Jesus because if you are in the ark you will be saved from the wrath of God the judgment done similarly if you're in Christ you will be saved from the wrath of God so what

Peter is saying is that the waters of the flood corresponds to baptism as an antitype so baptism in and of itself does not save you it only saves you as an antitype and then

Peter clarifies that by saying as a pledge or a response of a good conscience towards God and so Peter is very careful to say look this water baptism doesn't remove the dirt from your body it simply corresponds to something greater what

God has done already in your heart and so Peter doesn't actually say baptism saves you he says it saves you as a type an antitype rather a corresponding antitype so with the word antitype what a synonym to the word antitype would be symbol or more than symbol right like yeah it'd be a symbol or another good word we could use would be counterpart a counterpart and so and so Peter's very careful and first Peter 318 he already told us that that Christ died for the ungodly he suffered once so that he might bring us to God notice

Peter says it's Christ who brings us to God and then the first Peter 1 2 he says we're saved by what by the the formal for knowledge of God the

Father by the sanctification of the Spirit and by the sprinkling of blood of Christ and so he wraps it up in the triune

God the training God the Father foreknows he elects his people the Spirit sanctifies us and we are redeemed by the sprinkling of the blood of Christ and and that sprinkling

Anthony is is deliberate Peter is referring to the sprinkling of the blood on the mercy seat on the day of atonement in Leviticus 16 so Peter's being very clear that he's not talking about baptism per se that does the work of salvation but rather it functions as a symbol all right with that sprinkling or us also correspond to Ezekiel 36 or absolutely absolutely and he's equal 36 would tie in with John 3 5 where Jesus speaks about being born of the water and born of the

Spirit and so we can discuss that as well sure so now okay what would what would be your pushback in opposition to this view obviously you and you know we both don't hold to baptismal regeneration how would you push back on that on which one baptismal regeneration in other words yes we don't hold to that right right the way it pushed back on that is simply by looking at for example

Romans 8 5 to 8 where Paul says that those who are in the flesh cannot please

God and there's nothing we can do to please God and so when we ask the question where does the desire for baptism come from does it come from the fleshly man or does it come from the man who's in the spirit well obviously we cannot obey

God if we're in the flesh Paul says that those who are in the flesh cannot please God they're not subject to the law of God nor nor can they be it's impossible and so in order for someone to say you know what

I have a desire to be baptized in obedience to Christ the man that is not a fleshly that's not a fleshly impulse that is something that is given by the

Spirit of God who regenerates us but that step of obedience remember our good works have been preordained that we should follow them

Ephesians 2 10 and so what I would say is this baptism regeneration is false on the grounds that it is

God who regenerates us and makes us willing to obey him into baptism and therefore just like Abraham brought

Isaac to the altar to sacrifice him Abraham was already declared righteous and just in God's sight

God declared him to be just and therefore Abraham wasn't declared just after he offered up Isaac but he was already he was reckoned unto him as righteousness because he believed on the

Lord even before his circumcision so baptism regeneration unfortunately is is really if you trace it it really is a man -made doctrine right so would you is is this heresy is it a damnable heresy what

I would how would it fit in well I wouldn't say it's a damnable I wouldn't say it's a damnable heresy but what

I would say is that if you follow it to its logical conclusion then what you're basically doing is you are you are at the cusp of negating justification by faith alone so so take

Luther for example I mean Luther before 1525 now you'll notice Anthony I mentioned that year 1525 something happened in 1525 in Germany that really that rattled

Luther and that was the the the peasants revolt when the peasants started taking

Luther's ideas of the Reformation and you know breaking down churches and beating up priests and so forth

Luther became very disillusioned with what happened and he became a lot more let's say liturgical more ecclesiastical and so what you find is that Luther still maintained justification by faith alone but he ends up defending baptism regeneration and so there are

Lutherans that I know who love the Lord and are trusting Christ alone for their salvation but if I were to ask them do you believe that a child is made a child of God at baptism don't say yes and so I think

I think it's one of those areas like our Arminian brothers who think that it was their choice that brought them to salvation and it was their decision to accept

Christ I think that there's a lot of Arminian brethren who are truly safe sure but I think they have a misunderstanding of the the the the doctrines of grace and they have a misunderstanding of how

God moves us by his grace and brings us in and so I think that baptism regeneration

I would say is on is on that cusp and and I think that it's an area that we need to logically argue in good faith with our

Lutheran brethren like our brother Chris that we were supposed to engage in but with Roman Catholicism is a different Roman Catholicism denies a sola gratia sola fide sola scriptura unlike the

Lutherans so it is a serious question and it's an area I think that we as believers have to dialogue with with our brothers in it in those different denominations right because the danger could be from a man a man -centered point of view well

I was baptized right so and they end up having faith in their baptism and the fact that they were baptized and that's what brought me into the kingdom of God so therefore

I'm a Christian and they're going into something that was done by human hands not done by the

Spirit of God that's right that could be a serious a serious error exactly right and I've heard people use that type of language people in the

Christian Reform Church who would say well my son is not following the

Lord but but he was baptized and God's gonna honor that well yeah but it's a step to say

God is gonna honor what we did well it's not about God honoring what we did it's about it's about God's honor and the glory that is all his in his in his sovereign right to choose his people right yeah

God is gonna honor what he did in the form of punishment unfortunately I hate to say that way but yeah the only thing he honors is the death is the cross of Christ in the resurrection right he honors that but you're right he

God will also honor his justice as well so baptismal regeneration is something that's held by Lutherans with Eastern Orthodox also yeah yep they hold that Eastern Orthodox however don't believe in sola gratia sola fide they believe that works

I mean they will say it's by grace alone but they will tell you that without baptism you you cannot be saved and you you need the church to receive they don't call them sacraments they call them the divine mysteries and so in order to in order to become absorbed into what they call the the tri the triadic life of God that they call it theosis you have to be part of the church and you have to engage in the liturgy of the church and so forth so Eastern Orthodoxy just like Rome does believe that you are saved by grace but you're kept by law so it's the same thing again right you know and you know what

I'll do because you and Eli did a great talk on that you reviewed Hank Hannah grass interview with Eli so what

I'll do is I'll put a link to that in the comment section so if anybody wants to look up Eastern Orthodoxy and learn more about it you did two sessions with you and I and I thought they were they were excellent very very informative so as far as baptismal regeneration go did any of the early church fathers hold to that yes a number of them did hold to that and some people would argue well there you go

I mean the church fathers held to this therefore not all of them obviously when we talk about the church fathers

Anthony we need to be very very careful because we're talking about a huge broad area differences of opinions exist some of these church fathers were deeply influenced by Greek philosophy

Justin Martyr was very influenced by Plato's platonic philosophy and st. Augustine also was was influenced by neoplatonism so we need to be careful in these areas because some of the fathers looked at this through Greek philosophical lenses others believed that baptism was something that should be delayed until your deathbed so a lot of these fathers did not hold to infant baptism as a means to save the child there was we know from there's some tombs that scholars have found from the second century

AD that have on the epitaphs on the tombstones they will mention a child that that died and was baptized and what we know from that early period is that children would have been baptized in in times of emergency like clinical death when they're approaching death but why would they need to do that if they were baptized very early after their birth so we need to ask these questions why did they delay this baptism and there's many examples of this in the

West in the Western Church what we do know is that the idea of infant baptism and baptism regeneration really gets its driving force from st.

Augustine so about the year 410 AD that's where it really starts to get pushed very hard in the

West but there are fathers of the church that did hold to this but then again we need to understand that the church fathers number one a lot of folks will look back in history so the

Roman Catholic will look down the long well of history and at the bottom of the well you know Anthony there's there's water right look down the well there's water you see your reflection so the

Roman Catholic looks down the well in history to the fathers of the church and they'll say ah St. Athanasius was a

Roman Catholic all the church fathers were Roman Catholic and then the Orthodox will look down so they were all Orthodox and then the reformed

Baptists will say ah they were all reformed Baptists we need to let them be but you know we need to look to church fathers be the church fathers right and we need to understand

Anthony that we need to hold them to the same scrutiny that we hold each other to and that is we need to use the scriptures as our standard so if you take

Irenaeus for example Irenaeus about 8150 he says that he was taught by the

Apostle John and he claims that he received from the pastolic tradition this is the first use of the term apostolic tradition in Irenaeus he says that he received from a pastolic tradition that Jesus was 50 years old when he died hmm now

I don't know one Roman Catholic scholar Protestant scholar Orthodox scholar who believes that Jesus was 50 years old when he died they usually place him at 30 33 32 around 30 to 33 but but notice

Irenaeus says he got this from the Apostles already at this early stage in Christian history you've got this guy saying for the first time this comes from apostolic tradition and yet we all know through reading the

New Testament very clearly that Jesus had a three -year ministry and then he started when he was about 30 and the reason why

Irenaeus does this is because of the Greek concept of the the three ages of man the you know when he's a child when he's an adult and then when he's a mature adult and so what he was trying to say was that in Jesus he was recapitulating all of life in himself and so this is why

I've always said be very careful when you read the fathers they're not infallible and they openly admitted that that they were not and they never said their writings were scripture and so if we take the patristic route we need to understand that there's there's some weird things that the fathers of the church speak up to like st.

Basil the great said that when you baptize you have to face Jerusalem and you have to be baptized with your face going down into the water like headfirst right your face and and to do it nine times three times for each person of the

Trinity so I don't know anybody I don't know Orthodox or Roman Catholics or Protestants who baptized that way but Basil said this is the way we do it

Wow okay so so it seems like the early church follows look much like the

Protestant Church does today yeah yeah we're united on the essentials exactly and you know we vary on the non essentials let's say exactly and in all things we need charity chat right yeah that's that that phrase in all things in the essentials unity and the non -essentials

Liberty and in all things charity or love so I think I think I think that's important and when when people like Roman Catholics point to the early church fathers and say that they would be there's unanimity unanimous consent of the fathers there's no such thing no no no no even with my debate with Robbins Janice at me which you've already in Carlyle in Pennsylvania if you remember that Robert was saying oh yeah although all the early fathers believed in the

Immaculate Conception and yet you've got church fathers saying yeah Mary sinned yeah

Mary sinned with the sin of doubt and arrogance so forth so again none of the fathers at the

Council of Nicaea there are 318 bishops that assembled at the Council of Nicaea we don't know any of those fathers who said anything about Mary that the modern

Roman Catholic Church says the Assumption the Immaculate Conception almost perpetual virginity of Mary but I think on the subject of baptism what we'll find is that many of the church fathers actually would defer baptism as close as possible to death near death so Constantine the great

Constantine the Emperor wasn't baptized until his deathbed and the same goes with many other

Christians and the question once again is if infant baptism was the standard why is it that Constantine and and even the children of many

Christians were delayed baptism until they were able to understand the

Christian faith so there's there's a famous martyr Tony called perpetual right well it was a woman a

Christian sister in Christ she was in prison in Rome and she had a child she had a baby and before she was led out to the

Colosseum to to to be fed to the lions and so forth she asked for baptism well there she is she's asking for baptism right before she goes to her martyrdom but here's the funny thing

Anthony she was baptized but she didn't have her which is very strange because if again if infant baptism was the standard you would think that perpetual would have asked for her child to be baptized as well but he wasn't right yeah

I hate to say that that's a departure from justification by faith alone I mean you look

I don't know the state of her soul but it seems to me that in waiting to the end of your life to be baptized it you're you're waiting for that baptism when pointing to that baptism as the operation that's going to save you and anything that you're pointing to outside of Christ alone is is a work of man which yeah and the reason why they deferred baptism

Anthony was there was a belief that that if you committed grievous sins after baptism there was a belief that you your salvation could be on the line if you committed these sins and that's why if you notice they would defer these baptisms near to near the end of their deaths that way they can guarantee that they don't sin because they're on their way out but but you're right that that was the understanding that that they had

Wow Wow okay so that kind of encapsulates baptismal regeneration in a short period of time let's move on to infant baptism or pedo baptism where does the term pedo baptism come from well the word pedo baptism is just a

Greek word the word pedo means child like we use the word pediatrics pediatrician and so it simply refers to a child and so but pedo baptism means the baptism of a child or an infant so that's that's basically a term that was created to distinguish it from cradle baptism that is baptism for believers right now the groups that I would say that would still be considered reformed would be

Presbyterians that hold to pedo baptism correct right right and the Christian Reform Church as well and there are low

Anglicans the evangelical the evangelical wing of the

Anglican Church would would also hold to pedo baptism Methodists would hold to you know baptism and some of the

Wesleyan churches well Methodism is a form of Wesleyan ism and so a number of these churches would perform infant baptism right and and and obviously

Lutherans would also hold to into that system yes only out of that group really only proud of Presbyterians would be considered reformed right wouldn't consider

Lutherans reformed would you consider accurate Anglicans reformed there are a number of Anglicans that are strongly reformed

I mean even in the history of Anglicanism when when when the Church of England was formed if you read

Thomas Cranmer's Book of Common Prayer and the 39 articles of faith of the

Church of England Cranmer it was a very had a very strong reform bent you know and even today there are there are very strong reformed

Anglicans today and then again there's the Anglo Catholics that the high Anglican Church which is more closer to the

Roman Catholic side of things but but even with Lutheranism I mean you know

Luther did begin with a very strong sense of predestination bondage of the will but I think

Melanchthon after Luther's death Melanchthon kind of let's say did a reformation of Lutheranism himself mm -hmm okay and one one strong Anglican reform guide that comes to Mike in his mind is

Michael Horton right right that's right right I think Gary Packer would have leaned in that direction okay okay but yeah

Michael Horton for sure so what would be the scriptures that a Presbyterian or someone who holds to paedo -baptism what would be the scriptures that they point to that would lead them or someone else to believe yes we should be baptizing our our baby right now they all believe all paedo -baptists believe that that the

New Testament has baptism by immersion and they also believe that adults were baptized the only the only places they go to to argue for paedo -baptism is they would go to the household baptisms in the book of Acts where you read about this person believed and was baptized and his whole household right and the assumption there is that the household and again these are assumptions the assumption is the household would include infants even though the text doesn't say that and an indirect text they use is where Jesus says suffer not the children to come unto me for to them belong to kingdom of heaven that's just an indirect side note they use and so the problem with that of course is that when they mention these household baptisms they're following what the

Westminster Confession of Faith says good and necessary inferences and what that means is that well if they had households then they must have had infants in there that's not what it says so the refutation for that I think is very clear that every read about a household baptisms you always hear about them hearing the word and they believe the plural pronouns are used they believe and then they were baptized so to include infants in there

I think is really really a push right and the way

I think about it if an infant is baptized and the scripture says repent or believe and be baptized belief and repentance would follow baptism in that situation whereas I see scripturally it's repent and believe and then be baptized so that would have to precede baptism which is a picture of our

Union in our our identification with the death burial and resurrection right Jesus yeah

I mean Luther had to play with words like well the child reaches out in childlike faith the way a child reaches to be suckled by its mother the child in faith reaches out to Christ well

I mean that's very melodramatic but again there's nothing biblical there's nothing to back that up typically nothing at all right yeah so here's a question because I believe that Presbyterians hold that this puts the child in the

Covenant right I mean is that is that what are those is that something that they hold to concretely they do and the problem with that Anthony is because they believe that baptism is the

New Testament sign that that responds to the Old Testament sign of circumcision and so most of them take

Colossians 2 12 where Paul talks about circumcision and they talked about we were buried with him in baptism and and the issue here is they'll say the

Old Testament type the sign rather that brings the person into the Covenant and the

Old Testament was circumcision and that has been superseded in the New Covenant by baptism and and they believe that baptism it brings the child into the

Covenant they become part of the faith community and so baptism ushers the child into that New Covenant and there's a lot of problems with that well first of all the problem with circumcision the baptism that's a major problem and the other problem is the idea that children are inducted into the

Covenant merely by baptism so would Presbyterian say that when when the child is baptized he's brought into the visible church not necessarily the

Covenant or does it have to be both well I mean I guess it depends on how we define the

Covenant they would say that they enter into not just the visible church but they believe that that that reception of the child into the community of faith also brings them into the invisible church as well and that's why they talked about the promises

God the promises that God makes in baptism to us and so forth but that is that is so rife with so many problems yeah no

I agree and in my conversations with some people they said that if once the child is baptized

God would see that child differently than a child who wasn't baptized but is being raised in the church and it's it's strange isn't it

Anthony that they're very strongly reformed but yet there's something God if God reacts to something we do which which again sounds like anathema to our reformed baptist ears because the idea is that there's nothing we can do that can please

God and and and it's not God doesn't owe us anything I mean other than judgment and so to say that God looks at this child in a different manner in which he looks at an unbaptized child

I just don't see that I mean they try to use 1st Corinthians 7 where Paul talks about America Christian is married to an unbeliever but then he says but then your children are holy otherwise they would be unclean but that's by virtue of the fact that the child is receiving this counsel of the gospel he's he or she is hearing the gospel from the believing parent and so in that sense the child is is receiving if you will the the influence the the the let's say the the filling over of the cup of that Christian parent that will educate that child or or speak the gospel to that child's life and 1st

Corinthians 7 Paul's not even talking about baptism he's talking about marriage and in this case between a believer and a person who remained an unbeliever right but wouldn't the common grace of God being raised in a church be extended to children whether they were baptized or not yes definitely because he causes the rain to fall on both the good and the bad and his son the sun shines on both the good and the bad so common grace is indiscriminate

God does not discriminate in allowing all of his creatures to breathe the oxygen that he's created and so I agree with you that there's nothing in scripture that would suggest that a baptized child

I mean that that very concept is not even it's an oxymoron the scripture doesn't even speak in those terms

I think that it's it's more of a man -made idea rather than a biblical doctrine right because our baptism is is again a picture of our union with Christ and if these infants are not in union with Christ it must be picturing some future union that may or may not happen right so I just don't see how that would how they can consider that child to actually be in the new covenant yeah and I think the new covenant

Anthony is is it's delineated for us is it not in Hebrews 8 quoting from Jeremiah 31 31 that it's

God who will make that new covenant it's God who will write his laws in our hearts and put his commandments in our minds and then he says this he says that no one will have to say to them know the

Lord for they shall all know me in the new covenant they have an immediate awareness of God they're having immediate awareness of their salvation with God and you cannot be in the covenant unless God has brought you into the covenant by grace written his laws in your heart and they all those who are in the covenant in the new covenant all of them know him they shall all know me from the least to the greatest but in in this

Presbyterian idea of the covenant community not all these children know the Lord because a lot of these kids tend to apostatize at some point they walk away from the church and so do they are they really in that new covenant because the only ones in it the only ones in that new covenant are those who know the

Lord mm -hmm and that certainly cannot be said of many people who've been baptized in these denominations and then later don't even think about God or have no interest in the gospel whatsoever right and it kind of deflects away from the beauty and the superiority of the new covenant because everyone who

God places in the new covenant will be saved there is no there is no falling away

God God seals us in the Holy Spirit he writes his law on our hearts and he compels us to keep them he puts a fear of him in our hearts that we will not turn to the right or to the left that's right

I will cause them to walk in my ways right and and and we also we need to realize that the new covenant is based on better promises better mediator better sacrifice better priesthood and the difference between the old and the new covenant is that in the old covenant you can be made part of the the community of faith but that didn't guarantee your spiritual salvation because God loved

Jacob but he hated Esau Esau had the sign of circumcision in his flesh and God did not respect that sign

God did not even choose Esau and so in the new covenant the only ones who are in I mean in one respect it is a

VIP covenant it's people that God has elected and saved by a sovereign choice there is no unregenerate people in the new covenant anything the only people in the new covenant are those who are regenerated and so it's impossible to speak about you know people being in the covenant but not fully regenerate those are not

New Testament terms right so the pushback that I generally get when I talk about this is well when we baptize someone let's say we're we're gonna have a baptism in our church next month and we're baptizing to two young fellows how do we know for certain that they're baptized

I mean that they're saved we may be baptizing someone who's not truly regenerate so in that instance we're baptizing an unbeliever and that would be their their push back yeah yeah well we could see the example in the book of Acts 8 right when we find that Philip when he went to Samaria we learned that even

Simon Magus was baptized and and God didn't honor his baptism I mean he wanted to buy the gift of the

Holy Spirit from Peter and Peter said you know he said may you and your money perish and you know

Peter he was a fisherman so you know that everywhere he spat the grass never grew green again and yeah and he would have what he basically said was you can go to hell with your money that's basically what he was saying right you and your money perish so what

I would say in response to that is that as as as elders or pastors if someone comes to us and says they put their faith in Christ and and we see what seems to be food of the

Holy Spirit and and we go ahead and baptize them well we've done our part we fulfilled our our

Commission by Christ's command if this person deceived us or was just pretending to be a godly person that person is going to answer to the

Lord for what they've done they're they're answerable to the Lord and they will face judgment because if they weren't regenerated in the first place then they've simply mocked the the sign of baptism and that but that's very different than baptizing a child who has no decision in in that in that event to baptize a child without knowing what or he or she is doing that's a completely different story and then telling that child as that child growing up that you're in the covenant and that God will honor the promises made in baptism that's a completely different story sure whereas whereas an adult someone of sound mind who receives baptism just like Simon Magus I mean

Peter didn't scold Philip for baptizing him Peter told Simon Magus made you and your money perish so it's not exactly the same thing because a child is not responsible and does not know and is not conscious of what is happening so I think we're dealing here

Anthony with the apples and oranges here right I agree so now prior to Augustine which of the early church fathers would have promoted infant baptism it and which ones would you say wouldn't or would have promoted the believers baptism well from what from what we see before Augustine the the idea of baptizing children was was again it was various views some of the

Eastern fathers would see baptism to a child as as conferring the gifts of God on the child and grace sanctification so forth but then others you find cases where they defer bath baptism to children only in cases of danger like the child is dying and so we want to baptize the child so we have differences of opinions here so take st.

Augustine for example he tells us in his confessions he complains about his mother

Monica who was a godly woman who prayed all her life for Augustine's conversion he complained that when he was a young child he became gravely ill and at one point he thought he was going to die and Monica didn't have him baptized and he complained about her and he says mother you know do you realize you could have sent me into hell do you realize that in deferring my baptism you would have sent me into the flames of hell and so the question arises well why did

Monica baptize Augustine when he was an infant she didn't and she didn't baptize him when he was a ten -year -old she didn't baptize him when he was a teenager obviously and so this begs the question well if infant baptism was normative in the church then why was

Augustine not baptized and then you've got Ambrose Augustine's mentor and teacher Ambrose was baptized later in life as was as I mentioned already

Constantine and Basil as well Basil and Gregory of Nyssa they were baptized later in life so what we're finding

Anthony is that we don't see this urgency to baptize infants right after birth in the earliest years of the church what we find is that when

Augustine starts fighting with Pelagius and Pelagians by the way were pato -baptists as well Pelagians baptized infants as well but Augustine because of his battles with Pelagianism Pelagius and the whole idea of Pelagius says we're all born perfect we're all born with a clean slate tabula rasa and Augustine says no we're not born innocent we all have original sin and so Augustine began to push for this baptism immediate baptism shortly after birth usually about seven to eight days trying to mimic the circumcision right and the reason why

Augustine did that was because he truly believed that children without baptism would not go to heaven that they would actually go not exactly into hell because they're infants but not exactly into heaven so it's something like think of it this way

Anthony it's something like it's like brunch it's not exactly breakfast and it's not exactly lunch there's a cantaloupe at the end and so and so Augustine said what children will go into limbo which is almost like a let's just say it's an eternal playground where children get to play but they never experienced the loving presence of God so Augustine is the driving force to this idea of infant baptism as soon as possible after birth but before Augustine again it's a mixed bag you've got people deferring baptism until later until the kid is older Perpetua didn't have her baby baptized when she in the prison cell before she was martyred so you're looking at a mixed bag but if you really want to know where this this this emergency idea that begins scholars point to about 410

AD shortly after the fight with Pelagius and at the

Council of Carthage in 418 in North Africa they actually passed a law an ecclesiastical law that children a baptism of children should not be delayed and that and that was because of Augustine's influence and push and that was a local council it was not an ecumenical council that is it was not binding on all the churches but it was local and it was in it and it carried the support of Augustine Wow so when it comes to Augustine we want to embrace him because of his view on depravity but we want to smack him because of his view on baptism yeah so so so the

Protestants I mean Calvin said Augustine is all ours in his doctrines of grace

I mean and Augustine believed to in predestination and and he believed in the election they had a very strong view of God's predestination and but but then someone asked him said wait a minute

Augustine you believe that God elects his people of salvation but then what's what's with this infant baptism and getting them baptized you know what he said he says well all those who

God elects will all these infants will get baptized and and and those who aren't baptized weren't elect by God and so this is how we tried to balance this whole thing of election and baptism regeneration by saying that all those who

God elects will get baptized Wow as a quick aside didn't Pope Benedict do away with limbo didn't he say limbo yes was yes yes he did yeah he did which again raises the question of you know the consensus of the fathers it looks like the

Pope's don't really agree with the consensus of the fathers and again that wasn't the consensus of the fathers because they all had different opinions but yes

Benedict the 16th Pope Emeritus he he did he did away with that and and and also he moved towards let's just say softening the whole issue of purgatory and trying to dampen to downplay the severity of purgatory by talking about things like well you know the purgatory is not really a place of temporal time which is weird because historically the

Roman Church thought that purgatory does include time right you gotta make up time it's you do the crime you do the time in purgatory right and the whole 17

I don't want to get off topic but every Saturday Mary descends into purgatory and and and rescues a number of souls out of purgatory so if you really want to benefit from the 17 privilege you want to make sure you die a

Friday night so that Saturday Mary can come down and get you out of there instead of working all week right worst worst case you're only in there for six days anyway

I mean it's not it's not that bad isn't it wasn't that something that Mother Angelica would yeah drum away and she says if you wore your scapula if you were found wearing your scapula when you died the 17 privilege would be invoked and Mary would descend out of heaven into purgatory correct and the

Saturday after you die that's right right yeah so Our Lady of Carmel Mount Carmel the whole idea of Our Lady of Mount Carmel was she promised that whoever dies wearing the scapular will not suffer will not suffer eternal fire so yeah it's it's one of the the many

Roman the decretals of what did Luther call it he called them one of the many

Roman many many of the the decretals from the Roman dunghill I got a question coming in from one of our brothers at hope he said did any of these early church fathers and proponents of baptism in emergency circumstances speak to the need to baptize the sinner on the cross next to Jesus that would that would be with him in paradise

I didn't see anyone rushing to sprinkle water on him yeah no no they never did and yet that is that is an argument that of course we all we all recognize the fact that the thief on the cross who turned in faith to the

Lord Jesus if you if you listen to the interaction between him and the Lord the first thing you notice is he recognizes that he's a despicable sinner he recognizes his total depravity that that he tells the other guy don't you fear

God don't you understand that we we're getting the just desserts for what we've done but this man has done nothing and and then he recognizes

Jesus's messianic status he says remember me when you come in your kingdom now again that man was regenerated on the cross that was not a man who you know how did he know that Jesus was a king how did he know that he had a kingdom he's a cruise he's he's stark naked hanging on a cross with his flesh ripped to pieces and he's looking at him saying remember me when you come into your kingdom and it's interesting that the

Lord Jesus didn't say well I'm sorry but you know you should have been baptized first and I would have given you additional grace and so forth no one came with a bucket of water important threw it at him he didn't have time to be confirmed or you know have communion and so forth his first communion no the

Lord Jesus simply said to him today you shall be with me in paradise you didn't just say today you'll be with me in paradise he said truly truly

I say in Greek it's on then on then and it's it's the it's the the greatest way to state something with absolute certainty and Jesus is the only one who did that you don't find people saying that before Jesus we always we usually end our prayers with on it which means so let it be but Jesus predicated very important statements with the double assertion of the amen so John 3 3 barely barely

I say to you unless a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God so whenever you see those barely barely's it means you know tune up listen up because what he is saying is of the utmost importance yeah we we both have a very good friend in common

I'm not gonna say who it is but he's flirting with possibly baptismal regeneration but baptism as a requirement for salvation so when

I brought the you know the thief on the cross up to him he says well that's an outlier that's not the normative practice and that was before the resurrection of Christ after the resurrection of Christ it was taught by the

Apostles that you needed to be baptized right so how would you how would you respond to that in the sense that we're looking at a one -off situation there aren't other situations like that yeah yeah

I mean I mean he's making it sound like it was easier before the cross to be saved than after the cross it was simpler when it's really the other way around but the fact of the matter is

Anthony that the means by which God has saved his people through the centuries has always been through faith always

Abraham was not justified by anything he did it was not by circumcision he was justified by faith and Hebrews 11 points out that he was by faith that Noah pleased

God it was by faith that Isaac and Jacob and and he goes on to Joseph and Moses and he goes through that whole

Testament line in other words the the means of salvation has never changed and even though Jesus had not yet died on the cross we we need to understand that the atonement of Christ was already present in God's mind

God is his trans temporal and and so from God's vantage point the whole gamut of salvation was already present him he already knows his elect his elect are there that's why we can believe in the chain of redemption that those when he calls he predestined and those who predestined he justified and they will end up being glorified it's a done deal and so what

I would say Anthony is that the means of salvation has never changed it's always been the same you know the

I mean CI Schofield one of the fathers of American dispensationalism actually argued in his first edition of the

CI Schofield Bible that in the Old Testament Jews were saved by their works and then the new covenant were saved by faith no no no it has always been on the basis of faith and so that thief that was saved was already saved on the basis of Christ even before Christ died

Christ did not yet died technically but he was saved on the basis of the finished work of Christ and his resurrection that was already a realized fact in the mind of God even though it had not yet materialized in time and space yet in history so it's not a one -off it is a consistent stream of redemption that we find throughout all of Scripture right in fact

I just I just want to read something out of John 3 because I always I was read this and to me I took it to understand that being born of God's Spirit was not something new to the

New Covenant it was it's part of the New Covenant but that existed during Old Testament times because speaking about being born again

John 3 11 Jesus says truly truly I say to you we speak of what we know and we bear witness to what we have seen speaking about the new birth so is it is

Jesus saying in in that particular instance that he's that he has seen new birth prior to his death burial and resurrection well if we grant his his deity and his the fact that he is the eternal

Son of God then yes of course he would have he would have witnessed that in in in his dealings with his people in the

Old Testament and and speaking through the prophets speaking to Moses and so forth so absolutely the question though Anthony is that John 3 11 is problematic in the sense that what what does that we refer to some scholars think that Jesus may be referring to John the

Baptist and himself because John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus Christ were both witnesses to to what he came to do that John witnessed he heard the father's voice saying this is my son oh my well please so forth so the question is who is the we here is it referring to the the

Trinity the persons of the Trinity or is it referring to Jesus and John because shortly after that he talks about the bridegroom standing by the the best man standing next to the bridegroom and rejoicing to hear his voice and and so there's a connection made there between Jesus and and Baptist John the

Baptist so it all depends on who the we are there so okay yeah okay all right so so far we've hit baptismal regeneration and infant baptism let's now move to believers baptism which is also known as credo baptism correct right so out of the

Reformed camp who else besides Reformed Baptists which the only group

I know that hold to believers baptism are there any of the Reformed groups that hold to believers baptism uh not not that I know of not that I know of the

Reformed movement the Reformed Baptist movement maybe we should probably for the sake of our heroes we should probably explain a little bit about what happened with the how the

Reformed Baptist came about these now Luther Calvin's wingling and Knox these these great magisterial reformers you know we call them the magisterial because they they were not just teachers but they also believed in the power of the magistrates they believed in the church state so it's what we call sacralism the idea that the church and the state function together and that of course led to a lot of problems the first time that happened was under Constantine and that has led to a lot of problems the very fact that that your country

Anthony was born out of this declaration of independence this idea that that there's a separation of the church and the state that that that government shall make a law concerning the free exercise of religion or forbid the free exercise thereof is based on the

Puritan view the Puritans many of them were Reformed Baptist as well and it was the pilgrims the the

Puritans from England who came in the famous Mayflower voyage they came to the Americas created

New England and they began to teach this idea of the separation because they came from an oppressive monarchy in England that basically said it's the

Church of England you must conform to the to the Church of England and and the Puritans were the non -conformists they didn't conform people like John Bunyan who was placed in prison because he was not an

Anglican clergyman all of that to say this Anthony that in the time of Luther and Calvin there arose a movement in Switzerland known as the

Swiss Brethren and these were Reformers who came to be known as the radical

Reformers or they were called the stepchildren of the Reformation because people like people like Conrad Grebel John Slater folks like that began to arise in Switzerland and Germany and disciples of Zwingli approached him and said look brother the

Reformation is great it's wonderful but there's only one problem we haven't pushed far enough we're still holding on to these

Roman Catholic inklings and they said they challenged Zwingli on this and they said why are we baptizing infants and and at one point

Zwingli was actually siding with the what would be called the Anabaptists but then he decided to stick to the church -state solution and therefore maintain paedo -baptism well what these brothers did was they they'd left and they started what was called they didn't call themselves

Anabaptists their critics called them Anabaptists and the word Anabaptism means to re -baptize mm -hmm and you may not know this at me but back in 556 558 the

Emperor Justinian implemented an ecclesiastical law for all of Christendom that basically said that it was a crime to re -baptize and that whoever re -baptizes is subject to the death penalty that was held in the church throughout the

Middle Ages that's why they killed Anabaptists they burned them at the stake they drowned them in the rivers to mock their baptism and even

Luther supported the attack on the Anabaptists as did Calvin and you know

James White sometimes says that if I was in Geneva in the time of Calvin he would have run me out of the city because if you read

Calvin's Institutes he would even refer to the Anabaptists as a heretic movement and that was because of this idea of re -baptism that is is against church canon law and so it is from these people the

Anabaptist movement that created the Mennonites and other groups it was from these people that sorry

Tony I just got to turn this notice here just give me a minute mm -hmm yeah it was from these it was from these groups that the the

Anabaptist movement spread across Europe and then it went into England it's from England that you have the particular

Baptists those who become the this reform type out of which Charles Spurgeon would later come out of and John Owen and others sorry

Owen was a pedo -baptist and so it was these Anabaptist thinkers who said the church and the state need a divorce you cannot have the church in bed with the state because these are two different kingdoms two cities are in conflict with each other and so it is from these these brethren these these pioneers that we owe our our rights as Baptists because they they paid their they paid with their blood and they they are the ones who forged this movement of the

Puritans that came to America and established this idea of freedom freedom of religion freedom to enjoy

Liberty God -given innate rights that are inalienable that cannot be taken away from you these all came from these

Puritan Anabaptist thinkers and we owe them a great debt we would not know the

United States as we know today at least in its foundations if it was not for these great Anabaptist pioneers wow that's incredible yeah amen amen so um how where should we draw the line as far as breaking bread and fellowship with people with regards to baptism

I mean how far can we have what lines can we cross and what lines can't we cross yeah

I mean I think that fellowship with I think our Presbyterian brothers

I mean if R .C. Sproul was alive you know there's no doubt that I would have no problem breaking bread

I know John McCarthy did many times yeah had their dear friends and I think that you know we're back to that again those fundamentals in the fundamentals unity where I would divide is when you come to cases like Roman Catholicism and the

Eastern Orthodox Church that's why if I ever go to a wedding or a funeral at these places

I don't partake of communion because we're not we're not we're at two different tables here we're not thinking the same way and also because I can't fellowship with someone who believes that they're saved by their works that they're saved by the sacraments

Presbyterians don't believe that even Lutherans even though they talk about this baptismal regeneration

Lutherans are very adamant at least the Missouri Synod remember Anthony there's there's the was at the

ELCA the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America which I call everything Luther can't affirm and then there's the

Missouri Synod which is more of the conservative conservative Orthodox branch of the church so I've had fellowship

I've had communion with Lutheran brethren I've wore one of my great teachers mentors who taught me about Islam was a

Lutheran minister himself who had a great mission work in India for 25 years he worked as a missionary great man of God loved the

Lord understood God's grace that it was a way that we can never be saved by anything we did but still they hold to this wacky idea of baptism regeneration which

I can never understand but I don't think that's that's enough to bar us from from breaking bread with with Lutherans unless we're talking about the apostate

Lutheran Church so would you say is there any one early church father that stands out as a proponent of baptism yeah

I think I think that if we if we look at people like Athanasius not that Athanasius would be against baptizing children but he would also be a champion of believers baptism in the case of children again when when they approach death there was the sense of we should get them baptized before they die if you read

Justin Martyr Justin Martyr seems to have been someone who understood believers baptism that's about second of the second middle of the second century 150

AD if you read the D .K. the D .K. which is about 112

AD very early it's a worship manual that means the teaching and in there it talks about those who receive baptism must first be taught so they talk about a catechism to teach those obviously they can't refer to children because babies rather cannot learn and then it talks about how to baptize them they should be baptized in the name of the

Father the Son the Holy Spirit and you should be in running water preferably and if not then in still water by immersion but to baptize three times to dump them three times but the

D .K. doesn't talk about baptism of infants it talks about people being taught and then being baptized and also in the early church

Tony the the baptism was usually reserved for Easter or Pentecost so there was always this you know delay there wasn't this okay we're gonna get you baptized right away it was this okay we're at Christmas now we'll get you baptized on Easter and then if between Easter and Pentecost they'll get baptized on Pentecost so you don't see this urgency urgency urgency we've got to get about okay they're gonna die without baptism you don't see that not until Augustine and so when we look at the these early fathers and Tertullian around 200

AD Tertullian writes he's one of the first Latin fathers he writes and he says that there's this but there's this strange practice that is going on where people are baptizing their children and then he says why do they do something which the

Lord nor his Apostles ever commanded now why would Tertullian say that in the year 800 the turn of the beginning of the third century why would

Tertullian say something like they're doing something the Lord and his Apostles never commanded and then he says do they not realize that in baptizing their children they will rise they will grow up and then curse

Christ because the idea is they're not regenerate right right yeah look if baptismal regeneration was true and a scriptural truth we'd be baptizing everybody we know oh yeah absolutely you know just could talk them into getting baptized hey look just as a precaution get baptized if that's where salvation takes place let's just baptize everyone absolutely absolutely you know is there a book or a resource that we can point our listeners to that would help us to yeah understand more about this one here it's me infant baptism infant baptism in historical perspective by David F Wright this is a very good book he goes through the history he mentions a lot of the things

I just mentioned as well he puts everything into perspective and he basically and it's highly endorsed by a good number of scholars here in the back but this is a great book

I would highly recommend it's it's published by let me just get the publisher here it's published by Wipton stock

Eugene Eric Eugene Oregon and the publication date of this one seven two thousand seven so again infant baptism in historical perspective by David Wright and in fact it was dr.

Hagen who highly recommended this book the dr. Hagen as you know church church history professor at Southern Baptist seminary okay well

I just want to ask my my brothers over at hope if there's any questions that they that they have they can text me be happy to ask dr.

Tony while we have them on the line I don't want to keep them too much longer unless you you have a little bit more time sure

I have a little bit more time okay great great great great so scripturally we see the command is to repent and be baptized right so now

Presbyterians would also look at the Great Commission Matthew 28 19 and say that one of our commands is to teach them and baptize them in the name of the

Lord you know in the name of the Father Son and the Holy Spirit so wouldn't be wouldn't baptism at that point be part of something that we're commanded to do to them all right in order to indoctrinate them into the

Christian faith yeah well in Matthew 28 19 if you notice the first thing the Lord says he doesn't say go and baptize everyone in the name of the

Father and then teach them he says make disciples of all the nations that's the first command and the the idea of making the disciple what's a disciple well the word disciple is the

Greek word mathetes so we get the word mathematics from the idea of discipline and so a disciple in Hebrew they were called

Talmud in Talmud in the word Talmud for example means a book of learning and so the

Talmud in the disciples the learners that literally means a learner make learners of all the nations teach them make them students of who

I am make the disciples not just Israel but the whole nations and then he says baptize them in the name of the

Father's on and then teach them everything I've commanded you and know I'm with you always to the end here so the way

I put it Anthony I don't know if you heard this before I call it the three W's you win them you wet them and you wean them so when wet and weaned w -e -a -n you wean them off the word to go into the solid meat of the word so again make disciples of the nations it's kind of hard to make disciples out of infants we don't have an idea what you're talking about and so the idea implies that you are making disciples by doing what by preaching the gospel you're making it known and then they hear and they believe and then what do you do you baptize them and then they are to be taught they learn that's what

Christianity is about is is growing in the grace and knowledge of Christ now if the

Lord said go and baptize people and then teach them okay they may have a but that's not what it says right right

I was looking for another verse I know it's in in Luke and after a paralytic gets healed by Jesus Jesus says now go to the priest and make an offering for your for your healing and I look at that and I say to my friends who hold to acts 238 you know baptism go call upon the name of Jesus you know baptizing name

Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved for the remission of your sins are they putting the remission of sins after the baptism when it should be before well it sure sounds like it it sure sounds like it but you know you know

Anthony when they go to acts 238 I always I always tell them to continue reading go to verse 39 this verse 39 says the promises unto you and to your children and then they stop there they go there you go it's for us and for our children wonderful and I said praise the

Lord read on what does it say and to as many as whom the Lord our

God shall call all it's based on God's call election and so it doesn't say the promises to us for children stop full stop no the promises to you and to your children and to all those who are far off as many as whom the

Lord our God shall call so the the qualifying clause in that verse there Anthony is those whom the

Lord our God calls does God call everybody no and so it's all based on God's election it's based on his call and that's one place

I always tell my Presbyterian brethren you know guys you know you're really big on exegesis but for some reason you you're not doing justice you're only reading half that verse you got to keep on going to get the full context there yeah and I think it's just a reminder to all of us that somewhere along the lines every single one of us has a blind spot in our theology

I mean the only the only one who had perfect theology whoever walked the face of the earth is

Jesus so I think it's it's a reminder to us that we have to be graceful to other people yes even though they hold differing positions because we somewhere along the lines are holding an era you know in our theology we just don't see it right right so we do have the noetic effects of the fall right

Anthony yes we have the noetic effects of the fall which means that even our our thinking is is is filtered through our fallenness right and that is why we need the illumination of the

Holy Spirit to make known the Word of God to us because it's very easy for us to again this is the whole problem with the whole open theist view and the whole problem of you know that whole debate we had in the reform reform

Baptist circles on the passability of God and we start thinking of we start defining

God through our our faculty and we gotta be very careful there because the way we we think the way we we we judge things is always filtered through a fallen mind sure we just got to be cautious and that's a good a good point yeah yeah absolutely and I think the one thing that we all hold in common is sola scriptura absolutely other words we recognize that the

Bible is the infallible inerrant Word of God and somewhere along the lines we're gonna misinterpret what

God says due to you know our fallen nature and our sin stained minds so if we're gonna get something wrong we should certainly be gracious to someone else who's getting something wrong that that blind exactly absolutely right and and so I think we need to we need to be gracious we need to be patient you know the

Lord's servant must not quarrel Paul says you must be patient and we need to realize that yeah you know we all have blind spots and so that's why dialogue with other fellow believers in these areas is so essential absolutely you know what

Hebrews 6 says about it starts off talking about elementary things like the resurrection of the dead and and and washings baptisms and so forth he goes well we should be beyond this by now this is right you know what when you see when you said that you just triggered something that I meant to ask you when scripture talks about baptism for the dead yes what is what is that pointing to yeah it's the one verse that the

Mormon Church has built a colossal empire on and the world's biggest genealogical library is in Utah in the desert

Utah and as you know you probably heard of ancestry .com and all these groups that say we can trace we can tell you who your ancestors were they're owned by the

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -day Saints oh wow I didn't yeah it's owned by the Mormon Church because what they do is they they can figure out who your ancestors were and they can baptize living

Mormons for the dead they can baptize a living Mormon on behalf of a deceased person and so they baptized you know the founding fathers like George Washington and Jefferson and John Adams all these guys have been baptized by Mormons like by proxy living members being baptized for Washington so in the resurrection all the

US presidents are going to be Mormons to the great surprise but in in the terms of baptism for the dead

Tony it only appears in 1st Corinthians 15 verse 29 right it appears in a passage of scripture where Paul is dealing with the resurrection and he's also dealing with people in the church of Corinth who are questioning the resurrection and they're and he's saying look if if the dead do not rise then

Christ has not been raised and if Christ has not been raised then we are all we're lost we're fools the dead the dead are lost as well so what

Paul does there Anthony is some weird practice emerged in Corinth where they felt that Christians who had died without baptism they felt that in order to have those

Christians be baptized they came up with some weird idea that living members could be baptized on behalf of the dead what

Paul does is he doesn't endorse this practice he doesn't say hey keep it up he uses it as an argument against them so what he says is this look if you guys say there's no resurrection from death you deny the bodily resurrection there's a lot of Greeks had a problem with body resurrection he's saying look if there is no resurrection from the dead then why do you baptize for the dead if they are not raised right in other words he's using it as a polemic it's a polemical device where Paul is showing how silly they are by doing something which they which goes against their convictions that there's no resurrection if there is no resurrection then why do you baptize them in the first place so you'll notice

Paul never endorses this from what we know no other New Testament passage other than that one mentions it the early church has no no evidence that this was ever practiced and so in 1827 some weird guy in upstate

New York Joe Smith John Joseph Smith claims that some angel appeared to him and told him to write and find these golden plates up in the hill

Camorra up in upstate New York and right from there you get the Mormon church and they come up with this weird idea in Mormon temples they they baptize living

Mormons on behalf of dead people which is very weird but they based it all on first Corinthians 1529 which

Paul never endorsed and which Paul simply exposes as a fraudulent practice well brother

I can't thank you enough for having this conversation with me I truly appreciate you and your your diligence and the efforts that you put forth being the apologist that you are and availing yourself to us and making yourself available you're truly a gift to the body and we very much appreciate you

I appreciate that too Anthony and I appreciate the work you're doing as well with the New York apologetics and thank you and your commitment to the to Hope Church and please give my love and regard to the brethren there and pastor

Jensen and God willing when if this pandemic ever goes

I'd love to come down and meet you as Paul says face to face and amen well we look forward to that also so well friends thanks again for joining us on the reform rookie video podcast

I'm gonna put links to some of the things that dr. Tony talked about in fact that book I'll get the link to that and some of his other talks with regards to East Eastern orthodoxy remember to look us up on the web at www .reformedrookie

.com you could also check out our YouTube channel we have over a hundred and fifty different videos on there hitting reformed theology from many different aspects we have a podcast also where pastor

Chris is going through the book of Leviticus chapter by chapter doing a terrific job also pastor

Jensen is going through spiritual depression a book by Martin Lloyd -Jones that's also on the

YouTube channel and available at the podcast so thanks again for joining us and remember