You're dancing. Simply put, the term "baptismal regeneration" is the belief that one is regenerated at the point of baptism, in other words, that they become born again when they rise from the waters of baptism. In essence, that is saying that baptism is the means by which one is saved, which is totally unbiblical.
I asked you to define the term twice and I don't think you have. You've denied the following: that one arises from baptism with a new life (Rom 6; Col 2) that one is baptized into Christ (Gal 3) that baptism has anything to do with forgiveness of sins (Acts 2; Acts 22) that baptism has anything to do with salvation (Mark 16; 1Pet 3:21) Is that what you mean by "baptismal regeneration." Again, it is not my term and I've never claimed it, so you need to define it if you're going to bring it up. Since you're so dead set against it, I assume you know what you intend when you use it.
Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father; even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been joined together in the likeness of His death , we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection; knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be destroyed, that from now on we should not serve sin. (Rom 6:3-6)And you are complete in Him, who is the Head of all principality and power, in whom also you are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in whom also you were raised through the faith of the working of God, raising Him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. (Col 2:10-14)
Did you miss the words, "in the likeness of"? That clearly shows that baptism is a type, a representation, of the reality, and not the reality itself, which it would need to be in order to have any regenerating power. Paul clearly teaches that baptism is a representation of the common experience we all share, those of us who are true believers, that of being joined to Christ in His Death, Burial, and Resurrection. It is not the literal event, but a representation of it, the same as the Lord's Supper is a representation of the partaking of Christ's flesh and blood. Bread is not flesh, and wine is not blood, neither is water dirt or a tomb. The one represents the other, as a type, the same as the blood of bulls and goats represented the Blood of Christ, the perfect sacrifice. The benefits are obtained by faith, not by the doing of the work itself.
Also, please answer these questions: Do you believe in repentance regeneration?
What is that? If by that you mean that repentance regenerates, then my answer is no, it does not. Repentance is turning from sin.
Do you believe in faith regeneration?
Regeneration precedes faith in Christ. No one can exercise faith in Christ while they are still dead in sins, dead to spiritual understanding, and possessing the cold, stony, dead heart of the unregenerate sinner. They must first be regenerated by God to spiritual life, in order that they may be able to hear the Word, receiving faith, and then being able to believe on Christ, to the forgiveness of their sins and justification by God.
that baptism has anything to do with forgiveness of sins (Acts 2; Acts 22)
Baptism does not cause or bring about forgiveness of sins. You interpret wrongly the English translation of the Greek. Baptism is an act of obedience by believers, to signify the common experience of death, burial and resurrection they share with Christ, having been ALREADY joined to Him in spirit, by faith in His completed work on the Cross. Baptism does not itself bring about that joining with Him, nor does it bring about forgiveness of sins. It is an act of obediences signifying an already accompished fact.
Is one required to "say the sinner's prayer" to be saved? If not, why do so many preachers tell people to do that? Is there any biblical support for such?
The sinner's prayer is not some magical incantation, that once said, forever seals the speaker as a Christian. It is presented that way many times, and many understand it to be that, although they may not really know that is what they believe about it. Those who teach it take it from Romans 10:9. Paul wasn't teaching this as a formula, he was indicating that those who confess Jesus as Lord and believe in their hearts will be saved, because that is the natural response of the truly saved. Just saying the words doesn't make it so.
Is infant baptism of any efficacy toward salvation? If yes, please provide scriptural support. Can baptized infants still be lost?
I have not taken any position on infant baptism, but I personally am inclined to be a credo-baptist, believing that baptism is a conscious act of obedience to the already accomplished fact of having obtained salvation and forgiveness of sins. Not all Calvinists believe the same regarding infant baptism.
If a professed believer refuses to be baptized, is that a sure sign they are not really a believer and thus not really saved?
It certainly raises the question. As to the actual condition of that persons heart, only God knows. It is certainly a signal that they need to be taught concerning baptism. and by that I mean what the Bible says, not this wrong idea that baptism itself saves anyone, or causes forgiveness of sins, which is what you're pushing.
On the other hand, I truly was ignorant of the term "Oneness doctrine." You did define your intent in that terminology, and I stated that I do not hold to such a view.
The Church of Christ denomination and the Oneness Pentacostals hold very similar views regarding baptism, and often hold very similar views regarding the nature of the godhead, and Christ. They are both wrong, as I have amply demonstrated in these posts.
Wonderful post, NBF.
And everything you wrote sure leads me to believing that infant baptism is the Scriptural norm.
Here's what Calvin says, which is the most lucid, Biblical and precise rendering I've read on the topic:
John Calvin's Argument for Infant Baptism
"...The perfection of baptism, which extends even to death, is improperly restricted to one moment of time..."
To say that any ceremony, incantation, action or oath confers salvation is reminiscent of certain secret societies and their membership requirements.
Same old, same old.
Infant baptism is a sign and seal that our children will be raised according to Scripture by righteous parents, aided and strengthened by the Christian community of believers, led by the Holy Ghost to life everlasting through God's gift of faith in Jesus Christ.
Saved by grace alone.
All to the glory of God.
I believe Romans 6:4 "Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life."
You don't.
"Did you miss the words, "in the likeness of"? That clearly shows that baptism is a type, a representation, of the reality, and not the reality itself, which it would need to be in order to have any regenerating power."
In the likeness of what? Likeness of His death and resurrection.
But nowhere does scripture say it is a likeness of our death and resurrection. "Were buried with Him by baptism into death." That's "were", not "like when we were". "Were baptized into Jesus Christ." That's "were", not "like when we were".
Your wranglings cannot avoid the simple message in this passage. Notice, and this is important: outside of Christ --> baptism --> inside of Christ. What is the condition of those who are not in Christ?
"They must first be regenerated by God to spiritual life, in order that they may be able to hear the Word.
But it is the word which is the seed planted in the heart. 1Pet 1:23 - "you have been born again not of seed which is perishable but imperishable, that is, through the living and enduring word of God."
You have it all backward. Life does not preceed the planting of the seed. This is the N.T. pattern for salvations, set forth by God.
HEAR THE WORD --> BELIEVE --> REPENT --> CONFESS --> BE BAPTIZED --> NEW LIFE
I've shown you several passages where this is proven: Rom 10, Rom 6. You just refuse to accept the simple truth because of your Calvinistic bias.
"Baptism does not itself bring about that joining with Him."
You know, I am reminded of the garden where the addition of one word - "not" - was the difference between the truth "you shall surely die" and a lie "you shall not surely die".
nobdysfool - "baptism does not bring about that joining" with Him
Paul - "we were baptized into Christ Jesus"
nobdysfool - "Baptism is not what saves"
Peter - "Baptism saves you"
nodysfool - "Belief (faith) is what makes the difference between salvation and being lost, NOT baptism."
Jesus - "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved."
nobdysfool - "Baptism does not cause or bring about forgiveness of sins"
Ananias - "Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name."
"baptism is a conscious act of obedience to the already accomplished fact of having obtained salvation and forgiveness of sins."
Baptism is obedience to a fact? How do I obey a fact? Baptism is obedience to a command. And if one refuses to obey Christ's command, what does the bible say about such a one?
"Not all Calvinists believe the same regarding infant baptism."
In scripture, it's the believer who is baptized for the remission of sins. Are you prepared to say that pedo-baptists views are unscriptural and therefore that infant baptism is not of Christ? I am.