Spot on video, very helpful especially by going through all the different uses. I'm starting to just avoid it's use in dialogues with other denominations, because then it gets confusing and everyone has to explain their own definition
I read a Calvinist argue that in Titus 3:5 the expression “washing of regeneration” is not the same as “water of regeneration”, therefore he argued that verse 5 does not state that water is being meant by the word “washing”. I assume he seems to spiritualize “washing” to deny baptismal regeneration. If we connect John 3:5 to Titus 3:5, then it is easier to prove baptismal regeneration from verse 5, but my question is: How would you argue specifically from Titus 3 that the washing of regeneration means baptismal water that regenerates?
It's a word to encapsulate the idea that we are a new creation when we are born again. We are being "generated again" (re-born or re-created). While I understand how you could read Titus 3:5 as referring to baptism, I think it would have been understood by Jewish followers of the time (which of course Paul was) as referring to washing by Christ's sacrificial blood. The context of the passage seems to be about what Christ did for us. I'm not seeing baptism per se in this verse myself (though I think the two concepts are related, and something I find wonderful about Scripture is how it often can have multiple, layered meanings).
dr cooper hi can you please recommend a work/book that articulates the lutheran position of THREE sacraments ie penance/the keys other than the writings of Luther and Melanchthon???
Hot take: Regeneration means Re-Generate, which means Generate Again, which means Born Again, which is all child-making language, and thus is really all talking about Adoption. People don't want to think this way because Adoption has become an afterthought in soteriology when for Paul it was a primary concept in Romans 4, Galatians 3, etc, with Abraham's fatherhood and children.
Maybe a silly question but it’s something I’ve wondered about for a while. I know you look at Tit 3:5 and see baptismal regeneration, and so when a baby is baptized it is regenerated in that since. But it seems like Paul’s point is, going back to v3, the moral effects of regeneration. He’s essentially saying, You were once slaves to all these different fleshly passions but now you’re washed, you’re no longer enslaved to these things. My question is, would you say that an infant who is baptized experiences this moral effect of regeneration, and not only has a different status with God, but is producing better fruit than a baby who isn’t baptized? Are you hanging out with your baptist friend and his bratty kid and thinking “if only this child had been baptized”?
Not necessarily. While we do believe infants can come to faith, whether they believe or not is more unknown to us until they grow up; we're optimistic they do believe. As for morality, no, we're not expecting a baptized infant to automatically be an angel. We also daily fight our sinful flesh. Just because we've come to faith and have been baptized doesn't mean it is any less present.
@@restedassurance Thanks for the response. I figured that was the case but it’s curious to me. Paul says that regeneration does have this effect. If the deliverance from what is described in v3 doesn’t happen to an infant being baptized, in what way do they become regenerate? Obviously the struggle against sin is a daily reality until death or Christs coming. I don’t know any Christian that I would describe as an “angel”. But, just sticking with what Paul says, I do know Christian’s who, by Gods grace, have experienced deliverance from bondage (Tit 3:3), and that’s one aspect of what happens when a person is regenerated. If this isn’t true of the infant being baptized I don’t know why we would think they are regenerate.
Matthew 6:3-4 "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.."🙏 Let God’s Peace and Grace be with you (To The Reader). Praise God always.... Amen🙏🙌
I see that a common definition of palingenesias is “rebirth”. Is it useful at all to think of baptismal regeneration as a baptismal rebirth in a ritual sense? A ritual rebirth to which God has attached his promises? Thinking of this in connection with Jesus’ baptism, where the Spirit descends upon Jesus, and the Father declares, “This is my Son,” and Peter’s declaration, “Be baptized…and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,” can we simply think of regeneration as rebirth and the gift of the Spirit in baptism as the Spirit of adoption as sons?
I didn't hear anything voiced by Dr. Cooper here that I disagree with. If I were answering the same question, I would have pointed out how the prodigal son went through a death and resurrection experience that was an example of baptism for repentance. This is different from a conversion that is limited to a new intellectual assent to Christian religious beliefs. Baptism is likened to an enrollment into a reform school, That is why I think it is important to believe those whom came to John the Baptist for his baptism and whom were called "broods of vipers" were indeed recipients of this baptism, which was supernaturally instrumental for their later repentance.
@@carolinetrace894 A Christian man of one of the most biblically cohesive traditions is explaining a theological concept, yet your comment makes little sense in such context
When you become regenerated by the word and Spirit you are then God-centered, and you no longer assert the demands and desires of your fallen nature onto the faith. This shows in the doctrine you profess. If you are professing - demanding - the doctrine of baptismal regeneration you are asserting the demand of your fallen nature to be in control regarding grace, rather than acknowledging God's sovereignty in grace.
Lutherans believe baptism is purely grace. The only reason it does anything at all is because of Christ's death and resurrection. And of course someone who has faith and hasn't been baptized is just as saved.
Thank you Dr. Cooper for all of these shorter videos!! God's blessings
Amen. Not enough time to watch ever 1 hour video of my favorite Christian youtubers
Spot on video, very helpful especially by going through all the different uses. I'm starting to just avoid it's use in dialogues with other denominations, because then it gets confusing and everyone has to explain their own definition
I read a Calvinist argue that in Titus 3:5 the expression “washing of regeneration” is not the same as “water of regeneration”, therefore he argued that verse 5 does not state that water is being meant by the word “washing”. I assume he seems to spiritualize “washing” to deny baptismal regeneration.
If we connect John 3:5 to Titus 3:5, then it is easier to prove baptismal regeneration from verse 5, but my question is:
How would you argue specifically from Titus 3 that the washing of regeneration means baptismal water that regenerates?
@dr Jordan another amazing prestige video and more importantly great food for thought 🙏🙏❤
It's a word to encapsulate the idea that we are a new creation when we are born again. We are being "generated again" (re-born or re-created). While I understand how you could read Titus 3:5 as referring to baptism, I think it would have been understood by Jewish followers of the time (which of course Paul was) as referring to washing by Christ's sacrificial blood. The context of the passage seems to be about what Christ did for us. I'm not seeing baptism per se in this verse myself (though I think the two concepts are related, and something I find wonderful about Scripture is how it often can have multiple, layered meanings).
dr cooper hi can you please recommend a work/book that articulates the lutheran position of THREE sacraments ie penance/the keys other than the writings of Luther and Melanchthon???
Hot take: Regeneration means Re-Generate, which means Generate Again, which means Born Again, which is all child-making language, and thus is really all talking about Adoption. People don't want to think this way because Adoption has become an afterthought in soteriology when for Paul it was a primary concept in Romans 4, Galatians 3, etc, with Abraham's fatherhood and children.
Maybe a silly question but it’s something I’ve wondered about for a while. I know you look at Tit 3:5 and see baptismal regeneration, and so when a baby is baptized it is regenerated in that since. But it seems like Paul’s point is, going back to v3, the moral effects of regeneration. He’s essentially saying, You were once slaves to all these different fleshly passions but now you’re washed, you’re no longer enslaved to these things. My question is, would you say that an infant who is baptized experiences this moral effect of regeneration, and not only has a different status with God, but is producing better fruit than a baby who isn’t baptized? Are you hanging out with your baptist friend and his bratty kid and thinking “if only this child had been baptized”?
Not necessarily. While we do believe infants can come to faith, whether they believe or not is more unknown to us until they grow up; we're optimistic they do believe. As for morality, no, we're not expecting a baptized infant to automatically be an angel. We also daily fight our sinful flesh. Just because we've come to faith and have been baptized doesn't mean it is any less present.
@@restedassurance Thanks for the response. I figured that was the case but it’s curious to me. Paul says that regeneration does have this effect. If the deliverance from what is described in v3 doesn’t happen to an infant being baptized, in what way do they become regenerate? Obviously the struggle against sin is a daily reality until death or Christs coming. I don’t know any Christian that I would describe as an “angel”. But, just sticking with what Paul says, I do know Christian’s who, by Gods grace, have experienced deliverance from bondage (Tit 3:3), and that’s one aspect of what happens when a person is regenerated. If this isn’t true of the infant being baptized I don’t know why we would think they are regenerate.
Matthew 6:3-4 "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.."🙏
Let God’s Peace and Grace be with you (To The Reader). Praise God always.... Amen🙏🙌
I see that a common definition of palingenesias is “rebirth”. Is it useful at all to think of baptismal regeneration as a baptismal rebirth in a ritual sense? A ritual rebirth to which God has attached his promises?
Thinking of this in connection with Jesus’ baptism, where the Spirit descends upon Jesus, and the Father declares, “This is my Son,” and Peter’s declaration, “Be baptized…and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,” can we simply think of regeneration as rebirth and the gift of the Spirit in baptism as the Spirit of adoption as sons?
I didn't hear anything voiced by Dr. Cooper here that I disagree with. If I were answering the same question, I would have pointed out how the prodigal son went through a death and resurrection experience that was an example of baptism for repentance. This is different from a conversion that is limited to a new intellectual assent to Christian religious beliefs. Baptism is likened to an enrollment into a reform school, That is why I think it is important to believe those whom came to John the Baptist for his baptism and whom were called "broods of vipers" were indeed recipients of this baptism, which was supernaturally instrumental for their later repentance.
Bottom line: don't ask an unregenerate person what regeneration means.
Is this supposed to imply Dr.Cooper isn’t a Christian?
@@SamuelMoerbe That's between him and God.
@@carolinetrace894You seem really confused lmao
@@lothara.schmal5092 Pretty straightforward statement. How does it show confusion. Please elaborate.
@@carolinetrace894 A Christian man of one of the most biblically cohesive traditions is explaining a theological concept, yet your comment makes little sense in such context
When you become regenerated by the word and Spirit you are then God-centered, and you no longer assert the demands and desires of your fallen nature onto the faith. This shows in the doctrine you profess. If you are professing - demanding - the doctrine of baptismal regeneration you are asserting the demand of your fallen nature to be in control regarding grace, rather than acknowledging God's sovereignty in grace.
Lutherans believe baptism is purely grace. The only reason it does anything at all is because of Christ's death and resurrection. And of course someone who has faith and hasn't been baptized is just as saved.
It's a nonsense word made up by theologians who realize "no works!" is untenable theology 😂
You really don't understand it then.
Like Paul, that theologian who said "apart from works."