Acts 8:14 is an exception, despite the rule (unbaptized regenerates are
foreign to scripture).  When everything else in scripture lays out a
doctrine, an exception does not negate the doctrine, but is interpreted in
light of the doctrine.  Scripture knows nothing of unbaptized regenerates...
and notice that the moment the apostles realize that regeneration has taken
place, baptism occurs.  It should also be noted that the reason these are
baptized is to place them into the visible church.

Chad Bresson
Xenia, OH


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Fuchs (on MSN)" <SteveF_MS@...>
To: <soundofgrace@...>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 4:23 PM
Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] Covenant theology and baptism


> Yes.
>
> OT shadows are reflections of reality to come, which give us language and
a
> means to understand that which is spiritual and cannot be seen in the
flesh.
> NT acts of obedience are not shadows of the reality, but the physical
> footsteps produced by it.  They represent and symbolize what's happening,
> but not in a dark shadow, as if to be the reality themselves.
>
> However, there is a human timing issue.
> Doesn't scripture give example of those who were regenerate (or seemingly
> so) but not yet fully(?) baptized?
>
> Acts 8:14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria
had
> received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, 15 who, when
> they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy
Spirit.
> 16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized
> in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid hands on them, and they
> received the Holy Spirit.
>
> So, I would say it this way:  the regenerate refusing baptism is foreign
to
> scripture.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chad Richard Bresson [mailto:breusswane@...]
> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 12:16 PM
> To: soundofgrace@...
> Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Covenant theology and baptism
>
>
> Or put another way: the unbaptized regenerate is foreign to scripture.
>
> Chad
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chad Richard Bresson" <breusswane@...>
> To: <soundofgrace@...>
> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 3:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Covenant theology and baptism
>
>
> > I would say regeneration is the "sign", the "washing" of Titus 3:5,
> > and baptism is the sign of the sign because of its inseparable
> > connection to repentance.
> >
> > Chad Bresson
> > Xenia, OH
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steve Fuchs (on MSN)" <SteveF_MS@...>
> > To: <soundofgrace@...>
> > Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 2:44 PM
> > Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] Covenant theology and baptism
> >
> >
> > > "It shows itself first and foremost, biblically, in baptism."
> > >
> > > But analogously, you could then say that the peace offering, or sin
> > > offering, or the ceremonial washing is the sign of the shadow
> > > covenant.
> > Or
> > > that 'repentance' is the sign of the new, because it occurs before
> > baptism.
> > >
> > > The sign produces effects, and those effects themselves are further
> > evidence
> > > of the reality, but they are not the sign proof of it.
> > >
> > > The changed heart is the sign proof, which produces first repentance
> > (which
> > > isn't the sign either) and then baptism, and many other things.
> > >
> > > You can't fake flesh circumcision, and you can't fake heart
> circumcision,
> > > though you can fake the products of both.
> > >
> > > I know we're not really arguing two distant positions, so I don't
> > > mean
> to
> > be
> > > picking at nits.
> > > None-the-less, I think the paedo position completely deflates once
> > > you realize baptism is not the new sign, and I think the scripture
> > > supports
> it
> > > not being the sign, but the product of the sign.
> > >
> > > Grace brother.
> > > Thanks for your responses.
> > >
> > > Steve
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chad Richard Bresson [mailto:breusswane@...]
> > > Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 11:06 AM
> > > To: soundofgrace@...
> > > Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Covenant theology and baptism
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Steve Fuchs (on MSN)" <SteveF_MS@...>
> > > To: <soundofgrace@...>
> > > Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 1:42 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] Covenant theology and baptism
> > >
> > >
> > > > But I still think baptism is not the sign, and there's a certain
> > > > level of distinction between the two, though not necessarily as
> > > > much distance as traditionally thought in baptistic circles.
> > > >
> > > > In part because flesh circumcision carried with it evidence of
> > > > it's happening.
> > >
> > > Baptism is the first "evidence of it's happening".  Support for
> > > viewing
> it
> > > this way is the pattern in Acts: repent and be baptized.  Separating
> > > the
> > two
> > > goes beyond what the apostles did.
> > >
> > > > Likewise, heart circumcision carries evidence of it's occurrence.
> > >
> > > And that evidence is first seen (repent and be baptized) in baptism.
> > >
> > > >When a
> > > > person is truly circumcised of the heart, there's fruit that is
> > > >evidence
> > > of
> > > > it.
> > >
> > > Precisely.  And baptism is the first fruit that is evidence of the
> > > circumcision of the heart.
> > >
> > > >The heart changes, and it shows.
> > >
> > > It shows itself first and foremost, biblically, in baptism.
> > >
> > > > Baptism does not have that.  Baptism (the ceremony) is not
> > > > evidence of the change.
> > >
> > > This is where I think your thoughts conflict with the biblical
> > > record.
> > Look
> > > up baptizo, cleansing, water, washing, etc. in the New Covenant and
> > > it
> is
> > > almost always analogous to baptism at some point.
> > >
> > > Chad Bresson
> > > Xenia, OH
> > >
> > > --
> > > Read the Sound of Grace pages at http://www.soundofgrace.com
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
> > soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
> > >
> > > To view our online archive go to our web page at
> > > http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
> > >
> > > --
> > > Read the Sound of Grace pages at http://www.soundofgrace.com
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
> > soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
> > >
> > > To view our online archive go to our web page at
> > > http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> > http://www.soundofgrace.com
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
> soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
> >
> > To view our online archive go to our web page at
> > http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
> >
> >
>
> --
> Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> http://www.soundofgrace.com
>
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
>
> To view our online archive go to our web page at
> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
>
> --
> Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> http://www.soundofgrace.com
>
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
>
> To view our online archive go to our web page at
> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
>
>