Rom 6:3-7 is an important text which teaches
baptismal regeneration. I have discussed this text before, such as here. To see
how Reformed apologists tend to speak out of both sides of their mouth when it
comes to baptism having salvific effects and then, rather desperately, try to
downplay such in order to survive a symbolic view of baptism, can be seen in
the following from William Hendriksen (1900-1982):
To be baptized “into
Christ Jesus” implies to be brought into personal relation to the Savior. For
similar expressions see Matt. 28:19 (“baptizing into the name of the Father and
of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”); 1 Cor. 1:13 (“baptized into the name of
Paul”); and 10:2 (“baptized into Moses”). Paul, accordingly, points out that
baptizing people into Christ Jesus implies baptizing them into—i.e., in
connection with the sacrament of baptism bringing them into personal
relationship with—Christ’s death, so
that this death becomes meaningful to them, teaching them that by it the guilt of their sins had been removed,
and that they had received power to fight and overcome sin’s pollution . . . Through baptism and
reflection on its meaning these early converts, including Paul, had been
brought into a very close personal relationship with their Lord and Savior and
with the significance of his self-sacrificing death. The meaning of that death
had been blessed to their hearts by the Holy Spirit . . . It was the desire to
live this kind of new life that
caused people to come forward in order to be baptized. The water of baptism, by whatever method it is applied (immersion,
pouring, sprinkling) symbolizes and seals the cleansing power of the Spirit (Ezek. 36:25; 1 Cor. 6:11; Eph. 5:26;
Heb. 10:22). It symbolizes and seals what God
has done and is doing, and, as a result, incorporation of the person into the
fellowship of God and of his church. (William Hendriksen, Exposition of Paul's Epistle to the Romans [New
Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 2002], 195-96,
196, 199)
Elsewhere, on John 3:5, they try also to
downplay the salvific efficacy of water baptism (while, to their credit,
admitting that the “water” [υδατος] in the passage is water baptism unlike
many other Reformed Protestants commentators):
5. Jesus answered, I
most solemnly assure you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot
enter the kingdom of God. The key to the interpretation of these words is
found in 1:33. (See also 1:26, 31; cf. Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16) where water and Spirit are also found side by side, in connection with baptism. The
evident meaning, therefore, is this: being baptized with water is not
sufficient. The sign is valuable,
indeed. It is of great importance both as a pictorial representation and as a
seal. But the sign should be accompanied
by the thing signified: the cleansing work of the Holy Spirit. It is the
latter that is absolutely necessary if one is to be saved. Note, in this
connection, that in verses 6 and 8 we no longer read about the birth of water but only about the birth of the Spirit, the one great essential.
Now it is true that the cleansing work of the Holy
Spirit is not finished until the believer enters heaven. In a sense, becoming a
child of God is a life-long process (see 1:12), but in the present passage the initial cleansing implied in the
implantation of new life in the heart of the sinner is meant, as is evident
from the fact that we are taught here that unless one is born of water and of
the Spirit, he cannot even enter the
kingdom of God. (William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel
According to John [New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book
House, 2002], 1:134)
To see why they are wrong about the
salvific efficacy of water baptism, see: