Protestants will often tell us that the doctrines they disagree about are not central/primary doctrines. However, one I always point out to them is that of baptismal regeneration. Some will skirt this issue, but one former Lutheran “bit the bullet” and stated explicitly stated that those who affirm it, such as the Missouri Synod (the Lutheran synod to which he used to belong) is a damnable heresy:
John 3:5—Jesus answered, “Truly,
truly, I say to you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot
enter the kingdom of God.”
Jesus is about to make another
statement that is of critical importance. As we learned earlier, it’s time to
pay attention because what he is about to say is an essential truth as triggered
by the double amen. Jesus says, “Unless one is born of water and the spirit, he
cannot enter the kingdom of God.” Since we have taken time to understand what
the kingdom of God is, we need to understand what it means to be born of water
and the Spirit. Commentaries from different theologians and denominations look
to this passage as clear evidence that this is a reference to Christian
baptism. They see water and they see Spirit and conclude that the Holy Spirit
and the Word is in the water which yields the net effect of the word being
connected to the water which, thus, creates saving faith.
Not only is this a wrong
interpretation of Scripture, but this is also a false gospel
. . . (Curtis Braun, The False Gospel of Baptismal Regeneration in the
Lutheran Church and Christ’s Call to Saving Faith [Rapid City, S.Dak.: New
Harbor Press, 2021], 14)
From a chapter entitled, “Baptismal Regeneration: A Different
Gospel”:
. . . if any man should preach
another gospel, let that man be damned. (Ibid., 211)
This book has nothing to do with
smudging the importance of Luther or even declaring anathema on Luther for his
doctrine of baptismal regeneration. However, this doctrine of baptismal
regeneration is a false teaching and baptismal regeneration is a false gospel.
(Ibid., 213; do also note how the author speaks out of both sides of his mouth:
those who preach the doctrine are damned, but he refuses to condemn Luther,
notwithstanding Luther teaching this doctrine!)
In the conclusion of this book, the apologist writes that his
prayer is that this book is not
used to destroy The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod or any other church that
holds to this teaching. However, this book should be used as exhortation,
rebuke, and encouragement to reform this doctrine of baptismal regeneration as
there are eternal dangers to one who clings to the hope of their baptism rather
than on Christ alone. Additionally, there is a strong warning that comes from
God that if any man should preach another gospel, let God damn that man. Paul
argues vehemently against clinging to anything else than Christ through faith
in Galatians. (Ibid., 217)
Granted, the author is dead-wrong in rejecting baptismal regeneration, but at least he is correct in recognising it is a salvation issue, not a minor issue like exclusive psalmody.
