This week, Passion 2017 was held in Atlanta. The Passion Conferences are aimed at the 18-25 age bracket and have impacted many people over the years. The present day Passion Conferences are connected to the One Day event held in Memphis, Tennessee in 2000 where I was confronted with my sin in a sermon by John Piper. Over the years, the conference has stood against sex trafficking and sought to encourage young adults to find their ultimate passion and joy in Christ.
Although some really good things have come out of the Passion movement, there have been some questionable things emerge through the years as well. This year, another strange thing happened at Passion that’s causing people to ask important questions. No matter how passionate we are, if our passions are unbridled and not submissive to the Holy Spirit, it will lead to sin. Passion without knowledge is deadly.
On Monday evening, a special guest appeared on the stage at Passion 2017. Previously unannounced, Carrie Underwood, the extremely popular country music star emerged onto the platform and performed her song titled, “Something in the Water.” She was invited by the Passion staff to sing a song that’s full of false doctrine to thousands of young impressionable college students. What’s even more sad is the fact that the entire Georgia Dome erupted with applause. They loved it. Were they applauding the performance? Were they applauding the doctrine of baptismal regeneration (a false gospel)? What exactly were they applauding?
College Students Still Need Parents
If you have a college student, remember that it wasn’t so long ago that you were assisting your child in the basic functions of life such as putting on their shoes and brushing their teeth. Just because your son has graduated from high school, that doesn’t mean it’s wise to let him navigate life all on his own. He still needs you. He is still under your care. You still have a responsibility to disciple him in truth and lead him in the right direction theologically and biblically. He still needs you to lead him to a sound church and to help him formulate sound biblical doctrine.
If your son or daughter was at Passion 2017 this week, it would be good to have an honest conversation about the music and the preaching. Your college student needs to know that Carrie Underwood is not a good example to follow. Regarding practical living, you don’t want your daughter to imitate her dress attire. Regarding theology, Carrie Underwood has openly supported the agenda of homosexual marriage. When asked about her position, she said:
“I’m in favor of acceptance…And I am a Christian person, and I do love the Lord, and I feel no matter who you are, what you believe, how you live your life, it’s not my place to judge.”
To hold the applause is not to be a killjoy as a parent. It’s necessary at times. Not everything is worthy of applause. This decision by Passion is one that must be addressed by parents in order to help college students avoid disastrous mistakes in practical living and theological formation.
College Students Need Faithful Pastors
We must not fool ourselves into believing that the entire Georgia Dome was full of college students and their pastors had absolutely no idea that event was taking place. The college students, in many ways, were organized and assisted by pastors in order to get to the event. Not everything that happens at a conference would be advocated by every speaker at the conference or embraced in a worship service. I get that. I understand that conferences have their place, but they must not be left unchecked.
College students are forming their doctrine of God, their doctrine of salvation, and their doctrine of ecclesiology (the church) at a rapid pace while moving through their college years. It’s essential for faithful pastors to shepherd them with care. College students need to hear pastors teach and preach with a certain discerning eye to the culture and a faithful tongue that speaks truth. The truth is, Carrie Underwood sang heresy to thousands of college students and the students let everyone know that it was acceptable. College students need to know why it’s really not acceptable. The lyrics to Carrie Underwood’s song, “Something in the Water” point to an age-old heresy—baptismal regeneration. A repetitive line in the song states:
There must’ve been something in the water
Oh, there must’ve been something in the water
Many pastors may have supported their students in going to the Passion 2017 event, and all of this was a complete surprise. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to see college students have a greater passion for God, but there is a need to make sure that passion is rooted and grounded in the pages of Scripture. College students need to be taught the book of Galatians and learn that any additive to the pure unadulterated gospel is a damnable heresy (Gal. 1:8-9). That’s exactly what Paul taught and it’s what we must teach and preach in our present day.
Passion for God is needed in our day, but passion without biblical truth will lead to disaster. That’s exactly what Paul once said about Israel as he wrote Romans 10:1-4. College students need diligent and faithful pastors to stand for truth and hold the applause at times, and this is one of those critical moments. When a country music star sings to the tune of baptismal regeneration at a Christian conference, it’s proof that the Reformation isn’t over.
3k
0
0
3
0
0
I’m a little irritated with this article. It is based all on a Carrie Underwood performance that lasted maybe 5 minutes. Sure, maybe she could have sang her amazing rendition of “How Great Thou Art” instead of the song she chose. I’m also irritated by how you said she’s a bad influence because of the way she dresses (I’ve never seen her wear something inappropriate) and her stance on homosexuality. Who are you to judge? You don’t know her walk with Christ.
Why are you talking about a 5 minute performance that won’t even be considered a highlight to the majority who attended Passion this year? Why not talk about the thousands of college students and young adults whose lives were forever changed thanks to an amazing God. That is the highlight and that is what matters most.
Because doctrine matters, in a nutshell.
I completely agree with you! Rather than nit-picking at the few things we may have issue with, it is so critical that we stand together as believers. I was at the conference. Never once did the speakers preach the doctrine of baptismal regeneration as truth. Never once did they suggest that we all strive to imitate Carrie or anyone who took the stage for that matter. The speakers all made it abundantly clear that we are to look to Jesus as our rock and our example. And I have issue with some saying that women should not be speaking to men at a conference of this sort. Yes, it goes against scripture that women lead men regularly in a church. However, God gives us, men and women, different experiences and different views as a way to learn and grow in Him. As a woman, hearing another woman tell about how she has experienced the grace and mercy of our Father is so critical. I applaud the Passion staff for selecting a diverse and solid group of teachers to speak this year. As a millennial who experienced the conference first hand, I can attest that never once was there a suggestion that we don’t need our parents and never once did the team imply that we didn’t need to be rooted in the word. Passion was designed to be a launch pad. To be a time of rest and learning before jumping into a new year. I think we can all agree that events like this are so needed in order to run the race marked out for us with endurance and zeal found in the Father.
You do know Underwood is a proponent of “Christian homosexuality” right?
You ask, “Who are you to judge?” but aren’t you doing the same thing when you express your ‘irritation’ and frustration about this article? So it’s okay for your to pass judgment but not okay for the author of this article to express his opinion on the matter? The issue at hand is not that Carrie Underwood performed at Passion 2017 this year, the issue is that many people who call themselves Christian really have no clue who Jesus is and the call of the Gospel to repent of sin and to follow after Christ.
I’ve found it can be a waste of time to debate people who write articles like these. An INTIRE conference and they latch onto a line from a song that is clearly poetic and acted as if Carrie thinks Paul should have written it? It’s lunacy.
You’re response is as if you didn’t read the article at all. 🙁
We are living in some lukewarm times when it comes to the uncompromised truth of scripture. If we are to walk in Truth…it cannot be compromised…especially before impressionable teens / young adults who are submerged in so many distractions and cultural compromises.
No one is vilifying Carrie…but the Bible speaks a plenty to being watchful and mindful in…especially in the areas of doctrine / theology. God’s inerrant Word cannot be compromised in the name of accommodating the culture (i.e., the World).
God bless you and my hope that all in Christ will discern and action their lives wholly to the pursuit of His way, Truth and Life!
Pastor Josh,
I am thankful for you my dear brother, one of a small number of pastors with the courage to confront error within the visible church.
It’s also worth pointing out the problem of having Christine Caine, a woman “pastor” from heretical word of faith “church” Hillsong at Passion teaching men, a violation of Scripture.
Beth Moore, another self-appointed “preacher” is also undermining the Bible by teaching men (not to mention her erroneous affirmation of Roman Catholics as Christians)
CJC, a few responses to your comment.
**If you’ve never seen Underwood wearing anything inappropriate, you haven’t been paying attention. Most of what she wears is inappropriate for a woman who professes Christ.
**Her song teaches a soul-damning, heretical doctrine that promotes a false salvation by works.
**You said, “…her stance on homosexuality. Who are you to judge?
That’s not Josh’s judgement, it is God’s. In His Holy Word, He condemns homosexuality as sin and says no homosexual will inherit the kingdom of God.
**Do you see any irony and hypocrisy asking someone else “who are you to judge?” and then in the next sentence making a judgement like, “thousands of college students and young adults whose lives were forever changed” while having far less truth with which to support that judgement?
Well said, Bobby! Thank you!
I am so glad men like yourself are speaking out. This is getting to the point where every public figure is down this path. The message of Christianity will always be unpopular. Which is why my Pastor and I are releasing #unpopularthemovie unpopularthemovie.com – the unashamed presentation of the gospel.
It’s not just the doctrinal issues with baptism (I hesitate to use the word doctrine because I’m sure no thought of any doctrine went into this song), but it begs the question, just what was the songwriter saved from?
Basically, failure in life. “Slamming doors.” And the change is “it’ll all get better.” Life will improve. You’ll be stronger. You’ll “give it all that you have.”
This is so common among popular “Christian” music and ministry, that Jesus is our life coach who gives us a better life now. Nothing but worldly motivational pep talk with vague spirituality. Moralistic therapeutic deism.
It’s not the Gospel. And I think that’s the bigger issue here.
I’m not sure I understand why so many comments claim baptism is not gospel. Does your Bible not include Matthew 3:1-17?
Passion without knowledge IS deadly. I don’t understand how one can pass judgement on a line from a song speaking on baptism yet as a whole the church dismisses solid doctrines backed up by the apostles in the New Testament letters. Jesus tells The Pharisees in mark 7:
“You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.” And then we think He changed unclean food commands there. Paul says “imitate me as I imitate Messiah” and we say Paul preached something Jesus never said and changed the sabbaths and holidays apparently. Jesus quoted Isaiah extensively and one thing Isaiah wrote was this:
“If you turn your foot from the Sabbath,
from doing your pleasure on my holy day,
and call the Sabbath a delight
and the holy day of the Lord honorable;
if you honor it, not going your own ways,
or seeking xyour own pleasure, or talking idly;
then you shall take delight in the Lord,
yand I will make you ride on the heights of the earth;
I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father,
for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”
Yet we continue in our human traditions and call following the commands of God Legalism.
https://youtu.be/-FvT2wzKTmo
I believe that rejecting the Biblical teaching of baptismal regeneration is heretical. After all, that has been the consistent teaching of the Church for nearly 2000 years.
Sir, if we cooperate with God in salvation, it’s not by faith alone in Christ alone as Ephesians 2:8-9 states. Baptism is an outward profession of faith, not an inward change of the soul.
Where in Scripture does it say that Baptism is an outward profession of faith? Baptism is God’s activity, God’s work, not ours. This is why Scripture teaches:
“Baptism now saves you” 1 Peter 3:21
This same Baptism saves us, not by our works done in righteousness, but by “the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit” Titus 3:5
It “for the forgiveness of sins” and a “promise for you and for your children” Acts 2:38-39
It unites us to Christ’s death and resurrection – Romans 6:3-5
So how can Baptism do such great things? It is not because of some act of obedience on our end but it is because Baptism is God’s Word in and with the water that does these things. Without the Word of God, there is no Baptism, but with the Word of God, Baptism does exactly what Scripture says it does.
Oh the irony in that comment. If you study Luther and the reformed of his time and read the Book of Concord on the subject, you will quickly see that the doctrine of baptismal generation is a slam-dunk against synergism, because God is the worker and we are only beggars who recieve, even in baptism. In new-calvinism (Yes, even Calvin baptized infants), is where you get closer to a synergistic view on baptism. When you leave out regeneration, you end up making baptism into something you do, not something God does. But then I take it you only see the sacraments as symbolic? With all the heresies running rampant, a-millenialism, baptismal regeneration and consubstansiation ought to be any baptists/reformeds last concern. Even this blogger is completely ignorant as he has praised Luther before, but now calls something heresy, that Luther himself taught. How ironic!
Fr. Matthew,
It would be helpful if you could distinguish between physical water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Repentance comes before baptism, and the only way a person will repent is for God to cause the person to be born again. The work of God in salvation always precedes the external works of the sinner who responds to God. Baptism is good, but the act of baptism doesn’t save us. The work of Christ on the cross saves.
Scripture does not make a distinction between “water Baptism” and “Spirit Baptism.”
You say repentance comes before Baptism, this is not supported by Scripture. While you may cite Peter’s admonition “repent and be baptized all of you” the Greek grammar here does not denote such an order. Repentance itself is impossible without faith as repentance is more than just contrition, but it also includes faith.
Again, if you see Baptism as the work of man, you are seeing it in an entirely different way than the Church has seen it, than Luther saw it (since I see he has been brought into this discussion), and most importantly, different than how Scripture talks about Baptism. This is why the verb for the activity of Baptism is passive in the Greek. It is something that is done to someone. Second, as I said about, the thing that makes Baptism Baptism is the Word and Promise of God. Without that Word, you just get someone wet, like taking a bath or shower, washing off dirt. Baptism is not like that, but it saves (1 Peter 3:21) because of that Word of God.
This Word-centeredness is at the heart of Luther’s sacramental theology. He saw Baptism as something that God does, which actually accomplishes something because it included God’s Word. Same thing with preaching, or absolution, the Word is what creates and enlivens faith (Romans 10:17). This wasn’t really anything new with Luther though, you see this in Augustine, Iranaeus, Gregory of Nazianz, and John Chrysostom. How does Baptism deliver the forgiveness of sins? Because Baptism includes the Word and Promise of God.
An example from the 2 Kings 5 may be taken with the healing of the leper Naaman, Elisha told him to wash in the Jordan 7 times and he would be cured of his leprosy. Naaman responded by asking why not in the rivers back home in Damascus, for they were indeed much nicer rivers, why couldn’t the prophet just extend his arm and heal him. Then we hear, “But his servants came near and said to him, “My father, it is a great word the prophet has spoken to you; will you not do it? Has he actually said to you, ‘Wash, and be clean’?”” – 2 Kings 5:13 Note here what is at the center: the word and promise. Since the prophet was to speak only God’s word, this word and promise was not Elisha’s but God’s. Naaman washed and was healed. Not because of his faith, not because he was immediately obedient, but because God’s Word does not lie.
So we see in Scripture Baptism conferring that which our works cannot do. This is because of the Word of God.
So when Peter writes “Baptism now saves you..” He means the complete opposite? You are right in that it is the work of Christ alone that saves the sinner. However, you are mistaken when you assume, without any biblical backup, that the means of grace in no way delivers the gift of forgiveness and mercy to the sinner. If a baby is baptized, does that guarantee salvation no matter how devilish that baby is as an adult? No, because if a person after baptism grows up to be an unbeliever, baptism will not save, but not be invalid either (as in if that person repents again, there is no need to rebaptize).
The works of God always precedes the sinner who then responds? Of course! You are a monergist, right? So are Lutherans! Baptismal regeneration IS the doing of God alone with His word and water
The fact that you stamp baptismal regeneration as heresy, means that you stamp Luther as a heretic and the lot of the church fathers and apostles as well, yet you give praises to Luther as a reformer. Thats a logic I dont get. I would never give praises to anyone I considered a heretic.
FR. Matthew. Question for you. When one who has been baptized ceases to have faith, do they thereby cease to be both regenerate and justified. If so, is justification/regeneration possible again only by faith?
Thanks,
matt, yes. Scripture teaches that it is possible to fall away from the faith. That doesn’t negate God’s Word. An analogy (though imperfect) might be if I were to say to my son, “son you are always welcome in this house, you are always a part of this family, you will always have a place to rest here, no matter what.” Now if my son leaves in a prodigal son like manner, says “you are dead to me, I refuse to be a part of this family,” my promise is not negated is it (especially if I stick to that “no matter what” part). If the son goes on rejecting the promise and word of his father, he indeed is not living in the family. But if he comes back, even if comes back and says he just wants to work for me (thus not taking the roll of a son, but an employee) what would I say? You are my son! Welcome home! Such is the way of the kingdom of God. God does not break his promise. If we are faithless, He remains faithful for He cannot deny Himself (2 Timothy 2:13).
FR. Matthew, I understand where you are coming from with the prodigal son illustration. Where I would disagree, is that a. the prodigal son was never regenerate or b. he was later saved and the evidence thereof is repentance.
Regardless, to purport that God may declare a sinner justified and later revoke the sinners just standing is a significant error that should not be named among the brethren.
While you are arguing for the biblical validity of baptistmal regeneration, I fear you are allowing your tradition to interpret scripture instead of the other way around and in turn are missing the bigger picture. i.e Romans 8:1.
“Regardless, to purport that God may declare a sinner justified and later revoke the sinners just standing is a significant error that should not be named among the brethren.”
So you understand and can fully explain how God is tri-une? You know how He laid the foundations of the earth and put the starts in the sky and made their light shine?
Part of the reason for the way God answers Job out of the storm, has to do with making him abit more humble. I used to be a calvinist, until I discovered alot of things, such as something called scriptural paradoxes. Not contradictions, but paradoxes. What you are infact saying here is that you, Matt, understand how
God saves and how it just cannot be that God declares someone just, but then they are eventually damned.
So in your reason, God is not allowed to declare someone just by their baptism (because His word declares it, not you), and to later have them fall away from faith and become an unbeliever. I hope you told God that He cant do that. Because apparently, He does:
When man is saved, it is ONLY by the work and mercy of God (monergism). When man is damned, it is only by the work of his own doing.
That is a scriptural paradox you cannot explain, just as little as you cannot explain how God is three in one..
Baptismal generation, yes!
Explain all things related to God, NO!
Yngve, I was waiting for the “mystery” “paradox” Lutheran card to be played.
“So in your reason, God is not allowed to declare someone just by their baptism (because His word declares it, not you), and to later have them fall away from faith and become an unbeliever. I hope you told God that He cant do that. Because apparently, He does:”
It is not merely a manner of what God is allowed to do. We need to believe God is not schizophrenic and that scripture is able to be interpreted with scripture.
The ONLY reason you or anyone would hold to forfeiture of justification is not conviction of the word but instead an attempt to make the traditions of man fit within scripture.
“And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.”
Ultimate salvation is not conditional upon man. Those who God elects WILL persevere. Any other option diminishes the glory of God and leaves man with an “atta boy” for finishing the race.
Matt, the mystery and paradox comes from trying to not go beyond what scripture says and simply confess what God’s word says even if we don’t understand it all. We don’t use traditions that developed in the 16th-17th century enlightenment period to try and logically figure everything out as the reformed do. We reject those rationalistic traditions of men that try to explain the hidden will of God. We confess what scripture says and go no further. Salvation is all of God, damnation is all of man. God elects to salvation but he does not elect to damnation. Christ died not just for our sins but the sins of the whole world. This is what scripture says.
Do you with your universal atonement as well adopt universal justification?
By rationalistic traditions do you mean exegesis without Rome’s presuppositions?
Sorry friend, if losing/forfeiting/rejecting ones “justification” is an option then salvation is not all of God. Cf. Romans 8:30
Matt,
“Do you with your universal atonement as well adopt universal justification?”
Nope. Salvation is by grace through faith. No faith means no salvation. Scripture clearly says that Christ didn’t die for our sins only but for the whole world. Your tradition causes you to reinterpret those verses in order for your system to make logical sense.
“By rationalistic traditions do you mean exegesis without Rome’s presuppositions?”
Nope. I mean Zwinglianism that causes you to reinterpret clear passages of scripture because it doesn’t make logical sense and doesn’t fit your system.
“Sorry friend, if losing/forfeiting/rejecting ones “justification” is an option then salvation is not all of God.”
Scripture says that damnation is completely a work of man and is not God’s desire. Scripture also says salvation is completely a monergistic work of God. I am kept in the faith fully by his grace and not by any work from me. Your enlightenment era traditions cause you to reinterpret every scripture passage about apostasy or making shipwreck of one’s faith because it doesn’t logically fit with your system. Instead of seeking those passages through a law/gospel lens, you reinterpret their clear words and claim they are talking about people who never really believed in the first place.
Oh Matt. You quote that part of scripture, yet forget to quote the part which warns men against falling away. Yes, I know about the elect. Do you know about the ones who walked on the narrow path and then, as the apostle Paul writes, fell away? He warns against such things. Why bother if the elect are the elect?
But alas, you know the ways of the Lord and His thoughts.
I am not playing a “mystic” card. Its actually true. You only look to half of scripture, where Lutherans admit to the whole. Jesus clearly says that “for God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whomever believes in Him shall have eternal life”. But “whomever” only means a few, right?
So which is it?
Either you, Matt, understand all things concerning God and His ways, or there is a scriptural paradox in which we humans are quite limited to understand the fullness of salvation. You cannot have both.
“We need to believe God is not schizophrenic and that scripture is able to be interpreted with scripture”
Right there is your problem. You take a diagnose invented for men by men, and apply it to God because you need to understand God the way you feel comfortable with. Because if lutherans are right, God is schizo? Are you joking? You are actually pulling the God of all existense down to our level and try ever so hard at explaining all things related to Him and how He saves.
So if a man can be saved, but then is damned in the end, you dare to say this cannot be because scripture? I know that all the elect will be in heaven. I know none of the elect will be lost. That does NOT equal that I or you understand the fullness of HOW God saves and WHY some got lost on the way AFTER they clearly showed repentance.
The means of grace (baptism and The Lords Supper) helps us avoid mysticism and bending inwards for assurance. Its only in the last 200 years that we have seen such a great departure of what was once clear and consisce teachings of the church.
Excellent point!
Four words: thief on the cross.
Autumn, why does the thief on the cross mean we can’t believe what scripture says about baptism? The thief had a direct promise from Jesus. Jesus gives us promises too in places like Rom 6:3-4, Col 2:11-12, 1 Peter 3:21, and Gal 3:27.
It seems that you have all got this wrong. Carrie Underwood’s song is a song of redemption through faith. I was very hesitant to accept the song because my very first response to it was, “It has nothing to do with the water.” She is actually saying it cannot be the water itself. If you look into the rest of the song, it was a couple of days after the “baptism” that the subject of the song was on their knees saying “God come and rescue me.” I can relate because it was over a year before I was on my knees crying that out. I did go on to get baptized again as a SYMBOL of TRUE salvation in Christ. I know Carrie Underwood has expressed some other unbiblical things and those certainly should be addressed, but as for this song I wanted to put that point of view in there and I am hoping for a positive response.
I did notice that line as well in the lyrics, but, if you notice she goes on to continue to repeat and reemphasize that “there must have been something in the water.” The fact that we have to debate and discern her lyrics should be concerning enough, but I do believe that it presents a false gospel. Not only that, but couple that with her other theological baggage and it’s extremely problematic that she would be given access to the massive audience at Passion.
I agree with you completely. I was disappointed with those who would use a “worldly” individual who professes salvation but compromises the Gospel. What message did we send to those who are walking in sanctification that her lifestyle is acceptable as an example. People who stand before us should be exhibiting Christ in all aspects of their lives.
There is certainly an attack on college students. Brian head Welch spoke at Liberty U convocation a few months ago. The NAR influence on him is very sad. Here is a man who finished a tour this past summer in his band Korn with Satan worshipper Rob Zombie. Now he is speaking into the lives of students at the largest Christian University. We are under a strong delusion. Very powerful and deceptive spirits are at work. Same with Carrie Underwood. Her soft porn photo shoot with Cosmo magazine showed the fruit of her brand of false religion. Repentance is crucial in this late hour. God have mercy.
I’m not defending Underwood’s song but since scripture never once says that baptism is just an outward symbol of an inward change but it does say that baptism unites us with the death and resurrection of Christ (Rom 6:3-4, Col 2:11-12), clothes us in Christ (Gal 3:27), and saves us (1 Peter 3:21) so is right to say that baptismal regeneration is a false gospel when scripture clearly says that baptism does something? Again, scripture never, not even once, says that baptism is merely a symbol.
Just playing devil’s advocate here; what if she’s not really saying the water changed her, but is using a common language phrase? Would be very sloppy but not necessarily heretical.
Is anyone else seeing an ad on the page about the 500th anniversary of the reformation with a picture of Luther? Ironic since this article calls Luther’s beliefs a false gospel.
One need not embrace all of Luther’s beliefs to appreciate the contributions he made to the faith and the impact of the reformation.
Agreed, but the article calls baptismal regeneration a fake gospel. If the author really believes that then he should be horrified to see that an ad promoting a man who spread a fast gospel is on his page. If I had a website, I surely wouldn’t want an ad about Joel Osteen showing up since he leaves a fake gospel.
Ahh, you are correct. There is irony in denouncing Passion for permitting a singer who (on the surface at least) seems to promote baptismal regeneration, while running an ad with a theologian who (I did not know this) promoted baptismal regeneration.
If you’re going to call baptismal regeneration “another gospel” and a “damnable heresy,” you’re going to have to denounce and condemn Martin Luther, (who you speak well of in other posts), as a heretic.
For example, a short excerpt from Martin Luther’s Small Catechism:
Second
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)
Third
How can water do such great things?
Certainly not just water, but the word of God in and with the water does these things, along with the faith which trusts this word of God in the water. For without God’s word the water is plain water and no Baptism. But with the word of God it is a Baptism, that is, a life-giving water, rich in grace, and a washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit, as St. Paul says in Titus, chapter three: “He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by His grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying.” (Titus 3:5–8)
You’re welcome to disagree with Luther. But don’t condemn him, along most of the Christians who have ever lived, as unchristian for holding this position.
Megan, I will admit, Luther (a man whom I love) said many good things, but he likewise said some goofy things as well. Why? Because he was coming out of RCC and at times, not all of the RCC was out of him. If you read his theology, you will see that he did not embrace baptismal regeneration and stood on the firm foundation of – Faith alone in Christ alone – for the remission of sins. That’s the gospel.
Josh, Luther most certainly did teach that baptism unites us to Christ. It’s also not a RCC doctrine because they deny faith alone. The solas of the reformation are most clearly expressed in the Lutheran/scriptural doctrine of baptism. Making baptism into a symbol, which is a 16th century invention that has no basis in scripture, denies the monergistic gift of grace that God gives in baptism. Read Luther’s small and large catechism if you don’t think he taught that baptism washes away sins. Its what scripture says. Don’t let Rome-aphobia cause you to change the word of God in order to look less Catholic.
Luther most certainly did teach baptismal regeneration, and this is not at all incompatible with his teaching of justification by grace alone through faith alone. From his Large Catechism (not something goofy he said without thinking, but part of the official confessional documents of the Lutheran church):
“But as our would-be wise, new spirits assert that faith alone saves, and that works and external things avail nothing, we answer: It is true, indeed, that nothing in us is of any avail but faith, as we shall hear still further. But these blind guides are unwilling to see this, namely, that faith must have something which it believes, that is, of which it takes hold, and upon which it stands and rests. Thus faith clings to the water, and believes that it is Baptism, in which there is pure salvation and life; not through the water (as we have sufficiently stated), but through the fact that it is embodied in the Word and institution of God, and the name of God inheres in it. Now, if I believe this, what else is it than believing in God as in Him who has given and planted His Word into this ordinance, and proposes to us this external thing wherein we may apprehend such a treasure?”
More from Luther’s Large Catechism:
“For to be baptized in the name of God is to be baptized not by men, but by God Himself. Therefore, although it is performed by human hands, it is nevertheless truly God’s own work. From this fact every one may himself readily infer that it is a far higher work than any work performed by a man or a saint. For what work greater than the work of God can we do?”
“And this also we cannot discern better than from the words of Christ above quoted: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. Therefore state it most simply thus, that the power, work, profit, fruit, and end of Baptism is this, namely, to save. For no one is baptized in order that he may become a prince, but, as the words declare, that he be saved. But to be saved, we know, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death, and the devil, and to enter into the kingdom of Christ, and to live with Him forever.”
Read the whole thing here: http://bookofconcord.org/lc-6-baptism.php
I’m a youth pastor and I was at Passion with my college ministry. Carrie Underwood’s song is not about baptism changing her. “Something in the water” is simply a metaphor like so many Christian songs use. Do I believe Carrie is a model woman? No. But just because she is wrong in some areas doesn’t mean she can’t be put on a stage to sing about God’s redeeming salvation for students that look up to media figures. The fact that she agreed to sing at an event like Passion shows these students that it’s not “uncool” to follow Jesus like most media tells them.
As for the women pastors and teachers thing, that was a completely cultural thing. Moore and Kane both delivered Spirit-filled messages that impacted the hearts of thousands of men and women! The fact that some of you call that herecy is more Pharasaical than anything because you’re promoting religious ritual and practice over the work of the Spirit.
Passion is not perfect, but neither is anything else. You can pick out something wrong in anything. Passion does what it does to reach a generation that most people have turned their back on. The fact that some of you would condemn certain things shows that you are more concerned with following religious practices than the spread of the Gospel.
Oh my goodness, Nathan, Thank you!!! I’m so sick of people nit-picking one little thing to make their point and further their agenda, while completely ignoring (or worse, dismissing) what God is actually doing. Just because it doesn’t fall in line with OUR interpretation of what the work of God should look like doesn’t mean it’s wrong. I can personally attest to the fact that God has used women to powerfully speak His Word to men, and that their lives have been changed forever by the Gospel these image bearers (who are “supposed” to just sit quietly, by the way) have preached. We need to stop limiting God to our beliefs and what makes us comfortable, and just let Him do what He’s going to do however He’s going to do it. When we try to limit God to only using certain people or certain methodologies (especially when we try to use Scripture to justify it), we place ourselves (and the Bible, actually) above Him. Do you know what that is? Idolatry.
A “cultural thing”? How so?
A woman’s teaching then would not be respected. It would be in the same category as covering heads during prayer or food sacrificed to idols. Paul’s instructions were not meant to be taken as law, but rather as a good practices for the church at that time. In our time, women have just as much opportunity to be educated and respected as a man and therefore have just as much right to preach the words of God. Paul’s instructions to churches must be taken in context. Just because the Bible is 100% true does not mean that everything said is law or meant to be followed word for word by every generation on Earth.
Luther did teach baptismal regeneration, as is clear in both Luther’s small and large catechism, and has been pointed out above. However, as Barth pointed out (I think convincingly), Luther’s view of sola fide is inconsistent -maybe incompatible is a better word- with Luther’s view of baptismal regeneration. How? Because Luther rejects a Thomistic view of baptism, insisting that faith be present in the person being baptized. If faith is not present, then the work of the sacrament would not be by faith. Since the person being baptized has faith, the salvific effects of baptism are by faith, hence, sola fide. But Luther believed in infant baptism. So, to be consistent, he has to insist that the baby has faith. This is where Bart pounces, and I think, successfully exposes a genuine problem in Luther’s theology. So, is Luther a heretic? No. Why? Because he is trying to defend salvation by faith. Perhaps he fails, but that is a far cry from what the RCC was (is) doing.
For what it’s worth, I think you’re right about the song Josh, and your take on Passion in general. I also think recommend a piece from Roger Olson back in 13 at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2013/01/what-would-jesus-make-of-passion-conferences-guest-blog-by-austin-fischer/.
With peace and love,
Moz
On the topic of songs that are impactful and contain theological concepts, you should check out “Build My Life” by Housefires. We sang this song lots of times and reading through the lyrics makes me realize it incorporates really sound theology. Songs like this are what influenced students at Passion, not ten words that Carrie Underwood sang, which I couldn’t even hear. Please stop being so pharisaical, overly concerned about doctrine instead of seeing the beautiful love of Jesus.
Stop wasting time talking about a dumb article where everyone is just trying to get there word in. Why don’t you all go tell someone about Jesus rather then wasting time with each other on social media debating on who’s right. I’m sure happy to see and feeling turned to Jesus on all the negative and damning comments on here. (Sarcasm).