A Lutheran and Baptist Discuss Baptismal Regeneration (Part 1)

To watch part 2 now, sign up to any of our Patreon channels:

This is the first part of a discussion between Jordan Cooper and Gavin Ortlund on the subject of baptismal regeneration, which follows a previous discussion on infant baptism.

[DrJordanBCooper]

The second part of this conversation will be up on this channel next Monday. If you want to access it early, you can sign up to become a Patron.

[Mygoalwogel]

This is the perfect example of what Dr. Cooper is talking about when he says he prefers discussion to debate. They both did their homework which allowed them to define terms AND define what NOT to waste time on.

[josephabiti]

Gavin is a pure gift from above. I hope and pray his personality and gifts in articulating the historical faith won't be compromised by the toxicity of fame and social media. I am a great fan of Dr Copper as well. God bless them both.

[zekdom]

5:10 - Ortlund highlights a difference between Church of Christ and Lutherans

7:20 - Cooper talks about the necessity of baptism

14:08 and 16:50 - Ortlund’s coronation metaphor

25:50 - Cooper addresses 1 Peter 3
28:58 - Cooper talks about the water in 1 Peter 3

36:50 - Ortlund’s causes
37:46 - Ortlund’s reference to Thomas Aquinas
38:40 - Ortlund clarifies
39:28 - Ortlund addresses 1 Peter 3

42:05 - Cooper addresses Ortlund’s causes
45:24 - Cooper on justification as a process

52:21 and 53:10- Ortlund elaborates on his skepticism,
54:28 - Ortlund insists on “linguistic complexity”
55:06 - Gospel Simplicity asks a question, Ortlund clarifies his position on 1 Peter 3

56:49 - Ortlund talks about multiple Acts passages (chapters 2, 8, 9, and 19).
58:29 - Ortlund ponders if these passages are really “exceptions”

59:13 - Cooper responds
59:47 - Cooper and 1 Peter 3
1:00:32 - Cooper on the passages about baptism and salvific language
1:02:37 - Cooper addresses Acts
1:02:58 and 1:04:07 - Cooper focuses on Acts 8
1:03:13 - Cooper on Acts 10
1:03:23 - Cooper’s view of Acts

[toddvoss]

Non substantive comment : Kinda cool how the camera angle appeared to join Dr Cooper’s and Ortlund’s bookshelves together

[he]

What an absolutely wonderful conversation. I was riveted the whole time.

[villarrealmarta]

Acts 22:16 if that text doesn’t close the subject for people then nothing will.

[bjw]

So what I saw is two great minds in agreement on principle and edification of baptism. But also disagreeing on how it works out. Which I love btw. Because this shows you agree on historic Christian understandings and truths and differ how it works and happens. Because at the end of day. It’s truly a mystery of how / when because God is outside of space and time and human understandings.

[octaviosalcedo]

This two theologians are Giants of our time! It is so refreshing how they stick to the only infallible source of doctrine, the Bible. Not some bishop, council, saint, apparition or church body. Thank you for this tremendous video.

[PenMom]

Fun convo and great job all. I will say I’ve never heard a Baptist say that baptism saves before today.

[jbheavenlyfootman]

Great, irenic discussion of baptismal regeneration by two gracious, godly men. A year later and I am still persuaded by Dr. Cooper and the Lutheran view—and practically/pastorally what a comfort it is to remember my baptism!

[Qhaon]

This conversation was awesome! Can’t wait for part 2!

[michaelkistner]

I'll chime in and echo what others have said. This is a marvelous conversation, both in terms of content and as an example of how such discussion can be done in a genuinely Christian way. Kudos to all of you!

One of the shortcomings of theological education (my own at least) is ignoring linguistics as a precondition for serious study of the text. Dr. Ordman (I hope I got that right) is asking precisely the questions I'm struggling to answer when I look at the text. I have an entire constellation of terms i've memorized without asking the deeper question: 'what exactly is being named here?'. I've found what he alludes to. The nature of language itself limits my ability to know with complete certainty what's going on in the passage. This conversation is a perfect example of that inherent ambiguity.

Has this caused me to lose my convictions? No. Not at all. But it has, and continues, to humble me. The text is simply to big to fit perfectly into any box I can create or imagine. I'm not happy about that, but oh well. I'm being forced to learn how to live with uncertainty.

[AndrewVasel]

another excellent discussion that proved well worth the time to listen

[zekdom]

I must say, you addressed Acts in a way that I did not anticipate.

Great discussion!

[GermanFreakvb]

A very good discussion. I will need to review it to get thee deeper points, but I think your semi-initial statement that regeneration isn´t a one-time event in a sense is a very interesting and important point.

[rogertrinidad]

My fav Protestant YouTubers in one video!!

[prayunceasingly]

That beardless guy with glasses seems like a perfect moderator

[dbzgtcrazy]

Another fantastic discussion. Loving this. Both views presented so, so well.

[chrismatthews]

Very interesting passages from Hebrews and Ephesians mentioning cleansing with water and are both obviously not speaking of water baptism. Haven’t noticed those before