"Is a person saved at the moment of regeneration?"
And closely related to that:
"What is the relationship between regeneration and conversion?"
Are these two realities inseparably connected, or is it possible for someone to be regenerated without also being converted?
The answers we give will largely depend on how we define the terms.
Two Definitions of Regeneration
1. The Inward, Irreversible Change (Ordo Salutis View)
Some define regeneration as the first step in an unbreakable ordo salutis. On this view, it is an inward, spiritual, and moral change wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit—a planting of new life in the soul. Being a sovereign and effectual work of God, this regeneration is an irreversible experience. Consequently, it is given to the elect alone.
2. The Objective, Eschatological Reality (New Creation View)
Others define regeneration as participation in the objective, inaugurated reality established through the resurrection of Christ. Here, regeneration is not something that enters into a person, but something the person enters into. By Baptism, we are brought into the regeneration—the new creation, the kingdom of Christ in the here and now. In this sense, one may be regenerated and yet not abide in that condition.
(For the record, most contemporary Presbyterian and Reformed theologians hold to the first definition. In contrast, many of the earlier Reformers, the Lutheran tradition, and the early church fathers held to the second.)
The Early Church on Regeneration
Charles Hodge (Presbyterian) explains the historical development of these terms:
"In the early church, regeneration often expressed, not any inward moral change, but an external change of state or relation. Among the Jews when a heathen became a proselyte to their religion, he was said to be born again. The change of his status from without to within the theocracy, was called regeneration.
This usage in a measure passed over to the Christian Church. When a man became a member of the Church he was said to be born anew; and baptism, which was the rite of initiation, was called regeneration.
This use of the word has not entirely passed away. A distinction is still sometimes made between regeneration and spiritual renovation [conversion]. The one is external, the other internal. Some of the advocates of baptismal regeneration make this distinction, and interpret the language of the formulas of the Church of England in accordance with it."
—Systematic Theology, vol. 3
According to Hodge, this distinction persists in Protestant churches and denominations, where regeneration and spiritual renovation are often treated as two separate, though related, events—one objective and the other subjective.
A Biblical Case for the Eschatological View
The term regeneration (Greek: παλιγγενεσία) occurs only twice in the New Testament—Matthew 19:28 and Titus 3:5. Both passages point to an objective, redemptive-historical reality.
“By the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.”
—Titus 3:5
J.V. Fesko, a Reformed theologian, makes the case that Titus 3:5 refers not to an inward ordo salutis step, but to the believer’s entrance into the new creation:
"Historically, some have interpreted παλιγγενεσία as a reference to the ordo salutis…True, the work of the Holy Spirit in the application of redemption most certainly makes a person a new creature. However, it does not appear that [this term] refers to the ordo salutis as much as to the new creation; the reference is primarily redemptive-historical."
—Word, Water, and Spirit
He also highlights how Stoic philosophers and Philo used παλιγγενεσία to speak of cosmic renewal—periodic restorations of the world.
Matthew 19:28 supports this:
“Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration [ἐν τῇ παλιγγενεσίᾳ], when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones…”
Gerhardus Vos concurs:
“The word cannot be restricted to the more or less individualizing application of the resurrection; it covers the resurrection as a whole and even the renewal of the universe...”
—Gerhardus Vos (as quoted by Fesko)
Is a Person Saved at the Moment of Regeneration?
According to the First Definition:
Yes—regeneration is the moment of salvation. And because this gift of life is irreversible, the one who is regenerated is eternally secure. Faith is the fruit of regeneration, and perseverance is its inevitable result.
According to the Second Definition:
Yes and no. One may be saved in the sense of entering into a saving relationship—joined to Christ, given covenant blessings, and placed within the kingdom. Yet this state can be forfeited through unbelief, rebellion, or apostasy. Salvation, then, is both present and provisional. The final state of salvation belongs to those whom God sovereignly preserves in Christ to the end.
Again, this view sees Baptism as the entry point. By Baptism we are grafted into the Risen Christ (Who is the locus of the regeneration) like a branch being grafted into the Living Vine. But those who do not remain in Christ—having and continuing in faith—will be cut off and thrown into the fire (cf. John 15:5–6).
Regeneration and Conversion: How Are They Related?
According to the First Definition:
Regeneration and conversion are two sides of the same coin. Regeneration is an inward renewal; conversion is its outward expression through repentance and faith. The latter always accompanies the former.
According to the Second Definition:
Regeneration is union with Christ through Baptism. Conversion is the inward opening of the heart, which may precede, accompany, or follow that union. They are related, but not inseparable. One may be joined to the Vine, and yet fail to draw upon its life-giving power. What is needed in that case is the opening of the heart—a yielding to the grace already given. This, God alone can produce.
Now—whether conversion itself is a permanent and irreversible state—or whether it may be temporary—is beyond the scope of this post. For a fuller presentation of my position on that question, see here: "They Believe for a Time"
M.F. Sadler (Anglican) illustrates the distinction between regeneration and conversion with the imagery of grafting:
"Baptism, no matter what the state of heart of the recipient, at once brings the baptized into contact (if I may use the expression) with the highest powers of the unseen world. In some infinitely mysterious way the human graft—right then and there—comes into contact with the new stock of humanity: the Second Adam.
"If there be faith in the person baptized, he, at once, begins to partake of the root and fatness of the Divine Olive-Tree, which, if he yields his will to it (Rom. 11: 22–24; John 15: 1–8), subdues to itself the whole inner man (1 John 3: 6–9).
"If he has no faith, the saving efficacy of the grace of Christ enters not into him; nevertheless he is, all the same, brought into contact with the True Vine, but to his condemnation. His unbelief is the obstacle to the grace of the Saviour flowing into him. Christ would, but cannot, heal him, because of his unbelief (Mark 6:5–6). Till that is removed, the goodness of the Divine Olive cannot renew him.
"Now, if God, after such sin, still determines to grant him repentance unto life, then the grafting takes beneficial effect. The grafting, I say, which he has already undergone, for he does not need to be grafted in anew. He does not need to be baptized again, no matter what the previous circumstances of unbelief and impenitence which attended his original baptism; for that would imply that a thing done in the name and by the authority of the ever-blessed Trinity had been an empty form. In fact, the whole mystery and meaning of Baptism as an initial union with the Second Adam is wrapped up in the simple fact of its being administered but once."
—The Second Adam and the New Birth
Baptism, then, is never a mere formality—it is a real grafting into Christ. This may or may not be accompanied faith in the person baptized. The inward and ongoing benefits of that graft depend on conversion of heart and persevering faith.
Practical Implications for Ministry
These two frameworks lead to very different pastoral approaches.
Under the First Definition:
When a baptized person wanders, the call is to examine whether they were ever truly united to Christ. Baptism may not be mentioned at all, as it is not seen as the entrance into this union. The person is called either to Christ for the first time—or back from a state of backsliding, depending on the judgment of their past profession.
Under the Second Definition:
The person is approached as one who has wandered from Christ Himself. They are not asked to question their past standing, but warned not to reject it. They are reminded that they were once grafted in and are now cutting themselves off from the Savior.
This view allows for direct, bold, and deeply scriptural appeals:
“The Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.”
—Jude 1:5
“You have become severed from Christ; you have fallen from grace.”
—Gal. 5:4
“I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me.”
—Isa. 1:2
They were saved. They were children. And they rebelled.
The Parable of the Prodigal Son
This parable perfectly illustrates the second view.
The lost son was never not a son. His sin was not in pretending to belong, but in rejecting the privileges of sonship. His return is not a new birth, but a restoration of the previously existing relationship.
“This my son was dead, and is alive again.”
—Luke 15:24
Sadler again:
"The prodigal son and his brother are “sons.” Both are originally in their Father’s house—the Church of Jesus Christ. The son who leaves his home is still a “son.” And it is that which makes his sin the deeper, and his repentance the more bitter. When he returns, his Father meets him as His lost son and says respecting him, “This my son was dead, and is alive again.”
“My son.” We have here the covenant relationship established in time past, the “goodness” in which he ought to have “continued” (Rom. 11: 22; John 15: 1–6).
“Was dead.” Here we have the fall from grace into a state of death. (“She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth” (1 Tim. 5: 6; Jude 1:12).
“And is alive again.” Here we have the conversion of him who was, and continued to be from the first, “a son”; but the privileges of whose sonship were suspended till he returned to the bosom of his Father.
"This parable illustrates how completely the more unreserved preaching of Baptismal Regeneration and most earnest calls to conversion are in accord with one another. If you urge repentance and conversion on a sinner living at a distance from God, it must be on the strength of his past adoption into God’s family, if you are to take the parable of the prodigal son as your guide.
"Just as Isaiah beseeches the children of Israel to return to God because they were His children and His people: “I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me. The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know, My people doth not consider” (Isa. 1: 2).
"In fact, I doubt whether the place can be named throughout the whole of the Old Testament, in which God calls on the children of Israel to repent and turn to Him, except on some ground of covenant mercy bestowed on one and all of them.
In Summary
Both views aim to uphold the grace of God and the necessity of faith. But the second view—rooted in the eschatological framework of Scripture and the sacramental theology of the historical church—offers a compelling alternative to the prevailing evangelical model.
It allows us to take Scripture’s language seriously:
Rather than explaining such language away, it lets the warnings stand as real calls to repentance, faith, and perseverance to the end.
“If God, after such sin, still determines to grant him repentance unto life, then the grafting takes beneficial effect... for he does not need to be grafted in anew.”
—M.F. Sadler
More could be said—but this survey should be enough to clarify the two positions and how they play out theologically and pastorally. The goal here is not polemics, but clarity—so that we can consider these things thoughtfully, biblically, and faithfully.
And closely related to that:
"What is the relationship between regeneration and conversion?"
Are these two realities inseparably connected, or is it possible for someone to be regenerated without also being converted?
The answers we give will largely depend on how we define the terms.
Two Definitions of Regeneration
1. The Inward, Irreversible Change (Ordo Salutis View)
Some define regeneration as the first step in an unbreakable ordo salutis. On this view, it is an inward, spiritual, and moral change wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit—a planting of new life in the soul. Being a sovereign and effectual work of God, this regeneration is an irreversible experience. Consequently, it is given to the elect alone.
2. The Objective, Eschatological Reality (New Creation View)
Others define regeneration as participation in the objective, inaugurated reality established through the resurrection of Christ. Here, regeneration is not something that enters into a person, but something the person enters into. By Baptism, we are brought into the regeneration—the new creation, the kingdom of Christ in the here and now. In this sense, one may be regenerated and yet not abide in that condition.
(For the record, most contemporary Presbyterian and Reformed theologians hold to the first definition. In contrast, many of the earlier Reformers, the Lutheran tradition, and the early church fathers held to the second.)
The Early Church on Regeneration
Charles Hodge (Presbyterian) explains the historical development of these terms:
"In the early church, regeneration often expressed, not any inward moral change, but an external change of state or relation. Among the Jews when a heathen became a proselyte to their religion, he was said to be born again. The change of his status from without to within the theocracy, was called regeneration.
This usage in a measure passed over to the Christian Church. When a man became a member of the Church he was said to be born anew; and baptism, which was the rite of initiation, was called regeneration.
This use of the word has not entirely passed away. A distinction is still sometimes made between regeneration and spiritual renovation [conversion]. The one is external, the other internal. Some of the advocates of baptismal regeneration make this distinction, and interpret the language of the formulas of the Church of England in accordance with it."
—Systematic Theology, vol. 3
According to Hodge, this distinction persists in Protestant churches and denominations, where regeneration and spiritual renovation are often treated as two separate, though related, events—one objective and the other subjective.
A Biblical Case for the Eschatological View
The term regeneration (Greek: παλιγγενεσία) occurs only twice in the New Testament—Matthew 19:28 and Titus 3:5. Both passages point to an objective, redemptive-historical reality.
“By the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.”
—Titus 3:5
J.V. Fesko, a Reformed theologian, makes the case that Titus 3:5 refers not to an inward ordo salutis step, but to the believer’s entrance into the new creation:
"Historically, some have interpreted παλιγγενεσία as a reference to the ordo salutis…True, the work of the Holy Spirit in the application of redemption most certainly makes a person a new creature. However, it does not appear that [this term] refers to the ordo salutis as much as to the new creation; the reference is primarily redemptive-historical."
—Word, Water, and Spirit
He also highlights how Stoic philosophers and Philo used παλιγγενεσία to speak of cosmic renewal—periodic restorations of the world.
Matthew 19:28 supports this:
“Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration [ἐν τῇ παλιγγενεσίᾳ], when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones…”
Gerhardus Vos concurs:
“The word cannot be restricted to the more or less individualizing application of the resurrection; it covers the resurrection as a whole and even the renewal of the universe...”
—Gerhardus Vos (as quoted by Fesko)
Is a Person Saved at the Moment of Regeneration?
According to the First Definition:
Yes—regeneration is the moment of salvation. And because this gift of life is irreversible, the one who is regenerated is eternally secure. Faith is the fruit of regeneration, and perseverance is its inevitable result.
According to the Second Definition:
Yes and no. One may be saved in the sense of entering into a saving relationship—joined to Christ, given covenant blessings, and placed within the kingdom. Yet this state can be forfeited through unbelief, rebellion, or apostasy. Salvation, then, is both present and provisional. The final state of salvation belongs to those whom God sovereignly preserves in Christ to the end.
Again, this view sees Baptism as the entry point. By Baptism we are grafted into the Risen Christ (Who is the locus of the regeneration) like a branch being grafted into the Living Vine. But those who do not remain in Christ—having and continuing in faith—will be cut off and thrown into the fire (cf. John 15:5–6).
Regeneration and Conversion: How Are They Related?
According to the First Definition:
Regeneration and conversion are two sides of the same coin. Regeneration is an inward renewal; conversion is its outward expression through repentance and faith. The latter always accompanies the former.
According to the Second Definition:
Regeneration is union with Christ through Baptism. Conversion is the inward opening of the heart, which may precede, accompany, or follow that union. They are related, but not inseparable. One may be joined to the Vine, and yet fail to draw upon its life-giving power. What is needed in that case is the opening of the heart—a yielding to the grace already given. This, God alone can produce.
Now—whether conversion itself is a permanent and irreversible state—or whether it may be temporary—is beyond the scope of this post. For a fuller presentation of my position on that question, see here: "They Believe for a Time"
M.F. Sadler (Anglican) illustrates the distinction between regeneration and conversion with the imagery of grafting:
"Baptism, no matter what the state of heart of the recipient, at once brings the baptized into contact (if I may use the expression) with the highest powers of the unseen world. In some infinitely mysterious way the human graft—right then and there—comes into contact with the new stock of humanity: the Second Adam.
"If there be faith in the person baptized, he, at once, begins to partake of the root and fatness of the Divine Olive-Tree, which, if he yields his will to it (Rom. 11: 22–24; John 15: 1–8), subdues to itself the whole inner man (1 John 3: 6–9).
"If he has no faith, the saving efficacy of the grace of Christ enters not into him; nevertheless he is, all the same, brought into contact with the True Vine, but to his condemnation. His unbelief is the obstacle to the grace of the Saviour flowing into him. Christ would, but cannot, heal him, because of his unbelief (Mark 6:5–6). Till that is removed, the goodness of the Divine Olive cannot renew him.
"Now, if God, after such sin, still determines to grant him repentance unto life, then the grafting takes beneficial effect. The grafting, I say, which he has already undergone, for he does not need to be grafted in anew. He does not need to be baptized again, no matter what the previous circumstances of unbelief and impenitence which attended his original baptism; for that would imply that a thing done in the name and by the authority of the ever-blessed Trinity had been an empty form. In fact, the whole mystery and meaning of Baptism as an initial union with the Second Adam is wrapped up in the simple fact of its being administered but once."
—The Second Adam and the New Birth
Baptism, then, is never a mere formality—it is a real grafting into Christ. This may or may not be accompanied faith in the person baptized. The inward and ongoing benefits of that graft depend on conversion of heart and persevering faith.
Practical Implications for Ministry
These two frameworks lead to very different pastoral approaches.
Under the First Definition:
When a baptized person wanders, the call is to examine whether they were ever truly united to Christ. Baptism may not be mentioned at all, as it is not seen as the entrance into this union. The person is called either to Christ for the first time—or back from a state of backsliding, depending on the judgment of their past profession.
Under the Second Definition:
The person is approached as one who has wandered from Christ Himself. They are not asked to question their past standing, but warned not to reject it. They are reminded that they were once grafted in and are now cutting themselves off from the Savior.
This view allows for direct, bold, and deeply scriptural appeals:
“The Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.”
—Jude 1:5
“You have become severed from Christ; you have fallen from grace.”
—Gal. 5:4
“I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me.”
—Isa. 1:2
They were saved. They were children. And they rebelled.
The Parable of the Prodigal Son
This parable perfectly illustrates the second view.
The lost son was never not a son. His sin was not in pretending to belong, but in rejecting the privileges of sonship. His return is not a new birth, but a restoration of the previously existing relationship.
“This my son was dead, and is alive again.”
—Luke 15:24
Sadler again:
"The prodigal son and his brother are “sons.” Both are originally in their Father’s house—the Church of Jesus Christ. The son who leaves his home is still a “son.” And it is that which makes his sin the deeper, and his repentance the more bitter. When he returns, his Father meets him as His lost son and says respecting him, “This my son was dead, and is alive again.”
“My son.” We have here the covenant relationship established in time past, the “goodness” in which he ought to have “continued” (Rom. 11: 22; John 15: 1–6).
“Was dead.” Here we have the fall from grace into a state of death. (“She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth” (1 Tim. 5: 6; Jude 1:12).
“And is alive again.” Here we have the conversion of him who was, and continued to be from the first, “a son”; but the privileges of whose sonship were suspended till he returned to the bosom of his Father.
"This parable illustrates how completely the more unreserved preaching of Baptismal Regeneration and most earnest calls to conversion are in accord with one another. If you urge repentance and conversion on a sinner living at a distance from God, it must be on the strength of his past adoption into God’s family, if you are to take the parable of the prodigal son as your guide.
"Just as Isaiah beseeches the children of Israel to return to God because they were His children and His people: “I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me. The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know, My people doth not consider” (Isa. 1: 2).
"In fact, I doubt whether the place can be named throughout the whole of the Old Testament, in which God calls on the children of Israel to repent and turn to Him, except on some ground of covenant mercy bestowed on one and all of them.
In Summary
Both views aim to uphold the grace of God and the necessity of faith. But the second view—rooted in the eschatological framework of Scripture and the sacramental theology of the historical church—offers a compelling alternative to the prevailing evangelical model.
It allows us to take Scripture’s language seriously:
- That people can be saved, and yet fall away.
- That they can be God’s children, and yet rebel.
- That they can be in Christ, and yet become severed.
Rather than explaining such language away, it lets the warnings stand as real calls to repentance, faith, and perseverance to the end.
“If God, after such sin, still determines to grant him repentance unto life, then the grafting takes beneficial effect... for he does not need to be grafted in anew.”
—M.F. Sadler
More could be said—but this survey should be enough to clarify the two positions and how they play out theologically and pastorally. The goal here is not polemics, but clarity—so that we can consider these things thoughtfully, biblically, and faithfully.
Recent
Archive
2026
February
April
2025