In this CD, Mr. Bercot takes a clarifying look at what Scripture has to say about water baptism. I should add that when he sees doctrinal controversy between denominations (such as on this topic), he resolves it by looking at Scripture, and what the early church (pre-325 AD, before Catholicism dominated it) believed about it. Their beliefs were more likely backed by Scripture, since that church was closer to the apostles–and they were a church that the Lord made powerful–so it’s likely He didn’t see any substantially deviant doctrine there.
The early church believed, from Scripture, that in adult, or believer baptism, the following things happened: (1) all of a person’s prior sins are washed away; (2) a person is born again through baptism of water and the Holy Spirit; 3) through baptism, a person becomes a member of Christ’s church. (This series of events do not happen with infant baptism because there must be a confession by the one being baptized that he/she has believed, and will follow Christ. That’s clear from the many instances of baptism in the Book of Acts.) Because of the importance of these 3, we must conclude that the salvation process is not complete without baptism. When the person confesses Christ in Acts, details show they were baptized right away. If a person died after confession of Christ but before a soon-baptism (an unlikely event), we believe that in God’s grace, they were still on the way to heaven. But if they hid their confession and refused public baptism, that was not in God’s plan. You cannot hide a light under a basket. Evangelism is the only way the kingdom of God can grow. It is one of the gifts in Galatians 5, and one cannot deny Christ–such as being ashamed of what He has done for you. If you hide it, do you really live in Christ? Do you understand that He has saved us from hell, which we truly deserve because of our sin, and has invited us to heaven. You must share to to anybody–even “good” people (who won’t get to heaven on their “goodness”).
Is there proof from Scripture? Let’s start with John 3:5:
Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Does this not say that “born of water” is water baptism? Even in the Greek, the word translated “water” simply refers to physical water. Does it not clearly say that water baptism is essential in being born again?
Mark 16:16 says:
He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
This clearly requires baptism to “be saved,” or to be in heaven and escape Judgment. Of course, there are other verses which simply say believe in Christ, and be saved. But many verses only give a partial look at the concept; you must consider all the New Testament together to get the whole picture. For instance, if all you have to do is “believe,” are we talking about just mental assent? A mind-thing, but not a heart-thing? What about the person who “believes,” but doesn’t change their life? They still live a worldly life, and don’t let Christ be involved with important decisions. Yes, we should give command of all of our life to God’s glory, and pray about those important decisions for His direction. Besides, there is much more involved than “mental assent” with the Greek derivative for the word “believe.” It’s a heart-thing. where you are committed to abiding with Him, the same as breathing. We love Him if we obey His commandments, and baptism was a commandment that Christ gave to everybody (Matthew 28:19-20).
Romans 10:9-10:
….that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
There’s that public confession.
Acts 2:36-38:
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” 37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” 38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit
In verses 37-38, Peter has the ultimate evangelistic opportunity; the big question on the silver platter has been asked of him–“what shall we do?”. Does he say what all of us evangelical Protestants have been taught, telling them to pray to “let Jesus into their heart”? No; after they’ve been shown who Jesus is in earlier verses in Acts 2, assuming they believe in Him, what they need to do to be saved…is…(1)repentance and (2) baptism. He emphasizes the importance of baptism, saying “every one of you” needs to do it. He further says that without baptism, they cannot have the “gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Different denominations have different views on what exactly that is, but what’s important, if you really want to be saved, why would you NOT want such a gift? So jump in; be baptized.) These additional two steps will give them remission of sins. You must want “remission,” defined as “cancellation of a debt.” If you bear the weight of sin when you are judged, you won’t make heaven.
Acts 22:16 was when Saul was saved, becoming Paul, and he was told:
…And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’
Baptism, as it says, washes away our sins. That’s very important, is it not? Without it, with the guilt of sins on us, how can you get to heaven? (Again, allowance is made elsewhere for those who cannot be baptized.) Note the urgent tones that they should be baptized right away after it is evident that the Spirit has opened his eyes.
The early church fathers felt that baptism is important enough that they believed, and said, that a man who was saved, immediately imprisoned, then martyred fulfilled the required baptism—by having a baptism of blood.
Galatians 3:27:
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ
What is the meaning of “put on Christ”? Read Romans 13:14:
But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts
So it means wrapping yourself in godly thoughts and not thinking about sinful ones or things of the world. A result of salvation. A phrase in the same book is “clothe yourself with Christ.” This makes me think of Genesis 3, when God clothed Adam with skins of an animal (which required a sacrifice) after Adam sinned. That blood being shed to provide the skin was the first evidence of God’s plan for His Son, the Lamb, whose blood was shed once for all. The animal sacrifice was a sacrificial covering for the effects of sin.
Going under the water is symbolic of His death, and rising out of the water is symbolic of Resurrection. Romans 6:2-4 defines it and does the metaphor:
How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
The expectation is that we must “walk in newness of life,” a subject for another paper.
Titus 3:5: …but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit
The word “washing,” in Greek loutron, is defined as “a bath, a laver.” This seems to speak of water baptism, does it not? Baptism results in regeneration, defined as becoming a new creation. And, as Jesus put it (John 3:3), that’s essential to go to heaven. And it clearly says, “He saved us, through the washing of regeneration (through the water baptism) and renewing of the Holy Spirit.”
Hebrews 10:22:
…let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
“Pure water” is water baptism. Baptism helps gives us a full assurance of faith and enables us to draw near to Him.
I Peter 3:20b-21 uses the term “antitype.” That’s a New Testament fulfillment from an Old Testament prefigure (the prefigure is called a type):
…in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The type in the Old Testament is how the Ark saved Noah’s family from the death of the Flood. The anti-type is baptism. Peter bluntly points out that baptism, and Christ’s resurrection, save us. Of course, in context, and thinking of my “Paul v James” blogs, to be saved at the end, you need baptism combined with true faith, repentance, and abiding in obedience (John 15:1-6). Paul doesn’t want anyone to think that baptism merely is a temporary cleansing through works that has to be repeated, so he says that the symbol has nothing to do with removing “filth of the flesh.” Baptism gives you a “good conscience toward God.”
Again, EVERY ONE OF THESE VERSES IS DIRECTED TO BELIEVERS WHO ARE MAKING A CHOICE TO BE BAPTIZED. There are no baptisms of babies in Scripture that we know of.
There are other “types” in the Old Testament. Consider I Corinthians 10:1-2’s comments on the Jews passing through the Red Sea:
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
So, to think of the type: was crossing the water of the Red Sea (a type of baptism) merely a “symbol” of their salvation from the Egyptians? No, crossing the water DID save them! Why do most evangelistic churches use the weak word “symbol,” taking away all the power associated with baptism, when they explain baptism? It seems pretty clear that using the Red Sea type, baptism completes our salvation. I use the word “complete” because other things of faith were involved too, all of which together ensured their salvation. They had already stepped out in faith to follow God’s leader Moses. In faith they believed the ten plagues were a message from God. In faith they obediently protected themselves from death at Passover, when they obeyed the instruction to put lamb’s blood on the doorposts. And when they packed their belongings and marched out into the desert—that was a great step of faith, since a sensible man would never expect to stay alive long in the desert. All of these things, faith plus obedience, ensured their salvation, but the baptism of passing through the Red Sea completed the initial job—but all this was still only at the beginning of their journey. They still had to place faith in God throughout the journey, and the battles with the Enemy that followed. Salvation is Not a one-and-done thing. Subject of another blog.
Another Old Testament figure of baptism—mentioned several times by early Christians—was Naaman, the leper. Leprosy is a metaphor of sin. In II Kings 5, Naaman was purified of leprosy when he was baptized in the Jordan. This was a symbol of what baptism can do for us regarding the leprosy of sin. The sin is wiped away.
If you’re thinking, about the early Church, “surely there was some group who didn’t hold to this view of baptism, who thought it was just symbolic,” you’re right—the Gnostics felt that way. Of course, you also need to know what else they believed–that the creation of the earth and mankind was done by an inferior god, a second god, so his creation was flawed and beyond redemption, so they concluded that flesh cannot be saved. They did not believe in the resurrection of the body—you can’t get a perfect result from an imperfect body. Jesus couldn’t have come in the flesh, since He could never be imperfect, as all flesh is. Thus, they maintained, there was no God Incarnate. No one can be “reborn” through physical substances (since all such are evil)—like water. So baptism has no power to save, they said, it’s just a symbol of what’s happened in the spirit. So say the Gnostics. Are these views corrupt, or what? Can you believe that they got one doctrine correct (“baptism is a symbol, has no deeper meaning), when all their other doctrines are so Wrong?
The vast majority of Protestants do not believe in the power and necessity of baptism, as seen by Scripture above, and think that it’s just a “symbol.” So, if you agree with the Gnostics that it’s just a “symbol,” you’re also saying that all the church fathers, as holy a group as you ever want to meet in heaven, men who were taught by the apostles–were dead wrong. Which group do you want to follow—the Gnostics or the church fathers? But our beliefs should be founded on literal Scripture, don’t you think? Can we argue against all the above Scriptural passages? Not without doing twisty reasoning (as all the MODERN commentators do), instead of simple, literal reading of God’s Word. Does God want the common person to understand Scripture, or should we wait until the erudite commentators do their twisty reasoning and give us their “solution?” God wants every one of us to understand, and would use common-sense literal readings where possible. Water should mean water, wherever possible.
How did the church move away from this doctrine, if it’s correct? Why either baptize babies or, the opposite, say that’s it’s a “symbol?” I think the change in doctrine happened partly because the church reacted to people’s desire for “salvation by convenience”—people wanted to feel assurance of salvation, wanted a simple “formula.” So when the Catholic church was forming its doctrines, they came up with a convenient formula: do the sacraments, or ordinances, and you shall be saved. Infant baptism came about partly because when they conquered an entire nation, they wanted Everybody to get baptized and start believing as they do. Also because, due to high infant deaths, and the ongoing fear that without baptism, their baby would die with the stain of Original Sin (taught at the time), and wouldn’t go to heaven. So people wanted assurance that their baby was saved when he died, so they rushed to have them baptized. Note that none of these changes were Scripturally based–they are mechanical devices, not a choice being made by a repentant sinner. This “mechanical” religion requires no relationship with Christ and no day-to-day holiness, as Scripture demands (see the “Paul vs James” blogs). Expanding “the kingdom of God,” as they called it, by sword, by expansion, by alliances with pagans, came naturally to them as well. Scripture explaining the truth of baptism became hidden, in an impossible language (Latin, which most people of that day couldn’t understand), so darkness reigned.
When pietism (late 1600s, beginning in Germany) and the Great Awakening revival (1700s, in England and New England) came along, they placed their emphasis for salvation on the conversion experience; in some cases, the evangelist didn’t want to complicate things by explaining the correct theology of baptism to Catholics, or anybody else. The evangelist said, let’s make salvation easy to understand–more people can be saved. They called the spiritual awakenings the “new birth.” Before that, in state churches, everyone had already been baptized—as babies–but many grew up dead spiritually. Rather than preach on the negative topic, “why baptism as a baby wasn’t good enough now,” the revivalists wanted to see as many people turn their life around as possible, and make the salvation easy to get to. So it was the decision for Jesus, that was it. Oh, yeah, you “should be” baptized as a witness to show to everyone that you’re saved, but you can already be sure, they said, that you’re going to heaven. Everybody loved assurance like that. No follow-up requirements.
Now I again warn you: Keep in mind this extremely important caution (read the “Paul v James” blogs): Don’t assume you can get baptized, and you’re saved and done. A continuing saved relationship with Christ, following His commands (and baptism was one of them) are necessary. “Inward” baptism—of the Spirit—was essential as well, not just “outward” baptism.
When you want to repent of your sin and submit to the Lord Jesus AND when you are baptized in the water, then your sins are washed away. You need both. If you do the outward baptism without the inward desire for submission and cleansing–you’re still spiritually questionable, on “probation,” or dead. In any event, you need to have an abiding relationship with Christ so you don’t lose salvation.
Acknowledgements: Dave Bercot CD, “Baptism”
No comments:
Post a Comment