Archive for Baptism
What is accomplished by the act of Water Baptism?
Posted by: | CommentsBridge Church isn’t much for denominations. But we most closely resemble and most often partner together with other Baptist Churches for the sake of the Gospel. The practice of Baptism by immersion is something that we believe very strongly is entirely commanded by Christ through His Word. I’ve been blogging on Baptism for several months now, and today I’d like to elaborate on the significance of Baptism and what is actually accomplished.
If an individual believes in Jesus, repents of their sins, and is willing to commit themselves to the fellowship of the church for the sake of keeping watch over their soul and on-going discipleship, they can and should be immediately baptized. However, the question remains, “Why?” What is the purpose of baptism at this point if the church has already found the individual to be a repentant believer? What is accomplished by submitting to this ceremony? Obviously, a first and most important reason for following through with Baptism is to be obedient to Christ, which we’ve already agreed is the first step to salvation. But, practically speaking, why did Christ command this?
The Pre-Requisites of Baptism
Posted by: | CommentsPre-Requisites. It is such a laborious term. Prerequisite. The very mention of it brings fear of tedious drudgery. Most commonly referred to as “Pre-Reqs,” they incite loathing in most university students. There is a boring dry class that you have to take before you get to take the cool and exciting class. This boring and dry drudgery class that you must take is known as your Pre-req before you take the cool class. When I was in university I hated taking pre-reqs. I just wanted to skip past those boring mind-numbing classes, and get to the good stuff. I remember walking into my first year Greek class thinking I would walk out at the end of the semester speaking and talking to my fellow class mates in Greek. I was very excited! My professor’s opening statement to the class: “This course is actually a pre-req to the cool class where you will learn to speak and read Greek.” I was dismayed and flabbergasted. We spent that semester learning the alphabet and deciphering between participial phrases and adverbial modifiers. We also looked at adverbial participial modfying phrases. Don’t ask me to explain. You would need to take a pre-req to get it. I did.
Baptism is sort of like an advanced level class in university. Before you can take Water Baptism, there are some pre-requisites. But the prerequisites are not boring. They are the substance and essence of Baptism.
Baptism: Physical and Spiritual
Posted by: | Comments“Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.” Acts 2:38
I’ve been writing and thinking a lot lately about Baptism. This article is the next and most current in a series of articles that you can find on this wbsite recounting my thoughts and observations from scripture concerning the Doctrine of Baptism. This is one of those articles that doesn’t really accomplish much in the way of reaching substantive conclusions, but it helps set the stage for what is to follow. Most people hate that. “Oh man! This thing doesn’t arrive anywhere!” Sorry, guys. This article throws out a bunch of little tid-bits that need to be digested before I can draw together some sweeping and consequential conclusions regarding the practice of baptism as it commonly done, and the way that Jesus intended for it to actually be done. Please bear with me.
We begin this article with a quick review of the account of Jesus speaking to his disciples about Baptism in Mark 10:35-40. The episode of drinking from Christ’s cup and being immersed into Christ’s immersion must have stuck with the disciples. Surely as they observed his horrible torture and crucifixion, this concept of immersion and “drinking of the cup” must have lingered in their thoughts, and it will certainly play a key role in understanding the significance of Baptism in the early church. However, before beginning an analysis of baptismal practice in the New Testament church, we will need to make a few comments about the book of Acts. Like I said: we’ve got to set the table before we can sit down to eat. As you work your way through this article, I hope that your understanding of Acts will help shed light on Baptismal practice. Acts, the book of the Bible which follows the four gospel accounts, is the historical record of the early church, and specifically it tells of how the early church struggled to be obedient to Jesus in the days, months, and years following his ascension into heaven.
The Meaning of the Term Baptism
Posted by: | Comments“Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the Baptism with which I am baptized?”
In this second posting on Baptism, I’d like to make sure that we have a firm footing to stand on. As I said in my initial post on this subject, my purpose is to show that Baptism is extremely important to the Christian faith. Baptism is properly understood through its appropriate conference upon recipients who demonstrate genuine repentance. Baptism is the act of the Christian Church accepting the believer, and the believer’s subsequent commitment and initiation into that Church community.
I’ll explore all of these issues in time, but prior to examining any of the historical texts that refer to Baptism, it is essential to define terms. The word “baptism” occurs twenty times in the New Testament, and the word “baptize” is used seventy-three times. There are a variety of ways this term is used within dialogue among the historical figures, and so it is obvious that readers, writers, and the characters that interacted with each other throughout the narrative portions of scripture and historical texts had some understanding among themselves as to what was being referenced and what was meant when they utilized this term. Since this term held a common meaning that was easily understood by everyone who used it in the first century, it seems logical that we can arrive at a consensus on what it means.
The Greek term “βαπτίζω” (baptize) generally means to “immerse.” [1] However, it is worthy to note that scholarly sources from the previous century and originally published on a different continent are eager to disagree:
“The words ‘baptize’ and ‘baptism’ are simply Greek words transferred into English. This was necessarily done by the translators of the Scriptures, for no literal translation could properly express all that is implied in them. The mode of baptism can in no way be determined from the Greek word rendered ‘baptize.’” [2]
As I stumbled upon this definition that is more disclaimer than explanation I couldn’t help but laugh. Every book written has a political consideration, even theology books. Books are written in order to be purchased, and hopefully read, though the latter is of secondary concern. But I digress.
Perhaps the leading authority on the subject of the Koine Greek text would be Gerhard Kittel. In the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Kittle says, “The intensive form of the word ‘βαπτίζω’ occurs with the sense of, ‘to immerse’ (transitive) from the time of Hippocrates, in Plato, and especially in later writers. It is strictly an act: βαπτίζειν τὸ σκάφος, ‘to sink the ship.’” [3]
Without cruelly hooking and slicing words too far into the rough, it is sufficient to conclude that baptism is immersion, submersion, and plunging beneath the surface of the water. Any twenty-first century baptism should be done in the way that Christ would have observed, known, and participated in himself (Matthew 3:13-17). [4] After a cursory evaluation of the contextual usage of “baptizo” in the Greek New Testament, it is painfully obvious that the meaning of the word baptize is “to immerse,” or to submerge an individual beneath the water for a period of time. [5] In terms of the ceremony then, we may conclude that any group that performs baptism with a sprinkling of water is in error.
However, we are not simply talking about an act of water immersion or submersion. Christ in his discourse with the disciples is obviously speaking of something extremely significant when He poses the question, “Can you drink the cup that I drink or be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” (Mark 10:38) [6]. It is hard to imagine that Christ has in view here nothing more than a simple little ritual that involves a quick dunking in water. Christ’s question could be best understood this way: “Can you drink the cup that I drink? Can you be immersed into the immersion that I am about to be plunged into?” If it were simply a matter of water immersion and nothing more than a symbolic act, then it is hard to understand the somber and serious tone with which Christ seems to address this question to his disciples. The preceding question of drinking from Christ’s cup is tantamount.
At the conclusion of this second post, I hope the reader leaves with the understanding that most churches do not do baptism for the right reasons these days, and many churches that perform sprinkling are not doing baptism correctly.
In the posts that follow, I will begin to seriously evaluate the reasons Christ commanded baptism, the significance of the act as a confession and commitment to the Church and Christ, the rite of the ceremony as initiation and acceptance into the Church, and the imagery of baptism.
[1]Elwell, W. A., & Beitzel, B. J. Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 257.
[2]Easton, M. Easton’s Bible dictionary. (Oak Harbor, WA: Harbor, 1996, c1897). 210.
[3]G. Kittel, G. W. Bromiley & G. Friedrich, Ed. Theological dictionary of the New Testament. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans ,1964-c1976.) 1:530.
[4] See Matthew 3:13-17. The Holy Bible. English Standard Version. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2001).
[5] For a more thorough discussion on the topic see Wayne Grudem, “Baptism,” Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan ), 967. Given the symbolic portrayal of burial with Christ and resurrection in Christ, the obvious meaning of the word gives the best representation of this ordinance. Any argument to the contrary is influenced by theological prejudice and is not an honest assessment of the plain meaning of the word as it was used in the first century.
[6] Mark 10:38. Holy Bible. English Standard Version. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2001).
The Common Practice of Baptism as it is used Today.
Posted by: | Comments“A Boy Named Quinn.”
Baptism is important. Seriously. At first glance it may appear odd that the first sentence of this post should be so conspicuously simple. It isn’t very tactful, after all, to introduce a topic by headlining it with the cultural idiomatic equivalent of, “no, duh!” Yet, after weighing the evidence of scripture against personal observations of the modern day use of Baptism in a number of churches, it seems the most fitting title to arrest the interest of fellow evangelicals, and especially brother Baptists. Baptism is important. I’ll say it again… baptism is very important. As Protestants swim against the tide of the Catholic sacraments and all of the embedded meaning and significance that attaches to them, it appears that the preferred colloquialism offered to curious inquisitors is, “Baptism is just a symbol, and nothing more.” I disagree. Baptism is important. It is understandable that the objection to Catholic sacraments should manifest itself in a staunch decry of the concept of grace infusions or injections as though baptism were somehow the spiritual equivalent of a flu shot, or an act of prevenient grace removing the stain of original sin. Nothing could be further from the truth. However, while it is important that Protestants and Baptists should draw such distinctions between themselves and the Roman Catholic Church, such distinctions must be made very carefully. To suggest in casual conversation across the kitchen table with spiritual seekers that Baptism is just a symbol in an effort to distinguish between proper truthful orthodoxy and Catholic deception is a horrible mischaracterization of what was intended by our Lord when He instituted the ceremony.
Indeed, this mischaracterization is bleeding across the conversational lines of dialogue into actual theological praxis. It is apparent that the laity in the pew is now dazed as to the proper significance of Baptism. In southeastern Texas a boy named Quinn began encountering difficulties in his relationship with his fiancé. At the heart of the dispute was the difference of religious opinion between the two. Quinn faithfully stepped forward one bright Sunday morning to profess faith in Christ and to receive baptism in obedience. Quinn was baptized and promptly failed to return for services the following Sunday. After several months of Quinn’s repeated absence, an investigation was made, and during the course of very frank conversation, Quinn acknowledged that he was only being baptized to make things right with his fiancé. His ploy had failed; his fiancé had left him, and he was back to square one in attempting to reconcile the relationship. His interests in church and Jesus were really the same as they had always been. His baptism was only for the purpose of patching up their lovers’ quarrel. Quinn didn’t seem to mind too much that he had been baptized, nor did he care what significance this act may have carried with God. “It is, after all, just a symbol,” he said, parroting the often quoted expression.[1]
In addition to this, there is a new way of ‘doing church,’ known as the seeker-sensitive movement. This new way was pioneered by Willow Creek Community Church and has seen incredible expansion under the writing of Rick Warren from Saddleback Community Church. It attempts to identify and address a theological conundrum in succinct terms: everyone should seek God and yet no one seeks God, therefore the church should be as friendly as possible to people not interested in God, in the hopes that they may develop such an interest. Increasingly, churches around the nation are embracing this methodology, and utilizing numerical attendance to measure success. As a result, marketing plays a critical key in the growth of the church. Canyon Creek Community Church advertised this way: “Stronger family relationships… Greater satisfaction at work… And even better sex… and you can get all these things through church.”[2] Without commenting here on the shocking absence of the salvation of Christ for the souls of all mankind, there appears to be little renewed vitality in evangelical churches despite this paradigm shift. Numerous evangelical articles and Baptist publications bandy about the claim that, “85% of America’s Protestant Churches are either stagnant or dying.” [3] While there is some dispute concerning the accuracy of this statistic, those who follow Christ have sensed in their heart of hearts that there is some legitimacy to it. As a result, the paradigm has been effectively shifted in some fashion as pastors attempt to engage the culture and strive to become more relavent. David Wells, concerned about the paradigm shift, comments on this seeker movement, “The seeker-sensitive approach typically emphasizes the one side of this paradox [everyone should seek God] while significantly discounting the other [no one seeks God], seeing sinners as more or less neutral in their disposition toward God and the gospel and therefore amenable to marketing techniques.”[4] The church is attempting to reinvent itself in the twenty-first century, catering to consumer desire, launching marketing efforts, and ad campaigns. As the new ‘purpose-driven’ church seeks to be sensitive to potential God-seekers, Baptism has been nearly forgotten. In essence, it is almost forsaken.[5]
Before we go any further, I need to make sure that I’m clearly presenting my opinion. I have no personal objection to the implementation of programs and church activities that strive to evangelize the lost and win them to God. I don’t have any personal axe to grind with anyone in the leadership of the seeker-sensitive movement. I don’t find any problem in Saddleback Church or Willow Creek. I do find problems in the whole-sale marketing of these institutions to pastors and churchmen all across America. I think this is the great moral failure of Hybels and Warren. Selling methods without instilling an appropriate heart condition to employ those methods is very dangerous. The problem is that too many pastors are trying to mimick Hybels and Warren’s methods without first aquiring a heart for the lost. This is my only criticism. Pastor’s are trying to build the mega-church for their own self-glory without developing a loving and compassionate heart for the down-trodden and poor in spirit. They are without compassion. As a result, they are obsessed with numbers and care very little for the spiritual condition of the people behind those numbers.
It is indisputable, no matter how the numbers are evaluated, that baptisms are in sharp decline among evangelical churches. As churches seek to be seeker-sensitive there appears to be a growing mentality that baptism is nothing more than a formality. However, being an abstract traditional formality, it still carries kudos among denominational higher-ups. That a renowned church within the Southern Baptist Convention had for its inter-office slogan, “Get ‘em under; get ‘em wet, we aint hit three hundred yet,” appears to draw little concern from among the rank and file of evangelicals who are desperate to see a return to high baptisms, though in almost schizophrenic fashion there is a loss of insistence upon the practice.[6] This begs the question: what has baptism become? Simply understood today, Baptism is nothing more than a private ceremony held within churches, if it is done at all, that satisfies some enigmatic tradition or formality that appears to be a prerequisite to an individual becoming a member in the church. As a private ceremony, recipients of water baptism may never reveal to friends or family members that they have been baptized or that they now consider themselves Christians. In addition, there appears to be no noticeable change or lasting impact upon the recipient of water baptism. He is simply the recipient of some archaic function that is just a symbol; or, in a best-case scenario, he perfunctorily submits to the symbol of water baptism, as a symbolic act of obedience to Christ. Quinn’s baptism meant nothing to him. He attached no significance to the act. More and more, as churches break out against tradition and harp relentlessly on the priesthood [read 'debauched liberty'] of the individual believer, it appears inevitable that churches will abandon baptism as seeker un-sensitive.[7] Again, methodology in the pursuit of increased numbers for the sake of pride means more to many than the true spiritual condition of the people behind those numbers.
There is a need to return to the roots of Baptism and to understand its significance, if for no other reason, than to gain some perspective, to develop some theological opinion, and to render some Christian judgment on the current phenomenon taking place within many churches across the country. Why did Christ command Baptism? Is it for the believers of the first century? Is it for today? Is it just a symbol, or is it something more? What role, if any, does baptism play in God’s plan of salvation? Baptism is important. While it is beyond the scope of these postings to thoroughly examine every nuance and miniscule detail pertaining to the doctrine of baptism, baptism’s central meaning and effect will be discussed and evaluated primarily from the early church’s use of the initiatory act. Ultimately, as I work my way through this topic in successive blog postings, it will be discovered in following posts that baptism’s significance lies in its public confession of faith on the part of the believer, its proper conference upon recipients who demonstrate genuine repentance, the believer’s acceptance by the Christian Church, and the believer’s subsequent commitment and initiation into that Church community.
So my following posts on this topic will explore those issues. For now, I will conclude with this observation: most churches don’t Baptize with a correct understanding of Baptism’s significance. Baptism is important.
____________________
[1] This account is not a stylistic work of fiction designed to better illustrate the author’s point. This episode actually took place and was closely observed by the author, the author being a participant in these events, in the spring of 2003. Names have been changed to retain privacy and confidentiality.
[2] Advertisement, East Valley Tribune Newspaper, Arizona.
[3] Anderson, Leith. Dying for Change: An Arresting Look at the New Realities Confronting Churches and Para-Church Ministries (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1990), 10. This is a figure that is widely quoted in numerous periodicals and journals, so much so that it has taken on an essence of validity though the research seems inconsistent. Also see George Barna, User Friendly Churches: What Christians Need to Know About the Churches People Love to Go to (Ventura: Regal Books, 1991), 15.
[4] Wells, David. Above All Earthly Powers: Christ in a Postmodern World (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdman’s, 2005), 268.
[5] In all fairness, Rick Warren does make mention of Baptism in Purpose Driven Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), 323. However, his treatment of the topic warrants one half of a paragraph in this lengthy volume, and its ultimate purpose in Warren’s ministry agenda appears to make baptism nothing more than a pat on the back. The new member of his church should walk away from baptism feeling good about himself afterwards. While not disputing that water baptism should engender some comfort and spiritual joy to the participant, this paper seeks to clarify the deeper significance and ultimate meaning of Baptism, which is becoming more of a forsaken item in the modern church.
[6] A former staff member of a prominent and renowned Southern Baptist church in the south confided this truth to the author.
[7] The “Priesthood of the Believer” is a vague reference to a doctrinal disagreement that has engulfed and consumed much of Texas Southern Baptist Polity for the previous thirty years, if not the entire Southern Baptist Convention. Those several state factions in the South that have withdrawn from Southern Baptist denominational circles hold that this alleged doctrine frees individuals and church congregations to indiscriminate freedom, to act and behave in any manner they so choose. For a better discussion on these issues see, L. Russ Bush & Tom J. Nettles, Baptists and the Bible, (Nashville, TN: 1999). See also James Hefley, Truth In Crisis: The Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention (La Vergne, TN: Hannibal Books, 2005).