Institutions of the Church

Baptism

Baptism - The word "baptism" comes from the Greek word "Baptizo". (Strong's /907) It is translated "Baptist" - (lx); "baptize(ed)" - (73x); and "wash" - (2x). There are other derivatives of this word (Strong's #'s 908, 909, 910, 911) which are also translated "baptism" - (22x - 908); "wash" - (3x - 909); "Baptist" - (14x - 910); and "dip" - (3x - 911).

There are two words associated with "baptize". One, (Baptizo) is the root word believed to come from a base word that means "to make overwhelmed" (with water). This is why many denominations practice immersing the whole individual in a source of water. I believe, that according to the language used in the Greek, this practice is more Scripturally sound than sprinkling the water on the participant.

The word (Bapto) is only used 3 times (Strong's # 91l) and seems to indicate that the substance or item that has already been "whelmed" in fluid emerges changed from it's original format. It gives the connotation of saturating something. There are three verses this word is used in. First is Luke 16:24, a finger "dipped" in water. The second is John 13:26, bread "dipped" in sop. The third is Rev 19:13, a vesture (garment) "dipped" in blood.

Now it is easy to see how bread in sop or a garment in blood could be changed from their original format, but a finger dipped in water does not change the finger. Only if you saturated the limb for a long period of time; yes, the appendage would eventually be changed, although not without first destroying the tissue. This is were this interpretation breaks down in one respect, since God would not be destroying the finger so it became useless; but instead, renewing it.

The passage in question is the story of the rich man and Lazarus. When we consider that Lazarus is a believer now in heaven (so to speak) this is where the analogy of being renewed or changed does fit the context of the word "Bapto". Lazarus's hands are changed since they have been saturated (or stained) by the living water of the word of God.

Baptism of Repentance

In the Gospels and the Epistles there are three types of "baptisms" concerning the human body that are discussed. One is called the "baptism of John" which was a "baptism of repentance" (Mark 1:4, Acts 13:24, Acts 18:25, Acts 19:4) This baptism was only to "tell the people that they should believe on him who should come after John, that is Christ." Acts 19:4.

Immediately after Jesus was baptized, He was driven by the Spirit into the wilderness.

(Mk 1:12) There is no record that John baptized anyone else after Jesus. Matter of fact, Luke 3:21 states "Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass that Jesus also being baptized... ". Practically speaking, this was probably because they were coming to arrest John for he was thrown in jail shortly there after. (Jesus being driven into the wilderness immediately after being baptized since Ho was the last one baptized and would not be there when they came to arrest John.) We know this because when Jesus returned from the 40 days in the wilderness, He heard that John was in prison. (Matt 4:12, Mk 1:14)

Now in the Hebrew Scripture several people and entities had their heads cut off as was also done to John the Baptist. This was a sign of judgment.

First - The statue Dagon (a Philistine god) who the ark of the covenant had been placed next to in a temple in the province of Ashdod. It was found the second day with it's head and hands severed from the body of the statue. (1 Sam 5:4)

Second - Goliath; his head was severed from the body when David killed him.

(1 Sam 17:51)

Third - King Saul; his head was cut off by the Philistines when he was killed in Mt. Gilboa. (1 Sam 31:9)

Forth - Ishbosheth; he was a son of Saul who was sent to rule over Israel after Saul's death before David became King. His head was brought to David by the sons of Rechab.

(2 Sam 4:8)

Fifth - Sheba, the son of Bichri who'd tried to kill King David. His head was thrown to Joab by the women of Abel of Bethmaachah They were instructed to cut off his head by one of the elder women "who was wise" in their city. (2 Sam 20:22)

Sixth - In Isaiah 9:14 it says "Therefore the Lord will cut off from Israel head and tail, branch and rush in one day. The ancient and honorable, he is the head; and the prophet that teaches lies, he is the tail..." John the baptist was the physical allegory of this truth. Christ (ancient and honorable) would be cut off from the body (national Israel) so he could be joined to a new body (believers).

Baptism of the Holy Spirit

One of the controversial "baptisms" discussed in the Scripture is to be baptized in the Spirit of God. It has become an issue today because of the modern tongues movement. Some claim that being "baptized in the Spirit" means that you start "speaking in tongues" performing "healings", "prophesying" and other "miraculous" events, but I don't find this interpretation Biblical.

First of all, the presence of events that go contrary to the natural laws of physics, biology and/or any other common workings of the universe are what the Scripture considers miracles. These events occurred in coordination with the ministries of Jesus and the apostles; (as well as prophets of the Hebrew Scripture) up through the first century and before the canon of Scripture was completed. Once God had established that these were the people He had sent (and the writing of the scripture was complete) these miracles came to an end.

Secondly, the modern tongues movement is not what occurred in the first century. The Scripture declares that out of the mouth of two or three witnesses shall all things be established. (Deut 19:15, Matt 18:16, 2 Cor l 3:1) All happenings in the Scripture are repeated at least twice. This is the mouth of the two or three witnesses which all things are established. Those who believe in the validity of the modern tongues movement site verses in I Cor 14 to support their argument, but in order to understand what was occurring in the Corinthian church we must have a second witness some where in the Bible that records the same phenomenon. That second witness is the book of Acts and it is very clear in Acts, that the tongues they were speaking were indeed earthly languages of other nations which they had not been trained to speak. This was a sign that the gospel was going into all the world.

The third point I would like to make in regards to "speaking in tongues" comes right out of the passage in 1 Cot 14:21-25. "With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, says the Lord." This verse in Corinthians comes out of Deuteronomy 28:49. This had a historical reference also, when Israel was taken into captivity in Babylon. Ezekiel 23 tells us why they were taken into captivity. They courted the heathen nations to obtain power and favor. They lusted after the wealth and beauty of these earthly kingdoms and became enslaved to them.

Now, how does this relate to "speaking in tongues"? Just as ancient Israel believed God was showing favor to these other nations by allowing them to obtain all this power and wealth, there are those who are looking for some special "sign" to know God is working in a certain church or leader. Jesus told the leaders of Israel that a wicked and adulterous generation seek after a sign and the only sign they will get is "the son of man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matt 12:40

1 Cor 14:22 does tell us that tongues are for a sign - "not to them who believe but to those who don't believe" although it's not a sign of God's favor. Those who don't believe were defined earlier as being the Jewish nation. "For the Jews seek a sign and the Greeks seek wisdom." (1 Cor 1:22). The Jews are the only people spoken of in the letters who seek some sort of proof from God as to the validity of the Apostles' office. So consequently, speaking the gospel in foreign languages was telling national Israel that their "birthright" in the Kingdom had been taken from them and given to another nation; "one who's language they did not understand."

Is there an application to this today, concerning churches who practice the modern tongues movement? There may be? Since we know by the context of the books of Corinthians, Acts and Matthew who that "wicked and adulterous generation" was, as well as what tongues really consisted of- we know (at the very least) that what is going on in these churches is a lie. Some would conclude that this is some supernatural working of Satan, although personally I'm not convinced that Satan has the power (or has been given the power) to break the barrier between the natural and supernatural world. So no, I don't consider these "manifestations" miraculous in any sense of the word. Do I believe they are the workings of Satan? To this question I would have to answer yes, considering Satan is the "father of lies" and often disguises himself as an "angel of light".

So now with this established; what exactly is the baptism of the Holy Spirit? Acts 1:5 answers this question. Jesus had instructed the believers to wait in Jerusalem until the Father had sent the Spirit to them. Verse 5 declares this was a "baptism" with the Holy Ghost. Also in verse 8; "But you shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you and you shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and in Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth." This is repeated in Acts 11:16

The Holy Spirit is not confined to people who have first only been baptized in water. "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" (Acts 10:47)

"But after that the kindness and love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done; (for example - water baptism) but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost..."

(Titus 3:4&5)

"And such were some of you, but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Cor 6:11)

Baptism in water

The third Baptism was to "baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit." This was first instituted in the Gospels right after the resurrection by Jesus. He tells the disciples to go "and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Matt 28:19

Acts 22:16 Talks about Paul being baptized. "And now why do you wait? arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." If you look at the language you'll notice "washing away your sins" is linked to "calling on the name of the Lord." not "arise and be baptized". The two phrases are joined by an "and", so it's not the baptism that washes away the sin, it's the calling on the name.

Mark 16:16 "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be condemned." In this passage "shall be saved" is contingent on "believing and being baptized". Now this passage does not specify what type of baptism is required for salvation. We can not presume it is water baptism, since the thief on the cross had never been water baptized; but had been redeemed for Jesus said to him "this day you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). The baptism in question here is baptism in the Holy Spirit. This makes perfect sense when we consider no-one can be saved without the Spirit of God.

John 3:5&6 "Truly, I say to you: Unless a man be born of water and the Spirit he can not enter the kingdom of God." Now looking at this passage, what does it mean to be "born of water" in order to enter the kingdom of God? Is this talking about water baptism? Notice the passage says "born of water" not "baptized" of water. What is this verse referring to?

Some have come to the conclusion that being "born of water" is a reference to physical birth and the "water" is amniotic fluid. It is a correct assumption that you must be a physically living human being to be redeemed, since if a person dies with out salvation their fate is forever sealed; (although it was already forever sealed in eternity - but that is another theological topic). Yet, I don't think this is what Jesus is referring to when he makes this statement. The "water" you must be born of is the living water Jesus talks about in John 4:12 "But who ever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst; but the water that I will give him will be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." Also in Revelation 21:6 it says "I will give to him that is thirsty of the fountain of the water of life freely." Psalm 36:8&9 talks of the "river of (God's) pleasures" and "the fountain of life". I think both of these are a reference to Jesus and His willingness to pay for sin, for He is our "life" as well as the "pleasure" of His Father.

Finally in 1 Peter 3:21 Baptism is pretty well summed up for us in that it is a "Like figure [allegory, parable] where as even baptism does also now save us: (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh [being washed with water] but the answer of a good conscience toward God [baptism of the Spirit]) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

So if water baptism does not impart any grace to us than what is it for? Why do it? For part of that answer we need to go to 1 Cor 10:2 where it talks about how national Israel was "baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.." Of this "they ate the same spiritual meat" and "drank the same spiritual drink .. they drank of the spiritual rock...that rock was Christ" God used them as an example in which He cared for them and guided them on their long journey. (vs 11)

It is the mercy of God that provides His goodness even to the those who will ultimately perish for their sin. (Matt 5:45) God shows this grace so that His purpose (salvation of His people) may be accomplished. (Romans 8:28) They were baptized into Moses and given the law which, although it couldn't save them; it still was mercy because the law is the schoolmaster that points us to Christ. (Galations 3:24) That is how they "drank of the rock..that was Christ" and received mercy from God even though most of them perished in the wilderness because of their unbelief. (Hebrews 3:17&18) So "baptism" in this respect declares how we are "overwhelmed" even in our unregenerate state by the goodness of God. Yet, if we are looking for the full answer to this we must look further than common grace to a specific type of grace.

Matt 20:22, Mk 10:38, Lk 12:50 These three passages make mention of Jesus and the "baptism in which I am baptized with" In Luke it says "I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened until it be accomplished!" Notice that this baptism Jesus is talking about has nothing to do with being baptized in water; for that has already happened (Jesus being baptized by John) and these passages are in the present and future tenses. It is not very clear when exactly these two statements in Matt and Mark are made other than we know it was before the entry into Jerusalem. Either way, it begs the question - what baptism is Jesus talking about here? We find the answer in the book of Romans.

Romans 6:2-4 "...How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer in it? Don't you know that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him in baptism into death; that like Christ was raised up from the dead, by the glory of the Father; even so, we also should walk in newness of life." One of the results of being "baptized by the Spirit of God" is that we've been cleansed from our sin. We walk in newness of life because the power of God has buried our old self through substitutionary atonement and has raised us to be free from dead works. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ (into His death) have put on Christ." (Gal 3:27) When the sin that still remains with in us causes us to run a muck, the Spirit of God still prevails because He is stronger than anything in this universe. Even in our unfaithfulness, He can not deny Himself. (2 Timothy 2:13)

Now to sum all this up, God tells us - "For as the body is one, ...so also is Christ; For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we are Jews or Gentiles, whether we be slaves or free men; we have all been made to drink into the same Spirit." (1 Cot 12:13)

In Conclusion-

Well, I don't think it's really necessary to say much more since the scripture pretty well speaks for it's-self. We know baptism does not save us and is only a picture of how the Spirit of God washes us from our sin. The only last question we might ask is who is to be baptized. Should we baptize only people who have made a profession of faith, or should we baptized babies too? What about the method? Does a person need to be totally immersed? What about the water? Do we need special water too?

Some of these questions I think need to be applied individually to specific situations. It may not be practical or even possible to totally immerse a quadriplegic in a river or swimming pool. Also, there are people who are afraid of water and immersion may cause them undue trauma. Some times the circumstances (a prison or concentration camp) do not allow for an adequate water supply to immerse a person. In cases like this I think it would be acceptable in the sight of God to sprinkle those individuals if that is their preference (or all that's available) for baptism. God is looking on the person's heart and sees what they really desire in this whole process. He knows the infirmity of our flesh (or our circumstances) and is understanding.

As far as the type of water, it is quite clear in the scripture that there was nothing special about the water it's-self. Any source of water would do. It didn't matter if it was a pond, river, well or even run off from a mountain side. People were baptized with all sorts of water from a variety of locations and no-where does it say that water needs to be blessed by any human agent.

People of all ages, races, nationalities and levels of education and intelligence were baptized. Do you baptize babies or people who don't have the intellectual or verbal capacity to consent to baptism. If anyone thinks that these individuals have in some way indicated that they believe in Christ, even if they don't really grasp baptism; I would say it is good in the sight of God to baptize them. If Elizabeth (John the Baptist's mother) came to me and told me what he had done upon hearing about Jesus; I would have no problem baptizing him, even if he was only a baby. Do we baptize babies because we believe that will some how protect or save them. If that is our motivation, I would say no; since we know baptism does not equate to salvation. If we fail to baptize a person who really is a believer and has not been able to tell us this; we need not worry because our lack of knowledge will not prevent them from entering the Kingdom.