Differing Views of Baptism

The subject of Christian baptism can be a difficult discussion to have because there are a couple of different views about it and Christians do not agree. Not only do Christians disagree about baptism they also disagree about the importance of their disagreement. For some Christians baptism is closely related to conversion and becoming a Christian. To these folks, baptism is an extremely important issue on which there can be no ambiguity at all. To other Christians the discussion is not an issue on which anyone’s eternal salvation hangs, which downgrades the importance, and hopefully the intensity, of the debate.

What is the debate on baptism?

First, there is a debate about WHO should be or can be baptized. While not explicitly mentioned in the New Testament, the practice of infant baptism soon became the norm in the ancient Church and was never seriously questioned until the time of the Reformation when some of the more radical members of the Protestant Movement began to argue that only believers can or should be baptized.

Secondly, there is a debate on HOW people should be baptized, or the mode of baptism. Some have sprinkled or poured water as the act of baptism. But others have pointed out that the literal meaning of the word in the New Testament is to plunge, to dip, or to immerse. Therefore, it has been argued that the true and proper mode of baptism must consist of putting the person being baptized completely under the water.

Thirdly, there is a debate about WHAT happens when a person is baptized. Some believe that a spiritual operation is accomplished at the precise moment a person is baptized. They argue that this is the specific point in time when a person is regenerated and crosses over from a state of sin to being in Christ. Others say that the precise moment in time when conversion happens is not connected to the act of baptism at all but is a mysterious operation or work of the Spirit of God.

To summarize the debate, the questions about baptism are as follows: who can be baptized, how they should be baptized, and what happens during the act of baptism.

Something that nearly all Protestants have rejected is the idea of BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. This is the idea that a person is regenerated or saved BECAUSE they have been baptized. We must reject this view simply because it cannot be supported by Scripture. Scripture clearly teaches that we are saved by or through faith and the work of the Holy Spirit. Teaching that a person is saved just because they have been baptized in water contradicts this clear and foundational doctrine of Scripture. Wherever we go from here in a discussion or debate about baptism must be based on a rejection of baptismal regeneration or there can be no Scriptural resolution to this issue. Therefore, it seems that the debate about WHAT happens when a person is baptized has been somewhat clarified. Taking a dogmatic position that a person is only regenerated at the precise moment of their baptism sounds exactly like baptismal regeneration and must therefore be rejected as unscriptural.

But the two other questions about baptism remain. And within Protestantism there are two models for Christian baptism that have developed. Some Protestants still baptize infants based on a Covenantal understanding of Scripture. Other Protestants have adopted the practice of believer’s baptism.

Let’s look briefly at each model of Christian baptism.

Those who baptize infants argue that in the covenant God made with Abraham, which was carried over into the Law of Moses, the sign of the covenant, which was circumcision, was done to infant males. The sign of the New Covenant is baptism, which the apostle Paul clearly equates with the practice of circumcision (See Colossians 2.11-12). So, some Christian thinkers have reasoned like this: if the original sign of the covenant (circumcision) was done to infants, then the newer sign of the covenant (baptism) can also be administered to infants. Of course, this is all done on the assumption that the infant is going to be raised within the Covenant Community, which today is the Church, by believing parents. At some point in the future the child who was baptized as an infant can make his or her own profession of faith.

Those who practice believer’s baptism argue that only believers who consciously and willingly profess faith in Christ should be baptized, which is something an infant obviously cannot do. Furthermore, they argue, there are no explicit, concrete examples of infants being baptized in the New Testament Scripture. Therefore, the practice must have just developed as a tradition later in the Church. Those who practice believer’s baptism typically argue that their position has the most Biblical support, while infant baptism must just be a tradition of the Church.

Today it is typical for Christians who practice one or the other model of baptism to still accept those who practice the other type of baptism. This is because the issue is not deciding anyone’s salvation. Therefore, we can allow for a difference of opinion and of practice. In the Evangelical community there is consensus around the content of the Gospel message and salvation through faith in Jesus with allowance for differences on baptism. This, it seems to me, is the right way to view the entire discussion about baptism.

On an individual basis, each person is free to adopt one position over the other while extending grace and charity to those who take the opposite position. Churches may choose to practice only believer’s baptism, while still accepting those who were baptized as infants. And Churches that practice infant baptism should be willing to baptize adults who profess faith in Christ but were not baptized as infants.

There is one final issue: the practice of baptizing adults who profess faith but who have already been baptized as infants. This can be a complex and sensitive issue that almost deserves another article. However, I will briefly explain my own position here as I conclude. In my view, a person who was baptized as an infant should not be required to be baptized again as an adult. And the Church should make it very clear to these folks that their right standing with God is based on their faith in the finished work of Christ and not on their baptism. Those whose conscience is weak on this issue, and who may be requesting to be baptized again, need to be taken directly to the Gospel as the only true basis for Christian assurance.

Thought for the Day: Preaching

 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” (Romans 10.14-15)

When we hear the word “preaching” we mostly think of an activity that takes place in Church when a someone stands up in front of the congregation and delivers a sermon. And to be sure, that is preaching in the formal sense. Christians have long recognized that the public preaching of the Gospel must be a regular part of the ministry and worship of the Church. In most Churches, especially those who stand in the stream of the Protestant Reformation, the sermon is the central act of worship and the main reason for the Church gathering on Sundays.

A sermon in a Church is usually based on a passage of Scripture and contains some teaching elements or instruction as well as exhortation. Most of the people who hear these sermons are already Christians. The sermon is meant to encourage these believers and confirm and strengthen their faith and commitment to Christ.

The word “preach” means to announce or declare, much like the ancient town crier who went through the streets proclaiming the king’s edict to the people. In modern life, reporters who give the news are doing a kind of preaching in that they are declaring certain facts or events. The Christian preacher is declaring certain facts as well. The Christian message, or Gospel, is based on facts and on events. The preacher is not just giving ideas like a philosopher. Preaching is giving a report about what God has said or done, specifically, what God has revealed through His Son, Jesus. Preaching is the good news about Jesus and the offer of salvation in through faith in Jesus.

This all seems rather simple, and perhaps even obvious. But the Church often fails to understand the importance and centrality of the act of preaching the message about Jesus. Most people think of the work of the Church as multi-dimensional, with preaching the Gospel just being one aspect of Christian ministry. But the New Testament places a tremendous weight and emphasis on the act of communicating the message of Christ. This is not just one of the many things the Church is to be doing, it is the one, central thing that the Church must do. The only way people will be able to come to saving faith in Christ is by this message being proclaimed. How can someone believe a message they have never heard? The Church exists to bring people into a saving relationship with Jesus. The only way this can happen is if people hear about Jesus. And the only way people will hear about Jesus is through preaching. There is a sense in which the whole reason for the Church is preaching.

There are people who devote their lives to the regular, systematic preaching in the public worship of the Church. These are people the Church recognizes and sets aside as leaders who are called for this task of preaching. But preaching in this formal sense is by no means the only form preaching can take. Any communication of the message of Christ is preaching. This may happen in Church before a gathered congregation, or it may happen in someone’s home in an informal conversation. In another sense the written word could be called preaching because writing is another way of communicating the truth of the Gospel.

My point is that the communication of the Gospel should be the main work of every Church and even of every Christian, even those not ordained to a preaching ministry. All of God’s people can carry the message of Christ to anyone they can who is willing to listen.  Those who hear and believe that message will be saved.

Thought for the Day: Meditation

This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success" (Joshua 1.8).

You have probably heard about meditation in a secular context. Many people in our country have been exposed to the idea of meditation as a relaxation method or as a way to focus the mind. Some religions, like Buddhism, also teach their adherents to meditate. The practice of meditation in this context usually involves clearing the mind of all thought. The point is to silence the thoughts and experience a rest from all of the busyness of modern life. 

Meditation is also a Biblical practice and is one of the spiritual disciplines that Christians have used for centuries. But the Christian practice is very different from the secular method or the teachings of Eastern religions like Buddhism. 

The whole point of Biblical meditation is to FILL the mind, not to empty the mind. To meditate is to think, to reflect, and to do so in a deep and sustained manner. The mind should be filled with the Word of God, which is the content of the thought and sustained meditation.

Setting aside time to meditate on the Word of God ranks very highly among other common spiritual disciplines, like prayer, Scripture reading, and fasting. Reading the Word of God in Scripture has often been compared to the physical act of eating. The body needs food. The food of the soul is the Word of God. If we stay with that metaphor of eating, meditation is like digestion. Our physical bodies take care of the digestion of food without our minds having to think consciously. But spiritual digestion is different. The mind does not stop working after reading the Word of God. There must be some meditation or digestion. 

Let me give you an example of what meditation looks like. When we read the Scriptures we often come across things that are new, strange, or even mysterious to our minds. Meditation is an attempt to understand what God has said. When we meditate on what we have read in Scripture, our minds can begin to clarify things and we also allow for the work of the Holy Spirit, who illuminates our minds and helps us understand the written Word. The second part of meditation involves the application of the Scriptures. It is common for preachers and teachers to attempt to apply the Word of God to the lives of their hearers. But everyone who reads Scripture should be asking how the Word of God can be applied to life. We must ask questions when we read Scripture and meditate to formulate answers to questions like "what is there in this passage that I need to obey?" 

Spiritual growth involves time and some discipline, just like anything else we accomplish in life. We have help from the Holy Spirit, but we still have to put in the effort to read, study, and meditate on the Word of God. This is not just the job of preachers and teachers in the Church. Every believer should be setting aside time to meditate and think deeply about the things of God. I can think of nothing else that is so vital to spiritual life as this simple discipline. 

Unfortunately, we live in a culture that does not value thought at all. Most people run on their feelings rather than on sustained thought and reflection. And because of media we are in the habit of shutting down our minds down and just entertaining ourselves. 

There is nothing wrong with times of relaxation and rest. In fact, this is also a spiritual discipline. But periods of rest are for the purpose of refreshing ourselves so that we can return to our real occupation. The main occupation of a child of God is to know God through His word. This involves taking time to meditate and fill our minds with Divine truth.

Thought for the Day: What do Christians Believe?

 The whole subject of Christian doctrine or theology can be a sensitive and divisive one. There are different denominations of Christians who believe different things about what the Bible is teaching. Some of these differences are so stark, it is not even possible for these Churches to be in fellowship with one another. Therefore, we have different denominations. Sometimes the differences are still there, but the disagreement may only be over shades of meaning or areas of doctrine that are deemed non-essential to the Faith.

There is so much disagreement, and so many differences, that some have recommended minimizing doctrine and theology to remove the basis for the division and bring the Churches together without adherence to creeds or confessions. I came from a Christian tradition that was very much in favor of doing away with all man-made creeds and confessions and just getting back to what the Bible teaches.

This sounds very noble on the surface but is much more complicated in practice! The fact remains that, even without all the historic creeds and confessions of the Church, we all still have our interpretation of what the Bible is saying and what it means for today. We still have creeds and confessions, even if these are not historic or written down.

And so, the problem remains. What should Christians believe? Is there a single body or list of doctrines that all Christians everywhere must adhere to, to be called "Christian"? What are those areas that we may deem "non-essential" or open for debate and opinion? I think C.S. Lewis was right when he observed that Christians not only disagree with one another, they also disagree with one another over the importance of their disagreements!

I cannot claim to have all the answers to these debates, all of which go back to the very beginnings of the Church. However, I think there is one essential guide that can keep us from going completely off the beaten path in our doctrine.

The first guide to doctrine is to make Jesus the heart or the center of everything. In other words, the thing that really makes Christian doctrine unique and vital is who Jesus is and what He said and what He did. Therefore, it becomes critical that we know who Jesus is. What does the New Testament say about Him? We must be very particular about these points.

Do Christians believe that Jesus is just a good teacher, or another example of a Prophet sent from God? Is it critical for Christians to believe that Jesus is the Son of God? And what about Jesus’ death on the cross? Why did Jesus die on the cross? Was He the victim of a tragedy of human injustice and prejudice only? Or did Jesus die according to a Divine purpose? Was Jesus’ death just a symbol of Divine love, or did Jesus die as a substitute for sinners? And what happened in the resurrection? Do Christians believe in a literal, physical resurrection of Jesus? Was the grave really empty on the third day? And will Jesus come again? What do we mean when we say that He will “come” again?

How we answer these questions, it seems to me, is critical to our understanding of what Christianity is. Therefore, these things are essential. Jesus is Christianity. Therefore, our doctrine about Christ must be sound and must be something that all Christians everywhere can adhere to without compromise. 

All Christians everywhere have believed that Jesus is the Divine Son of God, that He died as a substitutionary atonement for sinners, and that He was physically raised from the dead and will physically return to the earth at the end of history in great power and glory. These great doctrines must be the foundation of Christian faith that binds all believers together in a common faith and confession. 

Thought for the Day: Mount Sinai Religion

On the morning of the third day there were thunders and lightnings and a thick cloud on the mountain and a very loud trumpet blast, so that all the people in the camp trembled. Then Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God, and they took their stand at the foot of the mountain. Now Mount Sinai was wrapped in smoke because the LORD had descended on it in fire. The smoke of it went up like the smoke of a kiln, and the whole mountain trembled greatly. And as the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder, Moses spoke, and God answered him in thunder. The LORD came down on Mount Sinai, to the top of the mountain. And the LORD called Moses to the top of the mountain, and Moses went up (Exodus 19.16-20).

The Mount Sinai experience was a frightening one for Israel. They were warned not to approach the fiery mountain, or they would die, but I cannot see why anyone would have wanted to approach such a sight! 

Mount Sinai was what we sometimes call a Theophany, or an appearance of God. Obviously, a complete revelation of God's glory would have been devastating. Sinai was just a little glimpse of God's awesome presence appearing for the people to see so that they might come to fear God and obey His word.

It was on Mount Sinai that God gave Moses the Law, having been written in stone by God Himself. The ten commandments were God's famous synopsis of the covenant He was making with Israel there, having brought them out of slavery in Egypt. Israel was going to inherit the land of Canaan, as God had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were to be God's holy people, called out from among all other nations of the earth. They had a special relationship with God and that is why God appeared to them on Sinai and spoke directly to them there.

The experience of Sinai was a depiction of God's relationship to Israel. They were His people, yet they were kept at a distance. They were given His commandments, yet God knew they were rebellious and would break the covenant. They wasted no time in doing this, making a golden calf to worship at the very base of the holy mountain of God!

The distance that was kept between God and Israel, and the rebellious hearts of the people of Israel, were the major characteristics of that Old Covenant made at Mount Sinai. The people were never allowed to come near to the presence of God. An elaborate system of sacrifices and cleansing was instituted in the Levitical priesthood, which made at least a partial Divine presence with the people possible. And the hearts of the people remained stubborn and disobedient to God.

But God promised that this would not always be the case. Through the Prophets God sent to Israel later in her history, God predicted that a New Covenant would be established that would be very different from the one made at Sinai (See Jeremiah 31.31-34). The blessings of this New Covenant would include an inner transformation of the heart and a permanent solution for the people's sin.

This New Covenant has been made through Jesus Christ!

God's people no longer must remain at a distance from God but are invited into His presence. The days of a Mount Sinai religion are over and done! We now have boldness to enter even the Holy of Holies through the blood of Jesus. 

Of course, it is still possible for people to have a Mount Sinai kind of religion. There are still religious people who remain alienated from God and basically rebellious in their hearts toward the Word of God. But wherever the Gospel of Christ is preached and is believed, there is freedom from the Mount Sinai experience of God. 

May all believers take full advantage of our access to God through Jesus Christ and draw near to God with the full assurance of faith!

Pastor Jason