On Baptism
On Baptism
There is one body and one Spirit, just as you also were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all. Eph 4:5
When I was in 7th and 8th grade, I remember Pastor Beltz explaining the concept of “original sin” by taking a copy of Luther’s Small Catechism and standing it on end. Pastor Beltz said that was how Adam and Eve were created. But once they sinned, the book permanently became slanted so that it could only ever fall to one side; the sinful side. Thus, all babies are born with this inherited sinful nature and need baptism for the forgiveness of this inherited sin. I accepted this without question as a 13 year-old. Much like a 10th grade biology student would accept evolution. Yet, I always thought it was an odd analogy: standing a book on its side and then saying Adam and Eve’s sin caused the book to be slanted so that it could only and ever fall to one side. I wondered, at the time, as Pastor Beltz repeatedly let the book drop to the side that it was odd.
Lutheranism and Catholicism teach, “baptism is an outward sign of an inward grace” and that infants must be baptized of they will go to hell because of original sin. However, although “an outward sign of an inward grace” sounds biblical, it cannot be found in Scripture and nowhere does any Scripture say that babies who die without baptism are condemned to hell. In contrast, David after his son with Bathsheba died before he could be circumcised on the 8th day says, “But now he is dead; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” 2 Sam 12:23. So, David believed that infants who died without being circumcised went to heaven and not hell. Also, Jesus actually said, “’Truly I tell youunless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” Strange that Jesus would want us to change and become like little children if little children are born into the depraved state of condemnation because of original sin.
In the headwaters of history most controversies can be resolved. John the Baptist wasthe first to mention baptism in the Bible. He began his ministry saying, “Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is near…I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.” Matt 3. In Acts, John’s prophesy was fulfilled. “Peter replied, ‘Repent and be baptized, everyone one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off – for all whom the Lord our God will call.’” All who are far off meant in terms of time; meaning to the end of the age and for everyone who would become a Christian in the future. The Lord Himself said “the one who has believed and has been baptized will be saved; but the one who has not believed will be condemned.” Mark 16:16
Although John the Baptist was the first to mention baptism in the Bible, did he invent it? Or are the headwaters further back in time? Was John the Baptist led by the Holy Spiritsua sponte: a new teaching I give to you? If not, where did the concept of baptism come from? And how in the world did it seemingly suddenly become the ONLY way to be acceptable to God? The answer is it did not.
Baptism predates Christianity. In the scholarly article on Jewish baptismal practices (Christianization of Proselyte Baptism in Rabbinic Tradition, Yair Furstenberg, 11-13)a detailed account of gentile proselyte conversion (during the Babylonian exile) revealsimmersion was required for both men and women gentile converts to Judaism. But ethnic Jews were never baptized, they were only circumcised.
What can we learn from these Jewish headwaters about baptism? For one, it created two classes of Jews. Ones who were born and others by choice. And when the last OT prophet appeared, he pronounced a very clear judgment on which class would be acceptable to God going forward:
“John’s baptism was a continuation of proselyte baptism. It was as though the forerunner had gone into the synagogue, observed the two kinds of members who were present there, and had decided to gather a communion in which only the proselyte variety was acceptable, for whom baptism had been appropriated. John concentrated on the member by decision, and he served notice that any other kind of applicant was unacceptable – in terms that could not be misunderstood. Did he not speak gruffly to those who offered to belong in the sacral sense? Did he not rebuff those whose would-be qualification was tribal consanguinity? Did he not declare that they were not welcome or acceptable? John left no doubt: “And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.” (Mat 3:9) Anatomy of a Hybrid, 54.
Prior to John the Baptist, baptism was exclusively used to initiate ADULT gentiles into Judaism. Infant gentiles were never allowed baptism because converting to Judaism required an adult decision to reject your ethnic gods.
Baptism was never used on ethnic Jews prior to John the Baptist (circumcision WITHOUTadult decision making was the only way ethnic Jews entered into a covenant relationship with God). Judaism was always a homogeneous sacral society like all other societies in the world at the time; citizenship was by birth without choice.
John the Baptist was the first to baptize ethnic Jews. Never done by anyone before him.This baptism, the one that exclusively allowed gentiles into the OT kingdom was never allowed to infants, had to be accompanied by an adult decision to leave the ethnic pagan gods and to obey and worship only the Hebrew God was selected by John the Baptist as the only way to get prepared for the coming of the Messianic Kingdom and then confirmed by the Messiah as the only way to be born again and enter the New Kingdom. The old homogeneous way by circumcision was rejected.
So, now you know what baptism means in context; what it meant in the minds of John the Baptist and Jesus. Doesn’t the Bible make a lot more sense? The reason all the pharisees and large crowds went out from Jerusalem to see what John the Baptist was doing was because John the Baptist was the first person in history to baptize ethnic Jews. Prior to John the Baptist, gentiles were the only ones who ever got baptized. But now since the New Covenant in Jesus blood and a New Kingdom were right around the corner, the Holy Spirit was calling the righteous Jews to get ready to leave their Old Covenant and Kingdom to enter into a New and far better Covenant and Kingdom. Jesus then adopts baptism as the exclusive way to enter His Kingdom. Jesus does this by saying you must be “born again.” For every Kingdom that had ever existed gave birth right citizenship. But the “new birth” required to enter Jesus’ Kingdom was by baptism thatalways required an adult decision. Now, both Jews and Gentiles must be baptized and both would be required to make a difficult adult decision to leave their ancestral religions behind in order to enter the New Kingdom by being born again; a Kingdom of choice.
Consider then both the kindness and sternness of God (Rom 11:22). Kindness in that, if you, like the pagans who decided to abandon their ethnic gods, also decide to abandon your ethnic German Hybrid religion founded in homogeneity and repent of your sins and get baptized, you too can be born again and all of your sins committed from your physical birth until baptism will be forgiven. But sternness, if you refuse to abandon your German Hybrid religion and repent of your sins and get baptized, all of your sins committed from your physical birth until you die will remain on you. You will die in your sins.