Baptism does not necessarily imply "WATER" baptism.
As stated earlier, the word "baptism" does not always refer to "water" baptism, or even to the "Holy Ghost baptism" that the apostles experienced in Acts chapter 2 (when they spoke with other tongues). If we fail to understand this, we may read "water" into passages in which water baptism is not even implied. For example, some time after His baptism by John in the Jordan river, the Lord Jesus mentioned a still future baptism that He was to endure, in Luke12:50 -
But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!
Water clearly played no part in this upcoming baptism of the Lord, since He had already been baptized with water in the Jordan river (Luke 3:21). Instead, He was referring here to His impending baptism into death upon the cross. Today, Christians are likewise baptized into Christ's death when they believe (Ro.6:3-5), with water being unnecessary for this to occur.
Far too many people, however, read "water" into many baptismal passages that actually have no connection with water. As a result, the doctrine ofwater baptism has actually created numerous divisions among Christians today. Different denominations, in fact, even require different methods of water baptism, for many different reasons. Some churches insist that only believers who are baptized by their particular denomination can be saved, while others contend that water baptism in any church is necessary. Still others maintain that water baptism is only required for membership in their specific denomination, but is not necessary for salvation. Even this last opinion, though, motivates these churches to deny membership to Christians who are admittedly saved. In turn, such attitudes imply that noChristian is "good enough" to join these churches, without first submitting to water baptism by one oftheir ordained ministers.
In addition, as mentioned earlier, there are also those who teach that water baptism is the "seal", or the "token", of the new covenant, replacing circumcision as the "token" of the old covenant. Such a teaching, though, is not even a scriptural teaching, in the first place. There is absolutely no scriptural basis for such a claim. Although circumcision was indeed "a token of the covenant" between Abraham and God (Gen.17:11), baptism was never a "token" or a "seal" of anything.
Moreover, there is even much disagreement over which method of water baptism should be used today, as well. Should the church merely sprinkle with water, or totally immerse; should it baptize only once "In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost", or baptize three separate times? Some, indeed, even teach that none of these questions really matter at all, as long as the believer is baptized in water "as a public profession of faith" (which is yet another unscriptural claim). As a result, confusion and controversy reign supreme today over the doctrine of water baptism.
By contrast, Paul instructs us to be unifiedconcerning baptism, as in Ephesians 4:3-6 -
3: Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
4: There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
5: One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6: One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
While few Christians disagree concerning the "one body" or the "one Spirit" of verse 4, there is much disagreement over which type of baptism is referred to in verse 5. Some dispensationalists believe that the "one baptism" mentioned here iswater baptism by an ordained minister, while others (this writer included) assert that this is a reference to the Holy Spirit baptizing all believers into the body of Christ (1Cor.12:13; see below). This is because there is one baptism for today, according to Eph.4:5, and not two baptisms (water baptism and Spirit baptism).
If we truly wish to strive for unity, then, as Paul instructs us to do in this passage, we must first identify exactly which baptism he is referring to in Eph.4:5. If water baptism is truly the one baptism for today, then we should indeed promote water baptism among all churches and denominations today. Yet in view of the many divisions it has caused, it should be obvious to even the most tradition-minded Christian that the issue of water baptism has actually separated far more Christians than it has unified. It would therefore be highly unlikely that the "one baptism" of Eph.4:5 could be water baptism, for the simple reason that Christians today cannot even decide among themselves as to the purpose or method of water baptism.
There is, however, another passage almost identical to Eph.4:3-6, in which Paul again addresses the doctrine of baptism along with the unity of the body of Christ. Today, we are all baptized by the Spirit if God into the body of Christ, as Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 12:12-14 -
12: For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13: For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14: For the body is not one member, but many.
Notice especially Paul's statement in verse 13 that the Spirit baptizes all believers into one body (the body of Christ). This baptism occurs the instant we are saved, and does not depend upon water in any form or fashion. The moment we believe, the Spirit of God then baptizes us into the body of Christ. By comparing the above passage with Eph.4:5, we can readily see that the context is exactly the same: The unity of the body of Christ is the key issue in both passages. We should therefore expect the context to remain the same concerning the issue of baptism, as well.
Comparing both of the above passages side-by-side, then, it should become evident that the baptism by the Holy Spirit (1Cor.12:13) is exactly the same as the one baptism of Eph.4:5 -
1 Cor. 12: 12 - 14Eph 4: 3 - 612: For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13: For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14: For the body is not one member, but many.3: Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
4: There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
5: One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6: One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Since Paul states in 1 Cor.12:13 that the Spirit of God baptizes us all into one body, and he states in Eph.4:5 that there is onebaptism, then the "one baptism" of Eph.4:5 must be the same baptism by the Spirit that he mentions in 1Cor.12:13. Neither passage, then, can be a reference to waterbaptism, unless there really is more than one baptism in effect for today. Indeed, ifthe baptism of 1Cor.12:13 (by one Spirit into one body) was a reference to water baptism, then in view of Eph.4:5, there would be no margin for the Holy Spirit to baptize us into the body of Christ.
So the baptism by the Spirit into the body of Christ (1Cor.12:13) must be the same as theone baptism of Eph.4:5, and neither baptism requires water. Otherwise, there would indeed be more than one baptism. Of course, some believers try to read water into the one baptism of Eph.4:5 anyway, by interpreting the passage to mean that there is only one "physical" baptism, which (they claim) is water baptism. The problem with such an interpretation, though, is the simple fact that there is nothing else physical in this passage. Consequently, why should baptism be the one physical exception? Paul writes that there is one body (aspiritual body, which is the body of Christ), one Spirit (obviously not physical), one hope(not physical; see Ro.8:24-25), one Lord(Who is no longer physical; see 1Cor.15:42-50), one faith (faith is not physical), and oneGod (God is a Spirit; John 4:24). Accordingly, why would Paul "really mean" there is only one "physical" baptism in Eph.4:3-6, when everything else in the passage is non-physical?
In view of Eph.4:5, then, since the practice of water baptism only adds another baptism to the one baptism by the Spirit into one body, there is little wonder why so many Christians today disagree over the "true purpose" of water baptism. As stated earlier, even though the Lord required believers in Israel to be baptized in water at one time (Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38), that baptism was in preparation for their future inheritance as a kingdom of priests (as we shall later see in detail). So unless a passage contains an obvious reference to water (such as a commandment to be baptized), we should never be too quick to read "water" into any passage concerning baptism. Otherwise, as the previous example illustrates, we will end up reading "water" into passages in which waterbaptism is not even implied. This is especially true concerning passages that pertain to our baptism into Christ, such asGalatians 3:26-28 -
26: For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27: For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
The above passage cannot be a reference to "water" baptism, unless water baptism places us "into Christ". Instead, since we are all one in Christ Jesus (verse 28), Paul is again associating this baptism with unity, just as he did in 1Cor.12:13 and Eph.4:5.
In fact, if Gal.3:27 above was a reference towater baptism, this would actually make water baptism a requirement for salvation, for one simple reason: According to verse 28, since we are all "in Christ Jesus", we first had to be baptized into Christ. However, if water baptism actually placed us "into Christ", then we could not be "in Christ" unless we were first baptized in water.
Thus, if Gal.2:26-28 is a reference to "water" baptism, the problem becomes obvious: If we must be baptized with water in order to be "in Christ" (and therefore to be saved), which church actually has the God-given authority to perform this baptism? Do we need to be baptized by the Methodists, or by the Baptists, or by the Church of Christ, or by the Mormons, or by the Jehovah's Witnesses? Suddenly, even our church affiliation is no longer a simple matter of personal belief. Instead, if we have been baptized by the wrong denomination, or if our church has mistakenly prescribed the wrong method of water baptism, we can no longer be assured of the fact that we can be saved at all. As a result, Gal.3:26-28, Eph.4:5, and 1Cor.12:13 must all refer to theone baptism by the Spirit into the body of Christ, and cannot refer to water baptism.
In addition, Paul's epistles contain even more passages which show that our baptism into Christ occurs without water, such as Romans 6:3-6 -
3: Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4: Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5: For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Once again, water should never be associated with this baptism. Instead, our baptism into Christ (verse 3) agrees with Gal.3:27 (we who have been baptized intoChrist have put on Christ), as well as with 1Cor.12:13 (by one Spirit are we all baptizedinto one body). Again, if the above passage was actually a reference to water baptism, then we could not "walk in newness of life" (verse 4) without first being "buried with him by [water] baptism into death".
Since we are therefore "buried" with Christ by baptism (Ro.6:4 above), we are likewiserisen with Him in this same baptism, as Paul also explains in Colossians 2:10-13 -
10: And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
11: In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
12: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
13: And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Again, according to verse 12 above, we are "buried with" Christ in baptism, just as Paul also states in Ro.6:4 ("we are buried with him by baptism into death"). Since we are also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands (verse 11, above), then our burial with Christ "in baptism" (verse 12) also occurs without water, as well. (after all, if we can be circumcised without hands, then why can't we likewise be baptized without water into the body of Christ?) The above passage, then, which concerns our burial with Christ "in baptism", parallels our burial with Christ "by baptism into death" of Ro.6:4, and neither baptism should be associated with water.
In addition, Paul's above statement that ourcircumcision is made without hands indicates that our flesh has now been cut away. This "circumcision" is evident from other passages, as well. For instance, Paul states that we "were" (past tense) "in the flesh", in Ro.7:5 -
For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
According to this passage, since Paul states that we were "in the flesh", then we must no longer be "in the flesh". This means that our "circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ" (Col.2:11) is the result of the fact that we are no longer "in the flesh", as in the above passage. So, our burial with Christ in baptism (Ro.6:4; Col.2:12) could not occurwithout this "circumcision made without hands", even though it does occur without the presence of water
Finally, concerning our circumcision of Col.2:11 that is "made without hands", Paul again states that we are "not in the flesh" inRo.8:9 -
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Accordingly, since Paul states here in the book of Romans that we are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, and we are also baptized by Spirit into the body of Christ (1Cor.12:13), then our baptism "into Jesus Christ" (Ro.6:3) must occur in conjunction with the circumcision that is made without hands (Col.2:11). And again, since we are circumcised without hands, we can certainly be baptized into the body of Christ without getting wet, as well.
To conclude this section, then, since we arecomplete in Christ (Col.2:10), there is nothing that can make us any more complete in Christ (not even water baptism). Yet if we had to submit to water baptism in order to be complete in Christ, then water baptism would be necessary for salvation, as well. Otherwise, we could never be "complete" in Christ without first being baptized in water. And again, if this was the case, the question would arise as to which church has the God-given authority to baptize. So because there is one baptism (Eph.4:5), water baptism should never be associated with the above passages. Just as the Lord Jesus Christ was Himself baptized into death upon the cross (Luke 12:50), we are likewise baptized by the Spirit into Christ's death (Ro.6:3; Col.2:12), and therefore into the body of Christ (1Cor.12:13). Since our circumcision and our baptism are accomplished without hands or water, we can understand why water plays no role in any of these baptismal passages. However, if we attempt to read water into the above passages, we are then adding another baptism to the one baptism of Eph.4:5.
(Not my work... this is the writing of an anonymous author; I do, however, fully agree with the content.)
No comments:
Post a Comment