We’re working our way through Leroy Garrett’s book: What Must the Church of Christ Do to Be Saved?
Now, by “saved” Garrett doesn’t mean that he questions the salvation of the individual members of the Churches of Christ. Rather, he is concerned to save the Churches of Christ as a “viable witness to the Christian faith. What must it do to escape extinction in the decades ahead …?”
The comments in this series have largely focused on the baptism question — which is inevitable given that Garrett is urging us to fellowship denominations other than the Churches of Christ. The comments follow very much along the traditional lines, and I’d urge us to think of the question in some different ways. After all, people have long-ago stopped listening to the traditional arguments — on both sides.
The next question is: Why do we impose a stricter standard for baptism than for faith in Jesus and repentance?
I’m sure we’d all agree that repentance and faith in Jesus are more central to the gospel than even baptism. At least, I’m sure we’d agree that they aren’t LESS central than baptism.
And yet we routinely accept an imperfect, incomplete faith. A convert might have very little understanding of what “Messiah” and “Christ” even mean when confessing that “Jesus is the Christ.” They might have at best an infantile understanding of “Son of God,” as well — a phrase that the scholars like to debate but that likely, on Peter’s lips, meant the “son of God” referenced in Psalm 2 — that is, the Messiah, the descendant of David who would sit on the throne of Israel. And even if a convert has the understanding of the confession of a scholar, his faith would still be weak! Which of us could cast a mountain into the sea?
And yet we accept a faith that cannot move mountains and that rarely fully understands the confession it makes.
Just so, we don’t require a perfect repentance. I mean, a truly perfect repentance would result in a sinless person! We’ve not seen one in nearly 2,000 years.
In both cases, as a matter of common sense — a and rich understanding of the scriptures — we judge such things based on the intentions of the heart as best we can. We know a convert will not be completely penitent and will have a less-than-perfect faith, but we can see a genuine desire to be obedient and submissive to God driven by conviction that Jesus really is King of the universe.
But for some reason, when it comes to baptism, we demand perfection. It’s not enough to deeply want to submit to God in every way possible. Worse yet, while we understand that a babe in Christ won’t have perfect understanding of the gospel, we demand of him an understanding of baptism that even Greek scholars dispute over!
It’s a very subtle point of Church of Christ psychology, but we unintentionally impose a higher standard for baptism than for faith or repentance because our forefathers taught that baptism is a “positive” command, a test of faith, and only effective if the test if passed.
If we would but think of baptism as a command no higher than faith in Jesus Christ, we’d realize that the standard is not punctilious adherence to everything the scriptures say on the subject — an impossible test when applied to faith and repentance — but the intent of the heart to submit to Jesus.
We should adhere to the wisdom of Thomas Campbell, who insisted in “The Declaration and Address” that we not impose standards of fellowship stricter than can be obeyed by babes in Christ –
That although doctrinal exhibitions of the great system of divine truths, and defensive testimonies in opposition to prevailing errors, be highly expedient; and the more full and explicit they be, for those purposes, the better; yet, as these must be in a great measure the effect of human reasoning, and of course must contain many inferential truths, they ought not to be made terms of christian communion: unless we suppose, what is contrary to fact, that none have a right to the communion of the church, but such as possess a very clear and decisive judgment; or are come to a very high degree of doctrinal information; whereas the church from the beginning did, and ever will, consist of little children and young men, as well as fathers.
Odd, isn’t it, that the one place where we insist that people understand koine Greek is for new converts, pre-baptism. After all, the interpretation of Acts 2:38 turns on such questions as whether eis should be translated “into,” “for,” “in order to,” or “because of” and the proper treatment of the shifting singular and plural word forms in the text. Aren’t we glad that once we’re baptized, it’s no longer necessary to show such a mastery of Greek grammar to please God?!
And just how crazy is that — that we have argue the meaning the Greek prepositions with new converts? Surely, it’s enough that a convert is willing to be baptized “to fulfill all righteousness” — that is, to do what is right?
And this brings us to infant baptism. And I’m no fan of infant baptism. But even the greatest Greek scholars and theologians in history dispute over this one. I have little sympathy for the infant baptism argument, but I have little sympathy for the notion that a child who grows up in a Christian family, who was baptized as an infant, who was taught all his life that he’s been scripturally baptized (and confirms this with countless commentaries and Greek dictionaries), who has a genuine faith in Jesus, who submits to Jesus in repentance, is damned.
The scriptures teach —
(Mark 9:23) “‘If you can’?” said Jesus. “Everything is possible for him who believes.”
(John 1:12-13) Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God–children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
(John 3:14-18) Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.”
(John 3:36) “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.”
(John 5:24) “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.”
(John 6:29) Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”
(John 6:35) Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.”
(John 6:40) “For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
(John 6:47) “I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.”
(John 7:38-39) “Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.
(John 11:25-26) Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?”
(John 12:46) “I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness.”
(John 20:31) But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
(Acts 10:43) “All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”
(Acts 13:38-39) “Therefore, my brothers, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses.”
(Acts 16:31) They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved-you and your household.”
(Rom. 1:16-17) I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”
(Rom. 3:22-24) This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
(Rom. 3:25-28) God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.
(Rom. 4:4-5) Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.
(Rom. 5:1-2) Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God.
(Rom. 10:4) Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.
(Rom. 10:9-13) That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.” For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile-the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
(1 Cor. 1:21) For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.
(Gal. 2:15-16) “We who are Jews by birth and not ‘Gentile sinners’ know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.”
(Gal. 3:2) I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?
(Gal. 3:22) But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
(Gal. 5:6) For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.
(Eph. 1:13-14) And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession-to the praise of his glory.
(Eph. 2:8-10) For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God–not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
(2 Thess. 2:13) But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.
(1 Tim. 1:16) But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.
(Heb. 10:39) But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved.
(1 John 3:23-24) And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. Those who obey his commands live in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.
(1 John 4:2-3) This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.
(1 John 5:1) Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.
(1 John 5:3-5) This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.
(1 John 5:13) I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.
The authors of the New Testament were never embarrassed to teach that faith in Jesus is sufficient to save, and yet we find that very teaching damnable. I think it’s more likely that the misunderstanding is ours.
Does that mean that we shouldn’t teach baptism by immersion of believers for remission of sins? Absolutely not. Rather, we should stop elevating baptism above faith. We are saved by faith in Jesus, not faith in baptism.
And when God is put to a choice by our broken understanding of his will to either save or damn a person who has a genuine faith and repentance and who thinks he’s been properly baptized but somehow got it wrong, God is going to honor his faith and not let a misunderstanding of the Greek preposition eis or the meaning of oikos (household) keep someone out of heaven!
One last point: One of our biggest mistakes as a fellowship has been to consider baptism a “work” in the Pauline sense. The Baptists have argued in debate against us that we make baptism a “work” and that we are saved by faith, not works (Rom 3:28; Rom 9:32; Gal 3:16).
Rather than countering that baptism is a gift from God, not a work, we’ve responded that it is indeed a work and that works are required to be saved — preferring our debating points to Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians.
The result has been to make much of the New Testament incomprehensible to many in the Churches and to push us into legalism. After all, if baptism is essential because it’s a work, then so is weekly communion, and so is my choice of a paid preacher or no paid preacher, or my view of the support or non-support of orphanages, etc. It’s been a hugely devastating turn in Church of Christ thought.
But when we see baptism as a gift of God, given either perfectly or imperfectly through the body of Christ, then the blame for flawed baptisms is rightly placed on the church, not the convert, and we begin to see why the convert can be saved despite an imperfect baptism.
It will bother many to suggest that God gives baptism via the church, but it’s obviously true. It’s a ritual designed to involve a convert and a member of the Church. Indeed, the Christians took the Jewish ceremonial washings in a mikveh, which were done solo, and turned them into a washing, by God, but at the hands of an existing Christian. “Baptize” is always grammatically passive. No one baptizes himself.
No, I’m not saying that someone on a desert island, who finds a Bible, cannot baptize himself! I am saying that baptism is a means designed by God to bring convert and congregation together. As we’ve all seen many times, the church decides whether to admit someone to baptism or not. We often ask someone to delay pending further study. We sometimes refuse baptism outright, because the “convert” obviously lacks the necessary intent and understanding.
And it’s the church’s understanding of baptismal theology that decides how the convert will be baptized. After all, few converts have read Acts 2:38 in the Greek and have on opinion on such things. Most have simply encountered Jesus and wish to submit to him as Lord and Messiah however they should.
In a “rules” based theology one is forced to judge, then condemn or approve…In a Grace based theology one is free to encourage the spiritual growth of another even though their POV is different at a certain point in time from my own with the hope that God will work in both our hearts to lead us BOTH to a more full yet obviously imperfect and perhaps incomplete understanding.
Question…what is necessarily different between an infant being baptized and a child that is 10 years of age? or 12 ? Is there a CoC approved age that defines the difference between an “approved” baptism and one that is unapproved because of age ?? Is there a different questionnaire that must be filled out by an adult versus a minor ?? Most 10 year olds that I know don’t have a complete understanding of English much less Greek… Should we require a course in systematic theology followed up with a lie detector test before we approve them as members ??
I wonder if God laughs or cries when He sees imperfect people demand such perfection of all others but themselves…
“One last point: One of our biggest mistakes as a fellowship has been to consider baptism a “work” in the Pauline sense. The Baptists have argued in debate against us that we make baptism a “work” and that we are saved by faith, not works.”
Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Jhn 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
(As Christians we might ask that same question of others)
Tts 2:7 In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine [shewing] uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity,
Tts 3:14 And let ours also learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful. (what happends to unfruitful branches?)
Hbr 4:10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God [did] from his.
( and that is when we should cease from our works, not before )
Hbr 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
(I have heard it said this is the difference in a living church, and a dead one)
Jam 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Jam 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
(I believe James to be right)
Baptism (defined specifically, as used here, water immersion of a believing adult), is a matter of obedience. Acts 10-11 tells us that it is obedience by the church rather than by the individual believer. (This can be seen once one gets over the need to quote selected verses out of context.)
Water baptism does not save and it is not a work, as defined by the usually referenced “works” passages. The best way to make a case for baptism being a work is to perform eisegesis on Matt 16:27, John 10:32, Titus 2:7, Titus 3:14, Heb 4:10, Heb. 10:24, James 2:17-18. But, when we do this, we are violating James 2:18, because eisegesis is not a good work coming from faith. I, also, believe James to be right.
God once impressed on me the human arrogance behind my thinking that something we humans do, and have control over, regulates in some way the grace of our creator, omnipotent God, who said “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,” not “I will have mercy only after you do your thing.” (And this is from someone raised to believe everything was “by the law” or else it was tube city for you.)
Water baptism is a testimony of the grace of God. It is the testimony of the believer to everyone of a “clean conscience” (1 Pet 3:21) because of God’s grace through Jesus Christ, and it a testimony of the church that the kingdom of God on earth has accepted this believer into fellowship within the body of Christ just as God has already accepted them into fellowship within the kingdom of God in heaven. “Your will be done on earth as it already has been done in heaven.”
When God gives His salvation to a believer, and when the believer is given the gift of the Holy Spirit by God’s initiative and timing (Acts 10:44-45), the church’s job is to accept what God has done by water immersing the believer (Acts 10:47-48), declaring the church’s obedience to the head, Jesus Christ, and pronouncing to the world and everybody an agreement in fellowship with the believer. If the church refuses to do this to someone whom God has saved and accepted, then the church opposes God. (Acts 11:17)
Doctrinal pride is not a good thing. I don’t think that James (James 2:18) or Paul (Titus 2:7) would classify “opposing God” as a very good “work.”
Leory Garrett is right about needing to repent.
First, people who call themselves progressive just because they have changed their minds as to which side of baptism that salvation takes place have no idea what being a progressive is.
Now, that aside; Price, AMEN! Believing we have an understanding of a certain doctrine does not put us in the judgement seat of Christ. I can accept that baptism is for the remission of sins while being totally aware that others, who in their love and faith, see their baptism, regardless of the age they were baptized, as a their answer to God.
We forget that, while our faith comes from hearing the word of God, the God of our faith makes the final judgement as to who understands. Do we know whose mind is thinking correctly during communion? Only God who sees the heart.
Back in the 1970’s while in a CoC university a teacher of the school, in his Gospel meetings, urged all baptisms to wait until services so the person could respond and be baptized in front of the assembly. What if the person had died before services? Of course, he would argue they were taught correctly. But, if salvation is no way possible until coming out of the water, how can anyone be asked to wait?
My point is this; In the matter of our faith in God, none of us can find the line in another’s heart. When we look at baptism as taught in the scriptures, we may see that it is for the remission of sins; that it proclaimes death and resurrection; that it is an answer of a good conscience toward God. But when God looks at the heart God sees it all, all the love, beginning and end.
‘It will bother many to suggest that God gives baptism via the church, but it’s obviously true. It’s a ritual designed to involve a convert and a member of the Church. Indeed, the Christians took the Jewish ceremonial washings in a mikveh, which were done solo, and turned them into a washing, by God, but at the hands of an existing Christian. “Baptize” is always grammatically passive. No one baptizes himself.’
Jay, please explain the baptism Jesus desired of John, I believe before the church was established.
Mat 3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer [it to be so] now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
(let’s look at what two other versions say.)
NLT
But Jesus said, “It should be done, for we must carry out all that God requires.*” So John agreed to baptize him.
NIV
Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.
That is what I was asking Price “do we have a different baptism, now, than that of John?
I think Jesus dealt with our baptism issue in the parable of the two brothers. The Father asks each of his two boys to go work in his fields. The first says “sure” but doesn’t go. The second says “Nope.” But later feels guilty and goes and does it anyway. Jesus credits the second with true obedience. Most “evangelicals” I am familiar with say baptism is not necessary and then proceed to immerse using the same words we use for the same stated reasons. We proclaim baptism but downplay the work of faith, grace and the Spirit – pretty much thereby denying the power of baptism. Which is truly obedient?
Laymond, You overlooked one of the most important passages on good works. It is the key of understanding the tension between faith and works.
Ephesians 2:8-10 “For by grace HAVE BEEN SAVED through faith. And this IS NOT YOUR OWN DOING; it is the gift of God, 9 NOT A RESULT OF WORKS, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship,CREATED in Christ Jesus FOR GOOD WORKS, WHICH GOD PREPARED BEFOREHAND THAT WE SHOULD WALK IN THEM.”
Grace excludes human effort in saving a person. Why? So no one can boast. Boasting is out. Salvation is past tense and by faith. Why did God give us the free gift of salvation? So we would do good works. He created us in Christ for GOOD WORKS, the good works God prepared (and decided) that we should walk in them.
“if we walk in the light…” If we love our brother….” If we etc…” in 1st John are all assurances we are indeed in Christ. If we don’t walk in the light, love, etc. we are impostors and only make believers and are lost.
At the judgment seat of Christ every believer will give an accounting of his deeds and will be rewarded if he has done well and not if he has not done as well. There are not two ways to be saved, there is one, and it excludes an accumulation of good deeds to convince God you are a good fellow. Jesus was good, you and I are not.
John’s baptism was clearly “for repentance”. Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3, Acts 13:24, and Acts 19:4 all say exactly that.
Now, is there anyone who believes Jesus needed to repent? Only a fool would think such a thing. And, did John’s baptism cause repentance? Of course it did not. Those who were baptized by John the Baptist were baptized “for repentance”, because they had repented and wanted to be identified with John and those others who had also repented.
The Luke 3:3 passages says “And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” Isn’t it certain that being baptized in water can’t repent for you? Neither can it forgive your sins.
The Acts 19 passage says in part, “telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” John was telling those he baptized to believe in Jesus. Never would he tell someone they could be sure they had repented because he had baptized them.
Isn’t there a lesson here?
Baptism was the identifying mark of the people of God. Jesus was baptized to identify himself with those believers. He needed no repentance and no forgiveness.
An unbaptized Christian is foreign to the New Testament. It is the task of Christians to teach people about the importance of baptism. It is not something a new believer will know automatically. So, we go preach Jesus, tell about his worth and work, and God’s gracious offer to whosoever will, and baptize those who believe.
Royce…that is exactly how I believe one should put baptism in proper context.. Thank you… We also know from the passage in Acts 8 regarding the Samaritans that the baptism of John was without power…It’s interesting that Peter doesn’t catch on until the conversion of Cornelius later on and then finally remembers that Jesus said they would be baptizing with the Spirit instead of with water as did John..
Question…Regarding the Eph 2 passage, particularly vs 10…Is it possible that what is conveyed by the good works being “created beforehand” isn’t some approved list of qualified good works that can be done and checked off but rather an indication that God has already decided ways in which He is going to direct us to be used by Him to help others…Perhaps even an admonition to pay attention to the leading and/or instruction of the Holy Spirit ? Or, is that reading too much into it ??
Price, Not sure about your question. But, one thing is clear, God designed and destined Christians to do good works. It is as natural as breathing in and out.
It is God who is at work in us, both to will and to do His good pleasure. I think the Bible says that some where..
Royce
I’m kind of wondering why we don’t just cut baptism out of the Bible since it evidently isn’t necessary for anything.
Laymond,
The Greek for why Jesus submitted to John’s baptism is “to fulfill all righteousness,” as stated in nearly all translations. “Fulfill” means to fill up or complete. “Righteousness” carries a variety of meanings, including fulfillment of God’s covenant promises (as in Romans) or merely to be good. You have to study the context to get the exact meaning intended.
If you review the use of the word in Matthew, you find the sense is something like “pleasing to God” — but not “perfect.”
Matt. 3:15
Matt. 5:6,10,20
Matt. 6:1,33
Matt. 9:13
Matt. 10:41
Matt. 13:17,43,49
Matt. 21:32
Matt. 23:28f,35
Matt. 25:37,46
Matt. 27:19
Thus, to fulfill all righteousness means to fill up what must be done to please God. In context, it means Jesus was baptized because God wanted him to be baptized. Now, there are, I’m sure, many other reasons for Jesus’ baptism. I can think of quite a few. But the reason Jesus gives in this verse is because God wanted him to be baptized.
Laymond,
You also asked about the baptism of John vs. Christian baptism. Clearly, John’s baptism is a “type” of Christian baptism. That’s surely part of why God wanted Jesus to submit. It was of God and would be incorporated into the teaching of the church by the Spirit.
After John instituted baptism, Jesus took up the practice, baptizing many via his disciples. But Jesus also forgave the sins of many without baptism. During his ministry, baptism was a means of forgiveness of sins, but not the only way forgiveness was received! Jesus often granted forgiveness without water. Faith was always a prerequisite to forgiveness, but water was not.
Of course, the distinction between John’s baptism and Christian baptism focused on by the Gospels and Acts is the Holy Spirit. John’s baptism provided forgiveness but not the Spirit. It was baptism in water but not in Spirit.
John said,
Notice the clear emphasis: one is with water; the other is with the Spirit.
Dr. T… or Jay…why do you think that James was so intent on a public demonstration of faith ?? Was it for confirmation to the “church” that a person was sincere ?? Obviously, God doesn’t need anything to know…
Well Jay , you started out pretty good then veered of the track a little. Baptism is to please God, why do we want to please God (in anything) to be in God’s favor/grace. remember what God said at Jesus’ baptism ” I am well pleased” My son deserves my favored status, my grace, because he insisted on pleasing me.Why else would God say what he did?
Royce is right in what he said about man being made to do good works, but man does not always do good works, but when he does God is pleased as well. and when God is pleased we are in his grace/favor.
Theo said. “God once impressed on me the human arrogance behind my thinking that something we humans do, and have control over, regulates in some way the grace of our creator, omnipotent God, who said “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,” not “I will have mercy only after you do your thing.” (And this is from someone raised to believe everything was “by the law” or else it was tube city for you.)”
Mercy and grace are far from being the same thing. one is deserved, the other is not, you decide which.
Jay, I have a confession to make, I believe I am more of an open theist, than I thought. I believe man does influence God.
I don’t agree totally with Patrick. but more than I thought.
Laymond, you’ll have to explain that one. God is the source of both grace and mercy. My decision is that both are from out of the love of God and neither is deserved or merited by any action on my part. Grace and mercy are not the same, but I don’t see they are “far from being the same” Mercy could be viewed as under grace. If I deserved mercy or grace by my actions, works, or self-righteousness, then what I received wouldn’t be mercy or grace. Mercy is not making me pay for my sin and grace is putting Jesus in my place to pay for me.
Laymond, why would Jesus need or deserve the Father’s grace when grace came through Jesus. And that was related to obedience to the cross. (Phil 2)
But this discussion misses the point, anyway. Whether it is God’s mercy or God’s grace, they are provided out of God’s love which He choses to bestow, even though we don’t deserve it. God’s decision of redemption has been made before the universe was formed. I see no indication that an intervention of human implemented water baptism into the sequence as the gate-keeper of God’s salvation was part of that plan.
But, in answer to Anne’s statement, we do not eliminate water baptism because God said to do it, if we take the conversion of Cornelius as a “binding example.” Which I think we should. For the church to not baptize in water those whom God has saved would be to “oppose God.” Peter doesn’t say what the consequences of opposing God would be, but the Jews in Jerusalem seemed to immediately recognize that wouldn’t be a good thing.
Laymond, this is consistent with the reason given for Jesus being baptized. He did it bodily because God wanted Him to, even though He was one with God before He was baptized. God gave His approval of Jesus’ obedience. The church, the body of Christ, baptizes in water, even though the believer has already been accepted by God, because God wants us to and commanded the church to do it. And I think that in some way God will give His approval of the church’s obedience. Since a dove descended on Jesus, perhaps the Holy Spirit will descend and indwell the church in a mightier way because the church is obedient and submissive. Would that the church could hear, “This is my beloved church, the body of Christ, with whom I am well pleased.”
But, first, I suggest there are some elements of doctrinal arrogance to repent of. I agree with Leroy.
Price, the book of James was addressing a particular situation with the faith and works situation, and making those passages on “works” apply to baptism is a sizable stretch at best. But I think immersion is done publicly because it is a testimony of acceptance into fellowship.
Theo said; Mercy is not making me pay for my sin and grace is putting Jesus in my place to pay for me.
Theo. you have mercy right, but how did you come up with your meaning of grace. I do believe God’s existed before the death of Jesus. ask Noah, and Abraham, they are good examples. Oh by the way notice what brought them into God’s grace. (favor)
Theo said; “Laymond, why would Jesus need or deserve the Father’s grace when grace came through Jesus. And that was related to obedience to the cross.”
Oh I don’t know, maybe because he loved God and wanted to please him in all he did. (like we are supposed to)
Theo, I intended to continue on the previous, with. Why did Jesus say “thy will, not mine” because he wanted to please his God even unto death, yes Jesus had the same God as you do. And he loved his God as we should, and he wanted to please his God as we should. How did he show his love for his God, by completing the “WORK” given him. And that is how you and I will please the same God, by our works, and that is how we will be judged, by our works. If we were given salvation as a gift, why will we be judged? On what will we be judged.?
” Since a dove descended on Jesus, perhaps the Holy Spirit will descend and indwell the church in a mightier way because the church is obedient and submissive. Would that the church could hear, “This is my beloved church, the body of Christ, with whom I am well pleased.”
You mean the works of the church might garner, the favor of God? and by the way a dove did not land on Jesus, the holy ghost came to rest upon him, and remained until released by Jesus death.
Dr. T….Agreed…
Laymond…IMHO, we are judged to see what sort of REWARD we might be eligible for in Heaven… I don’t believe that our “judgement” is going to determine our salvation but rather our reward…It might even be a long drawn out learning session with explanation of what exactly we should have done…who knows… But, waiting until the judgement to decide if one is saved is the theology of Islam…not Christianity…. Perhaps Jay will one day open up the discussion to what the Judgement might actually be…if he hasn’t already done so.
Price read Mat 25:31 Thru Mat 25:46 and tell me that again.
Where do people get this stuff?
Laymond,
Here’s a few places where “this stuff” might come from: 1st Cortinthians 3:11-15, Revelations 22:12, Luke 6:35, Hebrews 11:6.
The Corinthians verses speak of a a man’s work being burnt but of him escaping or being saved. There are works and then there are works… those works that are performed strictly out of duty or without love for those we might be working with are, IMHO, probably going to count for naught at judgement. Those works that are performed in the same manner as Jesus’s work was performed, that is out of love, will last and the worker will be rewarded.
And in the end, we will all place our rewards in front of Jesus as an offering because we’ll finally know that all of our works are really His doing.
Doug
Doug, and where is it said that he gives reward by degree.
None of the scripture you quoted said that. I will be waiting.
“And in the end, we will all place our rewards in front of Jesus as an offering because we’ll finally know that all of our works are really His doing.”
Doug, Can you point me to the scripture where this is said. I will appreciate it, thanks.
Laymond…it’s all over the scripture… particularly Mt. 16:27 If a man is rewarded by God ACCORDING to his deeds, then it’s only reasonable to assume that each person would have different deeds and different rewards…
I don’t think that is the way it was meant Price, I believe there are only two categories of work . The work of God, or the work of Satan. And they surely will garner two different “rewards” .
Once again I refer you to Matt. 25:31 to 25:46.
Laymond….it says what it says…to believers…there will be more reward for some people than others… it’s consistent with scripture and even with many of the parables that Jesus taught… the parable of the talents comes to mind… Or, I guess Jesus could have been mistaken…
I agree that the Matt 25 passage sure condemns the idea that works is going to do anything for you… Obviously, if Jesus doesn’t know you…If you haven’t entered into a relationship with Him…what you do won’t matter at all… even if somehow you could do miracles in His name..
Frankly Price, I can’t see where the lord rewarded the servant who gained him 5 talents over the one who gained him two.
Except maybe more work. When actually they both had the same gain, they doubled what was given.
Can you give me one of the many other parables that say we are rewarded in accordance to what we do. I never really understood the talents one.
Laymond…the first parable of the usage of talents in Matt 25 is interesting to me in that the talent of the man who was fearful and did nothing was given to whom ?? The man who had doubled his talents to 10 rather than the one who had doubled his talents to five…. But, even more interesting is the parable of the talents in Luke 19…They were each given the SAME amount…The one who earned 10X with the money was to be given charge over 10 cities…The one who had only earned 5X was to be given authority over 5 cities…and yet again, the money from the slackard was given to the man who had done the most which appears to have surprised the crowd if I read verse 25 correctly…. Then in vs. 26 it says to everyone who has, more will be given…it doesn’t say that they will be given the same.
So, in each case the one who had accomplished more, even if given more to begin with, was rewarded more… which is consistent with the passage I quoted earlier about a man being given rewards according to his deeds… Perhaps its just coincidence…
It’s not matter of like or dislike but of facts.
Baptism is the response to the gospel – in ALL instances of the NT
People who heard and believed were baptized by immersion for the forgiveness of THEIR sins.
Infant baptism is generally explained as a sign of God’s Grace – nowhere in the NT baptism is defined that way!
Infant baptism is without heraing, beleiving and repenting.
Infant baptism has no connection to personal sins but is – in the more traditional doctrines – for the remission of Adam’s sin (a position going back at least to Cyprian; but Tetrullian about 50 years earlier strongly opposed this)
Infant baptism is – at least in the Western churches – by sprinkling – not even outwardly in any way similar to NT baptisms.
Infant Baptism and NT baptism have NOTHING in common.
Come on, Jay! You don’t need to be a fan of Infant baptsim. Infant baptism is an error, it is no baptism at all. And we should feel sympathy for the millions of misled Christians who trust their denominational traditions and Greek scholars (remember Jas 3:1). I would not say theyx are automaticall ydamned, but also not that they are saved anway. But I do say: Without the one baptism they are outside of our fellowship – which is just one of the bitter consequences and results of schisms and false teachings.
It does not help to change the standards, Jay.
Alexander
Laymond,
Rev. 4:10 talks about the elders casting thier crowns before the Lord. You can hang onto yours if you want to but I’m going to follow the elders lead.
How about Rev. 22:12 for being rewarded by degree? “…my reward is with me, to give every man according to his work..” Sounds like the more the work, the more the reward to me.
Alexander….. how young is too young ??
Alexander…how young is too young ??
Doug,& Price I guess it is like Jay said “God ain’t fair” so I guess I had better go and gather more good deeds, so I can buy me a better position in the heavenly realm. I wonder if we will have to bid on them. can we keep a few back, or will we have to turn them all in with our crown. And here I am thinking only kings wore crowns.
You know what I wonder about, Just how the top two servants doubled their money, and how that plays into the best servant being the most humble servant.
Regarding degrees of reward in heaven, see my earlier posts at —
What Are Treasures in Heaven?
Faith Lessons by Ray Vander Laan: Run! The Passion of Elijah
I explain my view somewhat differently in the two posts, but I think they present an interpretation that just might be agreeable to Laymond, Doug, and Price. I’d be curious to know.
Price,
I wouldn’t interpret James as insisting on a public demonstration of faith. Rather, he was stating the simple point that a real, saving faith necessarily produces good works (absent some sort of disability). Therefore, the absence of works necessarily implies an absence of faith.
In logical terms ( p(faith) -> q (works)) (~q -> ~p)
If you never studied symbolic logic, don’t worry. What I just wrote is known as the law of the “contrapositive” among logicians.
Just so, if salvation necessarily brings the Holy Spirit, then the absence of the Holy Spirit means the absence of salvation.
This must be carefully distinguished from the “converse” — if faith produces works, then the absence of faith means the absence of works. That is a logical fallacy, and observation proves why. Many people without saving faith do good things.
Now, symbolic logic will get you but so far. The absence of good works may simply mean that we don’t see everything someone does. Or that the person may very weak faith, which needs to be strengthened and encouraged. But the absence of good works is always a sign of a very serious problem — and can mean that someone’s faith is dead.
Laymond,
I don’t much care for the Open Theism argument as usually argued, although I’m closer to Patrick Mead than to his opponents in my thinking. You see, the argument is couched in Aristotelian terms — that God must either be a “necessary” or “contingent” being. The philosophers argue that if people have influence on God, then he is contingent, since his condition varies with outside influences. Therefore, he is not necessary. And therefore he cannot be uncreated and truly sovereign. http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/openseason.html http://nd.academia.edu/AlanRhoda/Papers/218749/The_Philosophical_Case_for_Open_Theism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument#Argument_from_contingency
This line of thinking — taken from Aristotle originally — was coopted by Aquinas as a form of “proof” of God’s existence (not a very good one, in my opinion, but many disagree) and then by Calvin as part of the idea that Christianity is all about God’s sovereignty who is unaffected by people and is the cause of all. A non-contingent God (a God who is unaffected by human will) fits well with Aristotle’s and Aquinas’ and Calvin’s worldviews, but it doesn’t fit the scriptures, as Patrick Mead has demonstrated.
Yes, God is sovereign, but God is a person, not a force of nature, and so has a will and emotions. And in his sovereignty, he chooses to love. And you can’t choose to love and not be affected by decisions made by those you love. It’s kind of, you know, the definition of love.
Jay…. perhaps a person does things privately rather than standing on the street corner advertising his/her actions, expecting that God who is in secret will see what is done privately and anonymously…. I think it is a very precarious position to judge someone’s heart by what they “see” in another when all things might not be known. There is something said about not letting the left hand know what the right hand is doing… I know many men who have done great things for others and yet refused to be acknowledged or recognized for doing it… I’m sure you do as well…. If I’m not mistaken the scriptures take a pretty high regard for those that don’t advertize their good deeds to others… I could see where one might judge another who openly refuses to assist in any way but what is done in secret seems to get God’s attention…
Laymond,
Allow me to answer for Doug —
I’m not denying free will, just noting that God influences us.
Price,
I entirely agree. James’ warning should be taken very seriously, but we sometimes err by demanding certain specified works. Where I grew up, the rule was —
(Jam 4:17 KJV) 17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
Interpreted to mean that if you don’t go to the gospel meeting or Tuesday visitation, you’ll go straight to hell. At Lipscomb (in 1972) we had students who’d been raised on this brand of legalism. In 1972 Nashville, there was a meeting somewhere every night! And a few students went to them all to avoid damnation — and were at risk of flunking out. The administration had to issue an announcement explaining that it wasn’t really necessary to go to every gospel meeting in town to be saved! But such is the legalism of some.
Giving mental assent to a set of facts is not faith. It is believing, but not faith. I believe George Washington was the first President of the United States. I really, really believe that in my heart. But, I don’t rely on it, I don’t stake my future on that fact, I am not depending on George Washington to get me to heaven.
Many in our movement see no difference in believing a fact and biblical faith. Unless there is mental assent, and trust, it is not faith. We ask, “Do you believe Jesus is the Son of God?”, or something like that. A person may answer in the affirmative and not have a clue about the details.
Unless our faith (which always results in good works, obedience..) is in Jesus Christ alone we are in big time trouble. We must depend only upon Him for salvation.
Royce,
And that is what is hurting the conservative churches the most.
Way too much emphasis on the Bible, law, and even more, The Church, and very little if any on Jesus, Grace, Holy Spirit,
I believe the reason is that love of Jesus is taught by others so that is why its not taught in the COC.
We had rather miss out and not teach it, and not feel it as a consequence, than be like the denominations.
Jay,
Just want to say a quick thank you. I have many denominational friends and have, at times, been very unforgiving on the topic of baptism. This discourse has been very helpful in my understanding.
Acts 2:38 teaches plainly that baptism is absolutely essential in order to have the hope of eternal life. The Jews heard Peter’s rebuke, received his message and ask the apostles, “What must we do [to be saved]?” Peter then tells them what to do: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS…” Baptism [Greek baptizo–“to submerge, immerse”] is the very thing that washes away our sins. THEREFORE, if one has not been baptized for the purpose God has set forth, that person is still living in their sins. It is truly that simple.
The Word of God is not to be abused or manipulated. We are not to pick and choose whatever doctrines or passages we desire and shape God’s Word to fit OUR system of beliefs. One is either a Christian or a non-Christian. One can become a child of God (i.e. Christian) only when submitting to the Divinely prescribed method of becoming such.
1) Hearing the Word
2) Believing (“receiving” the Word–Acts 2:41)
3) Repenting of our past sins
4) Confessing Jesus as the Son of God
5) Being Baptized (for the remission of sins–Acts 2:38)
At this point, that person is “added” (Acts 2:47) to the body (the church). One does not JOIN a “church” through baptism AFTER having been “saved.” Baptism is the cleansing agent in the process of spiritual transformation/conversion (Acts 2:38).
Furthermore, one remains an heir to that salvation only as one remains faithful to the Word of God, rather than submitting to the poisonous doctrines and creeds of men, because it IS possible to “fall from grace” (1 Tim. 4:1 et al.).
I fear reevaluation is needed regarding the originator’s target of consideration. The concern should be directed toward denominationalsm, rather than the Lord’s church. Denominationalism is apostasy. Apostasy is sin. It results from a love of the traditions of men more than the commandments of God (Mk. 7:8), rendering their worship/”Christianity” vain (Mk. 7:7).
The church is not an organization. The word “church” (Greek “ekklesia”) simply means “a gathering” or “a company” of people. It was employed by the NT writers to refer to the church, the body (singular) of Christ. Therefore, Christ’s church, [i.e. the body of Christ (Rom. 12:5) or the church of Christ (Rom. 16:16) or the church of God (1 Cor. 15:9)], is made up of every single soul on earth who has submitted to the Divine system of salvation (mentioned above). The Lord Himself adds one to His church upon, and only upon, completion of that portion of His Will (Acts 2:47).
The church of Christ is identifiable as the church that was established in the first century because they submit to no creeds or doctrines other than the New Testament of Jesus Christ, and they worship according to the Divine pattern set forth by Almighty God and practiced by the New Testament church. These things we do because of our LOVE for Jesus Christ and the perfection of His Will. Teaching LOVE does not prove anything about our love of the Lord. However, professing doctrines and theologies that are contrary to Christ’s teachings (i.e. baptism does not remove us from our sin, the church of Christ should unite with denominationalism, etc.) says MUCH about our Love for Him.
In the end, only those who submit themselves to God’s Will [no additions, no omissions (Rev. 22:18-19; cf. Deut. 4:2)] will enjoy the blessing of living with God in eternity. That body or “church” of people is called, simply, “of Christ.”
Doug is right about degrees of reward and punishment in eternity.
Reward – The Parable of the Pounds (Luke 19:12-27)
Punishment – Matthew 10:15; 11:22; Luke 12:47-48
Most passages, though, that refer to being judged “according to our works” are concerning whether our deeds are good or evil, rather than HOW good or HOW evil.
John’s baptism was to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (i.e. in anticipation of the coming Messiah and the establishment of His kingdom (the church) though it was not yet established).
Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and, as a result, assuming one has heard, believed, repented, and confessed Jesus prior to that baptism, the Lord adds him to His body (the church “of Christ”) (Acts 2:41).
One final thing:
Baptism is a work. Anything we DO is, by definition, a work. However, that is not to say that “works,” in general, grant us salvation.
Obedience to the gospel is the only way one can inherit eternal life. Obedience is a work. One cannot obey (action verb) without DOing something (work). We are justified by faith, but included in faith, is works. Faith without works is dead (James 2:26).
Having said that, nothing we do can make us DESERVE salvation. But without works, we have no hope of salvation because the things we are commanded to do in order to initially be added to the body of Christ are, in themselves, works. However, without the grace of God and the sacrifice of Christ, salvation would be an impossibility, but works are certainly a necessity for those who wish to live in eternity. Were it not for the manipulation and distortion of the meaning of the word “faith,” the question of works as necessary would not exist.
Jesus Himself said works are essential to salvation: “Work not for the food which perisheth, but [work] for the food which abideth unto eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give unto you” (Jn. 6:27).
1 John 8: “Look to yourselves, that ye lose not the things which we have wrought [“worked for”], but that ye receive a full reward.”
Galatians 5:6: our faith is to be a working faith.
Philippians 2:12: “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.”
2 Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; Col. 1:10: “abounding in good works”
1 John 3:10: “whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God”
Notice that John did not say “whosoever doeth UNrighteousness” but “whosoever doeth NOT RIGHTEOUSNESS” (in other words, Christianity is not just about refraining from doing evil, but WORKING to do GOOD!)
The bottom line is: works are necessary for salvation. If it were not so, we would not have been commanded SO many times to do so. The doctrine of “faith alone” will send many sincere souls into eternal damnation. Faith and works stand or fall together.
The explicit clarity of James 2:26 (“faith apart from works is DEAD”) is testimony to the fact that doctrines such as “faith alone” were created due to a greater love for the pleasure of man than obedience to God.