<< Back |
Chosen no: R-1034 , from: 1888 Year. |
Change lang 
| |
BAPTISM AND ITS IMPORT
That our Lord and his apostles practised
and enjoined upon all followers--"even
to the end of the world," or present dispensation,
an outward rite called baptism, in which water was used in some manner,
cannot reasonably be questioned. This
was not only the case during our Lord's
ministry in the end of the Jewish age,
but also under the Spirit dispensation after
Pentecost, as is abundantly proved by the
Scriptural record.*
*See, Acts 2:41; 8:12,36,38; 9:18; 10:47,48;
16:15,33; 18:8; 19:3-5; 22:16.
Nor will it answer to assume, as some
do, that baptism belonged among the ceremonies
of the Jewish Law, and that with
all other features of that Law it ended at
the cross--where our Lord "made an end
of the Law nailing it to his cross;" for,
baptism was not a part of the Jewish Law.
The washings enjoined in the Law, performed
at the laver in the court of the
tabernacle, were neither immersions, nor
sprinklings, but simply cleansings, and
were not practised upon the people. The
one tribe of Levi alone had access to
that washing.
Nor will it do to say, as some do, that
the apostles coming out of Judaism erred
for a while. They failed to discern at
first (say these teachers) that the real
baptism was that of the holy Spirit at
Pentecost, and so improperly kept up the
water baptism after the Jewish age to
which it belonged. In this as in the matter
of not eating with the uncircumcised,
they claim Peter erred, and others of the
apostles with him to some extent. They
claim too, that Paul confesses to an error
when in 1 Cor. 1:14-16he says, "I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus
and Gaius...and the household
of Stephanas:" also, when he says (Col. 2:20,21),
"Why, as though living in the
world, are ye subject to ordinances--touch
not, taste not, handle not."
Thus an apparently strong argument is
built up, which is quite beyond the ability
of many to see through--including those
who make such arguments. This is the
result of a too superficial examination of
the subject, and a jumping at conclusions
from certain texts whose connections have
not been thoroughly studied or understood.
As already shown "baptism" was not
a feature of the Law Covenant: hence it
was not at all a part of that which our
Lord ended and cancelled at the cross.
It is a great mistake to class baptism, which is a symbol of the New Covenant,
with the "ordinances" of the Jewish Law
Covenant mentioned by the Apostle, Col. 2:20,23.
In verse 14, he shows that he
refers to ordinances that were against, i.e., unfavorable, disadvantageous to the Jew.
Can any one say this of baptism? In what
sense is it against any one?
What Paul does refer to as the Law
"ordinances" contrary to or against the
Jew, were those ceremonies, and fastings,
those celebrations of new moons and sabbaths
(verse 16), and particularities about
the eating of clean and unclean animals,
and wearing of clothing made of linen
and wool mixed, etc., etc. These "ordinances"
had their origin in the Law
Covenant instituted by Moses, and had
been added to by the Scribes and Pharisees
who sat "in Moses' seat" (Matt. 23:2),
until they had become a mass of forms
and ceremonies so complex and bewildering
that those who attempted a strict observance
of them found them extremely
burdensome,--a yoke of bondage. Our
Lord referred to the same bondage and
weariness (Matt. 23:4); and again (Matt. 11:28)
to the same class he held out grace instead of the Law, as the only way of
life, saying, "Come unto me all ye that
are weary and heavy laden [with the Law's
unprofitable and multitudinous ordinances
--which, because of your weak, fallen
condition cannot profit but only annoy
and weary you, and are therefore
"against" you], and I will give you rest.
Take my yoke upon you and learn of me;
for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye
shall find rest unto your souls. For my
yoke is easy, and my burden is light."
It is furthermore evident, that baptism is not one of the ordinances referred to
in verse 14, when we read to the contrary
in verse 12, that we who are buried with Christ in baptism, ARE THEREFORE (even
if Jews formerly under the Law Covenant)
not liable or subject to the ordinances of
verse 14. Thus baptism is placed in contrast
with the ceremonies of the Law.
The idea that baptism does not belong
to the Gospel age and ended at the cross
is again proved erroneous, when we remember
that it was after his crucifixion,
during the forty days before his ascension
that our Lord while giving special instruction
concerning the new dispensation, or
Gospel age, specially mentioned baptism as the outward symbol by which believers
were to confess him--"even to the consummation
of the age" then just begun.--
See Matt. 28:18-20.
And those who claim that proper baptism
is that of the holy Spirit only, and
that water baptism is therefore wrong, should be effectually silenced and converted
from their error by the Master's
commission to his church to preach and
baptize to the end of the age. For, how
could the disciples baptize any with the
holy Spirit? Surely that is God's part.
On the other hand, the Lord's words could
not have meant that his followers should
teach all nations, and that those who believed
would be baptized with the holy
spirit by God, for then why would he give
particular directions to the disciples as to
how it should be done,--"In the name
[or by the authority] of the Father, and
of the Son, and of the holy Spirit"--?
It is evident that our Lord's directions
refer to the symbol, to water baptism only;
because we can do no more for others than
teach them and symbolically baptize them:
we cannot believe for them, nor make
them believe; neither can we consecrate
for them, nor make them consecrate. But
we can teach them, and when they believe
for themselves and consecrate for themselves,
we can baptize them in water. And
by this act they confess their faith in
Christ's death and resurrection, and their
own consecration to be dead to the world
and alive toward God, that in due time
they may share in Christ's resurrection.
Furthermore, God specially recognized
water baptism under the Spirit dispensation
by in some cases withholding certain
gifts [miraculous manifestations conferred
upon believers in the beginning of this
age, for the purpose of manifesting God's
approval of the new teachings of the gospel],
until the water baptism had been
properly performed (Acts 19:3-6); as in
another case the gifts were bestowed first,
to teach Peter that water baptism and
every other feature of the gospel favor
was open to the Gentiles.--Acts 10:44-48.
That Paul's expression of thankfulness
that he had been prevented from baptizing
many of the Corinthian church, was
not because he saw that the ordinance had
passed away, but for an entirely different
reason, will be seen by a careful examination
of the context. A serious affection
of the eyes which rendered him almost
blind was undoubtedly the reason why
Paul did not baptize more of his converts
but left this ordinance to others to perform.
The great Apostle has been ignominiously
styled "The blear-eyed Jew," and there
is little room for doubt that after he
was struck down in the way to Damascus
(Acts 9:4,8), he never fully recovered
his sight. This "thorn" (figurative) he
besought the Lord thrice to remove, but
it was left as a reminder of previous error
and hence served to keep Paul humble in
the service of that Master whom he once
had persecuted. (2 Cor. 12:7.) It was
probably because of this difficulty that
he did not recognize the High-priest,
when on trial (Acts 23:5); and for the
same reason all of his epistles were written
by some one else, except one, and that
one of the shortest of them; and it closes
with a statement which indicated that
he could write only with difficulty and
that his readers could appreciate this,
knowing his disadvantages. He says: "Ye
see how large a letter I have written unto
you with mine own hand." (Gal. 6:11.)
Again, when wishing to mention their love
for him, and their willingness to do for
him the most useful thing, had it been
possible, he says to them (Gal. 4:15),
"I bear you record that, if possible, ye
would have plucked out your own eyes
and have given them to me."
It evidently was for this same reason
that Paul never baptized any of his converts
where he could avoid it--where
others were present who could see to the
service better than he.
When he thanked God that of the Corinthian
church he had baptized only a few
(1 Cor. 1:11-17), he was not assuming
that he had become wiser than to do so--
wiser than the Master who said, teach and
baptize unto the close of the age, but for
totally different reasons; reasons which
only those who read the epistle to the
Corinthians connectedly, as a whole, can
recognize. He had heard that the church
at Corinth was split into factions, divisions
[literally sects]; some were Paulites,
others Apollosites, others Peterites, and
others Christians. He was sure he had in
no way aided such sectarianism, and was
glad he could say, I never authorized you
to call yourselves by my name. Were you
baptized into the name of Paul, or into
the name of Christ? Since the majority
were Paulites, and since Paul had founded
the church at Corinth, it might appear to
some that he had been seeking to make
converts to himself, Paulites instead of
Christians; and as it turned out thus he
was glad to have it to say, that very few
of those calling themselves Paulites had
been baptized by him, as he said,--"Lest any should say, I baptized in mine own
name."
Even had Paul's sight been good, the
fact that he was an abler preacher than
others and that many could baptize as well
as he, would have been a sufficient reason
for his course; for it was thus with the
Master: We read (John 4:1,2), "Jesus
made and baptized more disciples than
John; though Jesus himself baptized not
but his disciples." Judging from his unfitness
for performing baptisms, and his
talent for teaching, Paul concluded that
preaching, and not baptizing, was his
special mission (1 Cor. 1:17), though
his own record shows that he did not allow
even his own unfitness to hinder or prevent
this obedience to the Master's precept
and example, when occasion required and
no one else was convenient to render the
service.
WHO WERE TO BE BAPTIZED?
Our Lord authorized teaching first, and
then the baptism of such as believed in
him as the Redeemer, and accepted the
gospel call to become followers of him.
The apostles followed this rule, and we
have no testimony anywhere that they
baptized others--neither unbelievers, nor
infants, nor idiots. True, it is recorded
that several "households" were baptized,
and from this it is argued that probably
there were infants in some of those families,
and that therefore it is probable that
infants were baptized, though none are
mentioned. But, we answer, some families
contain idiots, and some families number
one or more unbelievers, shall we therefore
conclude without other evidence that
the apostles disregarded our Lord's command
and baptized unbelievers? Nay,
verily! It is far more reasonable to conclude
that in the few cases where households
are mentioned they consisted only
of adult believers; or that, since the custom
or general usage would prevent misunderstanding,
it was proper enough to
say "household," even if there were in
them children too young to be "believers," and who therefore would be understood
as not included.
THE FORM OF BAPTISM.
The Greek language is remarkable for
its clear and definite expression of thought,
and therefore was well fitted to give expression
to divine truth. Its flexibility is
well illustrated in the following words,
each expressing a different shade of
thought, yet all having a similar significance.
Thus cheo signifies to pour; raino, to sprinkle; louo, to wash or bathe; nipto, to wash a part of the person; bathizo, (from
bathos the bottom), to immerse or plunge
deep; rantizo, (from raino), to sprinkle
or shed forth; bapto, to dip or dye;
baptizo, to dip, immerse or cover.
This last word baptizo (rendered baptize
in the common version Bible), is used
by our Lord and his apostles when referring
to an ordinance which they practised,
as well as enjoined upon all followers of
the Lamb. It is a deeply significant ordinance
in reality, though very simple in
the outward symbol. From the word selected
out from among so many others of
various shades of meaning, it is clear that
a sprinkling or even a washing of a part
of the person was not the thought, but
an immersion or covering of the whole
being,--whatever that action or thought
implies. Immersed is the correct translation;
baptized as rendered in our common
English Bibles is not a translation at
all, but a mere carrying over of the Greek
word into the English without translating
[R1034 : page 4] it at all. Immersed, is the English word which corresponds in meaning
to baptizo.
Not only does the Greek word signify
to bury, immerse, or cover, but the connected
Scripture narrative of itself, without
the particular strictness of the Greek
word used, would imply that the baptism
was one of immersion and not sprinkling. The Greek as well as the English shows
that our Lord went down into the water
and came up out of the water. And the
Apostle Paul frequently speaks of baptism
as a burial which would be a very inappropriate
figure with any other form than
that of immersion.
It has been suggested by some, that in
the case of the jailor who believed and
was baptized straightway (Acts 16:33),
that it could not have been by immersion,
because he and the prisoners could not
have left the jail for the purpose; but on
the contrary, it has been shown that at that
time the jails were provided with bathing
reservoirs, most suitable for the immersions.
And furthermore, it is to be remembered
that of John the baptizer, it is
written, "John was baptizing at Enon
near to Salim, because there was much water there." (John 3:23.) No one can
for a moment suppose that if John
sprinkled his converts, the largeness of
the water supply could be a consideration.
It was probably at a pool in the
Jordan river.
It is generally admitted by scholars that
immersion was the common practice of
the early church, but with the beginning
of the third century came great confusion
on this as on other subjects; on the
one hand some placed all the value upon
the form, insisting even on three immersions,
because our Lord had said in
the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the holy Spirit, not seeing that in the name of simply signifies in recognition of; others claimed that as our Lord's
head bowed forward in dying on the cross
so they should be immersed, not as in a
burial, but face downward; others insisted
that the baptized must be nearly naked as
our Lord died thus; and still others went
to an opposite extreme, and while holding
that a form was all important, claimed
that the exact form was unimportant, and
for convenience substituted sprinkling.
This latter finally became the standard
mode in the Church of Rome, from whom
it reached Protestants. Immersion however
is still the recognized form in the
oriental churches. As we shall show
presently, all these errors as to form, resulted
from losing sight of the real significance
of baptism. A claim frequently
made, but not generally appreciated by
those who make it, is that the Greek word
baptizo, though it generally is used in referring
to some thing or process (as the
dying of cloth) which requires dipping, has been found in classical Greek writings
used in places where the evident thought
was that of washing without dipping. To
this we answer that the word baptizo is
not limited to a certain form of action,
but rather carries the broad idea, to cover. And, so far as the word goes, the
entire person is baptized if the entire
person is wet, or in any manner covered
with water.* But if the entire person to
be baptized should be wet, or covered with
water, who will claim that dipping was
not the original as well as the easiest
method of doing this?
*An illustration of this use of the word is found
in 1 Cor. 10:1,2. The Apostle declares that all
Israel were baptized (immersed) unto Moses, and
gives as the form, that they were covered with water
(though not wet); the walls of the sea being on
either hand and the clouds of water over head.
WHO MAY IMMERSE.
There is no limitation placed in Scripture
as to who shall perform this ceremony
of baptizing believers in water, except
that only the church was ever commissioned,
either to teach or to baptize.
The faith and knowledge of the one performing
the ceremony does not count,
but the faith and knowledge of the one
immersed. Sometimes the one performing
the ceremony may be far inferior
every way to the one from whom it is performed
(John 3:14) and might even, if
necessary, be a believer not of the kingdom
or church class. (Matt. 11:11.)
Certainly all who are authorized to teach, are equally authorized to baptize; and
that includes every true follower of Christ
--"even unto the end of the age," according
to the general call to the ministry,
commission, and ordination of Matt. 28:19,20 and John 17:14-18-23. And
this commission evidently does not exclude
from this service the females of the
"body of Christ" (Gal. 3:28), only that
modesty, convenience, etc., indicate that
they should avoid such public services
except in rare necessary cases.
THE SIGNIFICATION OF IMMERSION.
In considering the signification of immersion,
the change from the Jewish to the
Gospel dispensation must be recognized.
The Jews, by their covenant, the Law, occupied
a relationship toward God very
different from Gentiles,--who were without
hope. (Eph. 2:12.) Israelites by God's
arrangement were recognized and treated
under the provisions of the typical sacrifices, as though they were justified from
Adamic guilt and penalty, and were as a nation consecrated to God and treated as
though they were to be made the Bride
of Christ. The provision, too, was that
when the true Lamb of God should come,
those truly consecrated among them,
"Israelites indeed," might, by accepting
of the true Lamb and true sin-sacrifice
and atonement, enter upon actual justification, and carry with them their former
consecration. In other words, an Israelite,
consecrated indeed, living at the close of
the Jewish age, when the real sacrifice for
sins was made by our Lord, would be
treated as though he had always had the reality, whereas really he had only a typical
justification up to that time.
Therefore in the opening of the Gospel
age, Jews were not preached to in the
same manner as Gentiles. The latter
were told,--Ye who were once aliens and
strangers have been brought nigh and
may now have access to God and enter into covenant relations with him. Therefore,
come to God by Christ who hath
abolished distinctions between Jews and
Gentiles, not by taking favors from the
Jews, but by ushering believers, whether
Jews or Gentiles, into the blessings and
favors of the New Covenant, which the
Law Covenant merely typified. (Eph. 2:13-19.)
The Jews were told the opposite:
"Ye are the children of the
prophets and of the covenant which God
made with our fathers,...unto you first, God having raised up his Son Jesus, sent
him to bless you, in turning away each of
you from his iniquities." "Repent and
be baptized each one of you in the name
of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,
and ye shall receive the holy Spirit: For
the promise is unto you [belongs to you]
and to your children, etc."--Acts 3:25,26 and 2:38-41.
The point, to be noticed, is, that Israelites
were already consecrated, and heirs
according to the Law Covenant, and the
only reason they as a nation had not been
merged right at once out of the Jewish typical
state into the Gospel realities and
holy Spirit acceptance with God, as the
apostles and other individuals had been,
was, that they were not living up to their
covenant relationship. Hence they were
told to repent, or turn back into the true
covenant relationship with God, and to enjoy
their privileges as children of the covenant.
They had sinned in not living
up to what they could of their covenant,
and they were to show that they renounced
their previous state of sin by immersion,
--washing away their transgressions in
symbol, after praying in the name of
Christ. (See Acts 22:16.) In like manner
baptism by John and by Christ's disciples
was confined to the Israelites, and
signified repentance for covenant violations,
and a return to covenant relationship,
and was intended as a preparatory
work: for those who fully received John's
testimony and reformed and became Israelites
indeed, did receive Christ, and did
pass into the higher favors of the Gospel age.
To these, already children of the covenant
and already heirs of the promised
blessings, water baptism meant a renouncing
of previous sins of unfaithfulness, and
it meant more: it meant their renunciation
of the national sin of crucifying Christ--
for the rulers representing that nation had
said, "His blood be upon us and upon our children,"--and hence Peter exhorted saying,
"Let all the house of Israel know
that this Jesus whom you crucified, God
hath made both Lord and Messiah." And
when in view of this national sin which
each shared, they inquired, "Brethren!
What shall we do?" Peter answered,
"Reform and be immersed, each one of
you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the
forgiveness of your sins [and specially
your share in this national sin of crucifying
Messiah] and ye shall receive the gift
of the holy Spirit." To those who accepted
it meant not only a renunciation
of their national error of crucifying Christ,
but a stepping out from the dispensation
and control of Moses into that of Christ.
Because in acknowledging Jesus to be the
true Messiah, they were acknowledging
him to be the long promised Saviour,
Lawgiver and Teacher greater than Moses.
But, baptism could not mean repentance in either of these senses to the Gentiles
who had never been under the Jewish
Covenant, and who had no direct responsibility
for the death of Christ. Hence
after the "elect remnant" of Israel had
been received, and the Gospel message
went to the Gentiles, to select out of them
the number necessary to complete the
body of Christ,--in the epistles to the
Gentile churches we hear no further exhortation
to be baptized as a sign of repentance,
or as a symbol of washing away
of sins. And since we by nature are not
Jews, but are of the Gentiles whose fathers
previously were aliens, and foreigners so
far as God's covenants and promises were
concerned, therefore, we should not apply
to ourselves that idea of baptism which
was Jewish, but that idea which the Apostle
unfolds in Rom. 6:3-5; Col. 2:12.
The full import of baptism, the reality
of which the immersion in water commanded
by our Lord is the symbol, is
clearly shown by the Apostle in the above
cited passages. "Know ye not that as
many of us as were immersed into Jesus
Christ were immersed into HIS DEATH?"
Those who know this fully and thoroughly,
and they alone, truly appreciate the water
immersion commanded, and its weighty
and appropriate significance.
"Immersed into Jesus Christ."--Those
who see the "high calling" of this Gospel
age--to joint-heirship with Christ Jesus
our Lord, as members in particular of the
"body of Christ" of which the Redeemer
is Head and Lord, know that our attainment
of that high honor depends upon
our acceptableness as members in that
body of Christ. (Rom. 12:1; 8:17,18.)
Such also know that no one is "called,"
or invited into this "body of Christ,"--
"the church of the firstborn," except
those who already are believers, such only
as own Christ as their Redeemer or Justifier,
such therefore as are justified freely
from all things by faith in his blood. Such,
are not sinners, are invited to become
joint-sacrificers and joint-heirs with Christ.
The blemished of the flock were not acceptable
on the Lord's altar under the
Law, as a type of God's rejection during this age of all imperfect offerings. Our Lord
was the actually spotless, unblemished,
perfect Lamb of God, sacrificed for our
sins; and in inviting some to join him in
sacrifice and afterward in glory and honor,
the Father accepts only such as are first
made "whiter than snow,"--who because
of faith in, and acceptance of the redemption
which is in Christ Jesus, are reckoned perfect and hence are acceptable with God
as joint-sacrificers.
"Were immersed into his death."--
This is given by the Apostle as the significance
of water immersion--the real baptism
therefore is this immersion into a
sacrificial death with Christ; and the water
immersion, though a beautiful figure
which graphically illustrates the real one,
is only its figure or symbol.
But, how much is meant by the expression,
"Immersed into his death?" In what
way was our Lord's death different from
that of other men?
His death was different from that of
other men in that theirs is a penalty for
sin, while his was a sacrifice for the sins
of others, to release others from their penalty
--death. We with all others of Adam's
family involuntarily share Adam's death
--the wages of sin. And we, with all the
Adamic family, were redeemed by Christ's
death and granted a right to live again,
and a restoration of all the human rights
and privileges which Adam lost for us.
We who believe this good news, accept of
and begin (by faith) to enjoy those redeemed
rights and privileges even now,
believing that what Christ died to secure
and has promised to give, is as sure as
though already possessed. We have joy
and peace in believing this "good tidings
of great joy which shall be unto all people,"
and by faith already reckon ourselves as in
possession of those good things which are
to be brought unto all who hate sin and
love righteousness, at the second coming
of our Lord Jesus.
It is when we are in this justified condition,
repossessed of the human rights lost
through Adam, but redeemed by Christ,
that the call or invitation is extended to
us to become something far higher and
far grander than perfect men fully restored
to the likeness of God in flesh, (though
that is so grand that few appreciate it)--
to become joined with the Redeemer in
the glories and dignities of the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4), and co-workers with
him in the great work of the Millennial
age,--the work of restoring the redeemed
race of Adam to perfection and all "that
which was lost" in the fall.
But the invitation to share this great
dignity, "far above angels" (Eph. 1:21;
1 Cor. 6:3), is accompanied by certain
conditions and limitations. This prize is
not given because of works, for no works
which could be conceived of could purchase,
or earn, so high an exaltation as
that offered. The offer is a favor, unmerited by anything which we have done, or
can do; and yet the conditions may be
[R1034 : page 5] said to be the price, or cost to us, of the
prize offered us. It is not however an equivalent or corresponding price. The
price to us is a mere pittance in comparison
to the value received, and "not worthy
to be compared with the glory which shall
be revealed in us." And when we consider
that we had nothing to give, until first
purchased by the precious blood of Christ,
it will be clearly seen that the high honors
to which we are called are not of works
of our own, but of grace, through Christ.
For even our pittance was forfeited by sin
and had first to be redeemed, before it
could be accepted.
The requirements or conditions attached
to the invitation to share with Christ the
coming glories and dignities, are plainly
stated:--Such must share his death, be
immersed or buried into his death; if they
would be of that "little flock" of joint-heirs,
the "body of Christ,"--otherwise
called "the Bride the Lamb's wife." To
be sharers in his death, means that as our
Redeemer spent his life, not in self-gratification
(even lawful), but consumed it in
the interest of truth and righteousness, in
opposing sin and doing the work and executing
the plan of the Father, so we must
use our time, talents, energies, rights, and
privileges. Redeemed by him and given
to us, we not only consecrate these all to
the Father's service, but we must use them
faithfully even unto death--as he hath set
us the example--walking in his footsteps
as nearly as possible. If thus we be dead
with him, we shall in due time live with
him (Rom. 6:8); if thus we suffer with
him, and in the present life endure afflictions even unto death (whether the death
of the cross or some other form) for righteousness sake, we are counted as sharers
of his death: and all who share "his death" will also share "his resurrection." --See Phil. 3:8-11.
As "his death" differs from the Adamic
death, so "his resurrection" differs from
the RESTORATION resurrection which he
has secured and will effect for all men.
His resurrection is in Scripture pointed
out as different from that of the world redeemed
by him. It is emphasized in the
Greek--"the resurrection," and also designated
the "first [chief] resurrection."
His resurrection was to the divine or immortal
nature, a spiritual body. And so
many of us as shall be immersed into Jesus
Christ--immersed into his death--shall
also obtain a share in "his resurrection"
--"the resurrection," as described in
1 Cor. 15:42-53. We who have borne the
image of the earthly father Adam who
also lost it for us, have been redeemed
to it again by Christ's sacrifice, and have
surrendered that again with him as joint-sacrificers
of human nature. Thus we become
partakers of a new nature, and shall
bear the image of that new divine nature
in the resurrection.--Verse 49.
Note how pointedly the same writer
mentions this too, in the passage under
consideration. (Rom. 6:4-5.) "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 a new life. [Our new natures are reckoned as begun now, and are to be perfected at our resurrection
in the Lord's likeness.] For
if we have been planted together in the
likeness of his death, [then] we shall be
also [sharers] in the likeness of His resurrection." --Rom. 6:5.
It is evident then, that baptism in water
is the symbol of a complete, and to those
who would be joint-heirs, an indispensable
self-sacrifice; an immersion with our Lord
into his death--an immersion which began
and is counted from the moment the justified believer consecrated himself and surrendered
his will to God,--though to secure
the prize promised it must continue until
the close of the earthly life. It was from
this standpoint that our Lord spoke, when
he said, "I have a baptism to be baptized
with, and how am I straightened till it be
accomplished." (Luke 12:50.) He had
already performed the symbol at Jordan,
but he was now referring to the consummation
of his baptism into death. His
will, surrendered to the Father's will and
plan, was already buried; but as the dark
hour of Gethsemane and Calvary drew
near he longed to finish his sacrifice. It
was from this same standpoint that he
spoke of baptism to the two disciples who
asked to sit, the one at his right hand and
the other at his left in the kingdom. "He
answered and said unto them, Ye know
not what ye ask--Are ye able to drink of
the cup that I shall drink of, and to be
baptized with the baptism that I am baptized
with?" (Matt. 20:22.) He referred
here to the baptism into death, and shows
that none need expect to share the kingdom
except those who share this baptism
of death with him. Thus our Lord's explanation
of the symbol exactly concurs
with that of the Apostle.
These are not two baptisms--one of
water and the other into Christ's death--
but one. The immersion into water is
the symbol or shadow of the immersion
into death. If there is a shadow, there
must be a substance; and a clear strong
light falling upon a substance produces a
shadow of it. It is for the instructed
child of God to distinguish between the
substance and the shadow, and by recognizing
their relationship to see in the two
parts "one baptism." Since the two parts
were recognized as one baptism by the
Apostle, it is doubtful if any one fully
appreciates the ONE TRUE BAPTISM without
seeing both the substance and the
shadow.
Recognizing the true import of baptism
we see, that next to faith in Christ,
it is the one important and essential
step by which the Church glorified shall
be entered: for only such as are conformed
to, and have fellowship in our
Lord's death will, as "members of his
body," share the first or chief resurrection,
to be with and like the head. It is
not surprising that some have mistaken
the shadow or symbol for the real, and
made it a test of membership in the
church upon earth; this is but a natural
mistake. All who see the real immersion,
as well as the symbol, yet ignore the latter,
should carefully examine themselves to
see that their wills in this matter are really dead and buried in the will of Christ.
And if they refuse obedience to the Lord's
word and example in this, they should
make unquestionably sure to themselves
the strength and validity of any arguments
to the contrary, by which they set these
aside.
But some inquire, Is it necessary for me
to be immersed in water, if I am confident
that I am fully consecrated--immersed
into Christ? Would the Lord
reject me for so small a matter as a failure
to go through a form?
Do not forget that the present age is
not one of commands and compulsions.
God does not command and compel the
obedience of his Church. This is a time
in which, as a great favor, believers are
privileged to offer their wills and their all
in self-sacrifice to God. It is "the acceptable year of the Lord"--the time in
which God is pleased to accept of our sacrifices (through Christ) and to give us
certain exceeding great rewards promised
to those who surrender their little all, and
thus become followers in the footsteps of
the High Priest of our order.
Such as see this clearly will know that
the Body of Christ is not given a law of
commandments, nor dealt with as were the
Jews; for "Ye are not under law but under
favor." Theirs was the house of servants
and it is proper to command servants;
but we belong to the "house of sons"
(Heb. 3:5,6), if we are new creatures
in Christ; and God dealeth with us as
a true Father with true sons. True sons,
and the only ones whom he will acknowledge
as such, possess the spirit of adoption,
and the spirit of obedience, the spirit
of sons, and need not be commanded and
threatened; for such both by word and
deed, and in matters both small and great
declare, "I delight to do thy will, O my
God." For such, no self-denial is too
great, and no act of respect and obedience
too small; and ignoring pride and
all human philosophies and expediencies
as unworthy to be weighed at all in opposition
to the Father's wisdom, these
learn that to obey is the best of sacrifice.
No, God will not compel you to be immersed,
either really or symbolically.
These opportunities to sacrifice convenience,
worldly opinion, etc., are privileges
which we should highly esteem and
covet, because by these we are able to
show the Lord the depth and sincerity of
our love and the reality of our consecration.
It is on the basis of this and hundreds
of other little things that we are
being tried now,--to see if we are as earnest
as we have professed to be. If we
are ashamed to confess Christ before men
by the very simple way which he arranged,
we may well expect that he would be
ashamed to call us overcomers and joint-heirs,
and to confess us as faithful followers.
He could not do so honestly and
truthfully, and hence we may be sure he
would not do so. And if after we see
how much our Lord has done for us--first
in our redemption and secondly in the
great offer of the crown and divine nature,
--we allow a trifling sacrifice of contemptible
pride to hinder us from a small
act of obedience which our Redeemer and
benefactor requested, our own self-contempt
and shame, should prevent our taking
crowns and places (even if offered them)
with the little band of faithful overcomers
who valiantly sacrificed much, and thus
proved that they loved much.
While therefore we do not say that none
will be of the "little flock" except those
who have been immersed in water, as well
as in the death of Christ, which it so
beautifully symbolizes, we do say, that we
do not expect to find in that "little flock"
a single one who has seen water immersion
to be the will of God, and who has refused
to obey. Let us remember that obedience
in a small matter may be a closer
test than in a large one. Had Satan attempted
to get Eve into the sin of blaspheming
the Creator, he would have failed;
had he attempted to get her to murder
Adam he would have failed; hence
the test of obedience in a very small matter,
was a much more crucial test. So
now God tests our professions of love and
devotion and obedience most thoroughly
by some of the smallest matters, of which
the symbolic immersion is one. God's
decision is, He that is faithful in that
which is least, will be faithful also in that
which is greater.
Though "Baptists" do not generally
grasp the full import of immersion, and
look at the water rather than the death
which it symbolizes, yet the holding of
the symbol has been valuable, and shows
the Lord's wisdom in choosing the symbol;
for the truth with reference to the
symbol even, has been unpopular ever
since its rejection by Anti-christ centuries
ago, and in very many cases has it required
the true consecration, the true burial
of the will into Christ's will, before the
believer was willing to brave the scorn of
the world by obedience to an unpopular
ceremony.
Even those who practice sprinkling and
that upon unintelligent (and hence unbelieving)
babes, hold that baptism is the
door into the Church of Christ, and none
of the sects receive into membership
others than those who have gone through
some ceremony called "baptism." They
receive infants thus into their Churches,
on the ground that only church members
will be saved from everlasting torment.
True, this like other doctrines is little
taught in our day, and is losing its influence
over the people, yet millions of parents
to-day believe that their children
would be consigned to everlasting torment
if they should die without being
sprinkled with water in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Especially
do Romanists, Episcopalians and Lutherans,
fear an omission of this sort, and some
Presbyterians and Methodists no less so.
An illustration of this, and one which
shows the power these errors put into the
hands of the priestly or clerical class,
came under our observation here in Allegheny
about four years ago. The parents
of the infant were Lutherans, but had a
disagreement with the pastor of the congregation
about non-payment of church
dues and non-attendance at meetings.
The child grew seriously ill and the
father and mother by turn went many
times to implore the cold hearted, error
teaching, hireling shepherd to come and
sprinkle their babe and save it from the
eternal damnation he had taught them
would otherwise be its portion. But he
refused to come, telling them that they deserved
the punishment. After further effort
they got some one "just in time" to allay
their groundless fears.
Thus, it is evident, that no matter how
careless they may be as to the exact form all the principal sects view baptism as the
door into the church, the door of salvation,
the door into the body of Christ, as
truly as do Baptists. We, on the contrary,
hold that neither the sprinkling with
water, nor the immersion in water is the
door into the "body of Christ," now being
elected or chosen out of the world;
but that the immersion into Christ's death, which begins in full consecration, is the
door by which justified men become members
of the Body of Christ which is the
Church. We insist, that all who thus become
members of "THE CHURCH whose
names are written in heaven," as soon as
the precept and example of the Lord and
the apostles, and the appropriateness of
the symbol are seen, should make haste
to show their obedience and consecration
before men.
BAPTISM AND THE TABERNACLE.
The true baptism is illustrated in the Jewish
Tabernacle, but not by the Laver which
stood in the Court full of water, at which
the priests washed their hands and feet.
No, that is a symbol of the cleansing effect
of the truth upon the outward conduct of
believers in general. It symbolizes the
putting aside of filthy practices--lying,
stealing, etc., and the putting away of
filthy communications out of our mouths,--
slanders, envy, strife, back-biting, etc.,--
a cleansing as proper for the natural man
as for the consecrated saints.
The vail at the door of the Tabernacle
represented the same thought as baptism,
namely death. When the priest passed
the first vail, it represented him as passing
[R1034 : page 6] out of sight, buried from the outward
things; and his shut in condition enlightened
only by the lamp and supplied by
the shewbread, represented the spiritual
nourishment and enlightenment granted
all such as are immersed into Christ--
which the world knoweth not of.
The second vail represented the end of
the reckoned death in actual death; and
the Most Holy represented the full fruition
of all the exceeding great and precious
promises made to those who become
new creatures in Christ Jesus by sharing
his death and also his resurrection. In
the Most Holy comes the full realization
of what the Holy gave but a foretaste of.
Thus we see that a complete immersion
or burial from sight was necessary to reach
the Most Holy. And as the Tabernacle
had but the one entrance, it clearly
teaches that none can attain that state or
condition which it typified (the divine
nature), without first passing through the
first vail, representing consecration or
death to the world, which baptism in
water most beautifully illustrates also.
WHO MAY BE IMMERSED.
In John's baptism of the Jews unto
reformation, he demanded of some that
they should first show by their lives that
they had reformed, before they went
through the symbol of reformation. In
the use of baptism after Pentecost, however,
the only condition imposed was faith
in Christ. It seems to have been taken
for granted that none but true, sincere
persons would thus profess faith in and
allegiance to so unpopular a Leader, as
the crucified Christ. But the water immersion,
though it was a public profession
of Christ by the one immersed, was not
necessarily an endorsement of such by the
apostles and the church. The church could
not and did not decide whether the one
they immersed symbolically had been
really immersed into Christ. The symbol
indicated this, and they explained the
symbol and urged all that had consecrated
in symbol to see that they were really
dead to the world and its plans and aims,
and alive toward God and his plan.
This is evident from some instances,
as that of Ananias and Sapphira and Simon
Magus (Acts 5:1-10and 8:13,20-23).
To the latter, though he had been
baptised, the apostle declares, "Thou art in
the gall of bitterness and in the bond of
iniquity." So now, we do not need to decide
for others who may wish to thus confess
Christ, (except it be very evident that
they do it as an intended mockery); it is
their act alone and represents their conscience
toward God; and the opinions
and faith of the one performing the symbol,
cannot affect the matter either favorably
or unfavorably. The real baptism
is that which cannot be seen, except in
its influence upon the conduct; and the
real church which is joined is the church
whose names are written in heaven whose
members cannot be known positively until
the close of this age, when they shall be
glorified with the Head.
THE MANNER OF THE SYMBOL.
The immersion since it symbolizes a
burial should be backwards, in water sufficient
for the purpose, and convenient as
circumstances will permit. It should not
be done with secrecy, as it is intended as a
public confession of faith, and the only
form of such public confession used by
the early church, of which we have any
record. Yet its publicity should be to fellow-believers
rather than to the world.
Hence, while it should in no way be kept
secret from the world, it is unnecessary to
give public notice except to the fellow-believers
of the church. In fact, so solemn
is the occasion to the church who realize
its deep significance, that the presence
of the worldly, unless they be seekers
after God and therefore more than mere
curiosity seekers, is not desirable. Such
public notice we gather from the record,
was the custom in the early church.
Some think that because John the Immerser
and the Lord's disciples baptized
publicly in the river Jordan, therefore
all should be immersed in public view
in a river. But let it be remembered that
the whole Jewish nation was the church according to their Law Covenant, therefore
public view was public to the professed
church of that time. As for the river
Jordan, John and the disciples evidently
used it as the most convenient place at
their service. If the river was an important
factor, why not the same river
Jordan?
It should be noted that when the Eunuch
believed and was immersed, only
Philip was present; when the jailer believed
and was immersed (Acts 16:33),
it was not in a river, but in a bath or some
convenient arrangement in the prison.
And we know that the ruins of the church
buildings of the first two centuries show
that they had special annexed buildings
prepared for the convenience of
immersions.
The form of words used by the apostles
and early church is not given, which shows
that the form of words used is much less
important than the act, and the meaning which it expresses. We may gather however
from Acts 2:38, 8:16, Rom. 6:3,
Gal. 3:27and 1 Cor. 1:13, that baptism
"into Christ" into the name of the Lord
Jesus was the thought; and that it was
expressed in words. We may also presume
that our Lord's words "Baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit," were not
disregarded, but expressed somehow on
such occasions. The thought is, that believers
by immersion into Christ's death,
are joined to Christ as members of the
little flock which is "his body;" and
that their right or privilege to be thus
accepted in the Beloved, is in the name
or by the authority of the Father, through
the merit of the Son and by the impartation
to such of the holy Spirit of truth.
We now give the form of words which it
is our custom to use on such occasions,
and our general procedure, for the convenience
and satisfaction of those who
may have occasion to use the suggestion.
We first have, privately, some assurance
on the part of all who are about to be
immersed, that they recognize the death of Christ as their ransom price, and that
they are already consecrated wholly to
his service, and desire to now confess all
this in the symbol which Christ enjoined.
Then, the announcement having been publicly
made before the congregation, we
meet at an appointed time and place* for
the service; and there, after briefly explaining
the real immersion and its water
symbol, and after offering thanks to God
for the privilege of thus following in our
Lord's footsteps, and expressing our trust
in his promises to give grace and strength
sufficient to enable those who have consecrated
all to his service, to be dead indeed
to the world and its aims and ambitions,
and alive only to God's service and
the study and carrying out of his plans;
and after specially requesting a blessing
upon those about to symbolize their covenant,
we receive the candidates in the
water. Then (in the usual manner, with
one hand in front at the throat, and the
other at the back of the neck) we say, if
the name of the candidate be John,--
"John, in the name of the Father and of
the Son and of the holy Spirit--by this
authority,--I baptize thee into the name of
"Christ." We then let them down backward
(as a corpse) until immersed, covered completely;
then raise them to their feet.
After again changing our clothing in the
provided rooms, we meet in the presence
of the congregation (who meantime worship
God in prayer, songs of praise, etc.)
and with convenient words we extend to
the newly immersed ones the right-hand
of fellowship in the name of the great
Head of the Church, and on behalf of the
entire church whose names are written in
heaven; exhorting that they walk worthy
of the name of Christ which they have
confessed and taken; and that they run
earnestly in the race for the prize of the
high calling which they have publicly
entered.
*We are kindly made welcome to the use of
three different baptistries here, and presume could
by asking, obtain the privilege of all. Our "Baptist"
and "Christian" friends hereabouts, though they
do not see this subject and others from the same
standpoint as we, nevertheless are courteous, respectful,
and willing to fellowship as far as they can
see.--Would to God they were less self-satisfied and
would examine again the full import of the symbol
to which they both so earnestly and so steadfastly
adhere.
It is evident that all through the Gospel
age baptism into Christ has symbolized
union with him and membership in the
one body--the bride. But now in the
harvest or lapping of the Gospel and Millennial
ages, a new question arises, viz.,
While it is still appropriate for all of this
class who have not done so, to confess
Christ by this symbol, what about others,
of the restitution class, who shall now confess
Christ and desire to consecrate themselves,
--to relinquish their wills and have
the will of Christ only? Seeing that such
will sooner or later apply for baptism as
a symbol, and that it would be a proper
symbol of consecration for others as well as
for the body of Christ, and that it is not incumbent
upon us to decide to which class
those belong who apply to us for immersion,
--the question arises, Would the same
form of words be appropriate for both?
Yes, we answer; for though the class referred
to will not be of the bride of
Christ, they will be of the Christ family,--
children of the Christ; and it is proper
for the children to bear their father's
name. Christ is to be the "Everlasting
Father" or life-giver to the restored human
race; and hence it will not be improper
for them also to take his name.
Therefore as we now view it, it will be
proper to baptize such into the name of
Christ; and we doubt not that all of the
world who shall come into harmony and receive
the gift of life from the Life-giver
in the next age, will be known also as
Christians. As before pointed out, however,
the words of the immerser cannot
affect favorably or unfavorably the interests
of the immersed; the importance
rests in the obedience of the act and what
it signifies of consecration to the one
immersed.
BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
AND OF FIRE.
We need not examine this subject at
length here, since it was discussed in our
issue of November '87. We merely remark
now that the immersion in holy
Spirit which began at Pentecost, is not symbolized
by water baptism: it follows, but is
totally different from an immersion into
Christ's death, which the water immersion
does symbolize so perfectly. The immersion
of the holy Spirit is bestowed as a consequence
of full consecration and immersion
into Christ's death, and is a pledge
or earnest of our full acceptance to the
divine nature with Christ, when we shall
have fully accomplished our sacrifice with
him. The baptism into Christ's death
and its water symbol are matters for us to
attend to. The immersion of the holy
Spirit is God's work entirely. None are
immersed in holy Spirit except such as
have voluntarily consecrated, or immersed
themselves into Christ's death. And such
as have experienced these two have no will of their own to oppose to the water
symbol, enjoined by the word and example
of the Head, and practiced and taught
by the stalwart members of the Royal
Priesthood.
The baptism of fire signifies destruction
and accompanying distress. Thus, as already
shown, the Jewish nation, except
the Israelites indeed worthy of the Pentecostal
baptism, was immersed in tribulation
and national destruction. This was
John the immerser's prediction.
Luke 3:16,17.
BAPTIZED FOR THE DEAD.
"Else what shall they do which are baptizing
for the dead, if the dead rise not
at all? Why then are they baptized on
behalf thereof?"+
+sinaitic MS reading.
This has been considered a very obscure
passage, because the real meaning of immersion
(as symbolic of death) has been
generally lost sight of. Some have been
led to the absurd conclusion that early
Christians were immersed in the interest
of their dead unbelieving friends and relatives,
--supposing that Paul here referred
to and commended so senseless a thing.
On the contrary, the Apostle here refers
to the fact, then well understood, that
each one of those who had been immersed,
had symbolized his own death--had cast
his lot among those dead with Christ, to
share his sacrificial death (which was on
behalf of the dead and dying world), in
prospect of a glorious resurrection to share
with the Redeemer the work of blessing
and restoring the world.
Paul is combatting and disproving the
theories of some who were teaching that
there would be no resurrection. He appeals
to various arguments to prove the
falsity of such teaching. He proves that
the dead can be raised by divine power
by the fact of Christ's resurrection (verses 12 to 18);
and then, in the verse under
consideration, he shows how absurd it is
for those who by immersion have symbolized
their consecration to death, to disbelieve
in a future life. He asks such
doubters of a resurrection, Why then were
you baptized for the dead, if you hope for
nothing beyond? Wiser and better far it
would be, if there is to be no resurrection
of the dead, that we should make the most
of the present life, enjoying all its pleasures,
instead of consecrating ourselves to death
in baptism, and then living a life of self-sacrifice
which is a daily dying.
But, in this as in all things, the beauty
and harmony only appears from the true
standpoint. Those who regard sprinkling
as baptism can see no meaning in this
passage; neither can those who deny water
baptism interpret it without making out,
that this great inspired apostle was foolish.
Neither can those who see the symbolic
water immersion only, appreciate the passage.
Its beauty and force are only discernible
from the standpoint herein set
forth, viz., a recognition of the death with
Christ to self-will, to the world, and all
worldly interests, and also of the water
immersion as its proper, appropriate
and provided symbol. In conclusion we
quote the inspired record.
Peter said: "Can any man forbid
water?" (Acts 10:47.) Paul said: "So
many of you as were immersed into Jesus
Christ, were immersed into his death....
[R1034 : page 7] For if we have been planted together in the
likeness of his death, we shall be also in
the likeness of his resurrection." (Rom. 6:3-5.)
"Then they that gladly received
his word were immersed,...and they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine
and fellowship."--Acts 2:41,42.
====================