Study of Denomintions 04/04/2010
A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week
Baptism
A Study of Denominations
Statement of Belief
The Scriptures say that baptism is a commandment of God,
"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned" (Mark 16:16 ),
being the immersion in water for the remission of sins,
And Peter said unto them, "Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38 ),
that allows one to be buried with Christ,
having been buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead (Colossians 2:12 ),
and leads to salvation,
which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 3:21 ).
Sections
● The Need for Baptism
● Infant Baptism and "Original Sin"
● Baptism is Immersion
● Tripartite Baptism
● Baptism in Running Water
● Baptism is for Remission of Sin and is Necessary for Salvation
The Need for Baptism
There are some denominations today who teach that baptism is not a physical action that should be performed; instead, they teach that when Jesus and the Apostles mention baptism, they are speaking about a "spiritual" act. This "spiritual" act is not physical nor has any form of physicality. Do the Scriptures teach that baptism is only a "spiritual" action?
Let us consider the example of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch from Acts 8:38:
And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they both went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
By all accounts, Philip physically went down into the water with the eunuch and the eunuch was physically baptized. The example of Peter in Acts 10:47-48 is also telling:
For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, "Can any man forbid the water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Spirit as well as we?"
If Peter were speaking about a "spiritual" baptism that does not involve one getting into the water, why would he speak about the physical substance into which one is baptized? How could water factor into Peter's mind if baptism were simply some "spiritual" act? Further, what need would there be for any Christian to assist another in some "spiritual" act, yet we see in the Scriptures countless times that a Christian baptizes someone into Christ (cf. above, Acts 16:31-33, Acts 19:1-9 , etc.)?
Therefore, we can see from the Scriptures that baptism is a physical action that takes place when one desires to become a Christian.
Infant Baptism and "Original Sin"
Many denominations today teach that children and even infants must be baptized in order to be cleansed of sin. Let us examine the progression of this belief and to see what the Scriptures teach.
The first premise for baptizing infants is an inference based on the content of some of the Scriptures. The argument, generally, goes as follows:
Argument: When Cornelius and the Philippian jailer believed, their whole households were baptized. Thus, children were probably baptized also.
Answer: This argument is based upon an assumption about the term "household." Within the texts in question, Acts 10 and Acts 16:24-38, we also read the following about these families:
a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, who gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God always (Acts 10:2 ).
And they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house."
And they spake the word of the Lord unto him, with all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, immediately (Acts 16:31-33).
We can see in Acts 10:2 that "all the house" of Cornelius is said to fear God. Regarding the house of the jailer in Acts 16:31, we can safely say that the jailer's household also must believe if its constituents will be saved, considering that no other Scripture witnesses that an entire family can be saved on account of the belief of one member. This evidence allows us to reach two possible conclusions:
1.Everyone in the households of Cornelius and/or the jailer were old enough to understand the Gospel and believe in its message, and therefore every single person believed and was baptized.
2.Luke expects his audience to understand that his use of the term "all" involves some hyperbole: he is not trying to say that literally every member of the house of Cornelius and/or the jailer believed and were baptized, but that everyone in those houses who were of sufficient age to understand the Gospel believed in it and were baptized.
Either option demonstrates that the inference made concerning these two texts is not valid: just because a "household" is baptized does not mean that any and all children present are baptized.
As the years progressed, it became clear that a compelling reason needed to be found to justify the baptism of infants, and the doctrine of "original sin" fit the bill. "Original sin" is defined somewhat differently by different denominations, but the basic idea is that sin is inheritable. Most denominations do not teach that individuals inherit specific sins from their parents, but instead believe that children are born with a sinful nature and therefore are sinners requiring baptism.
The main difficulty with "original sin" is found in the way Jesus speaks about children in Matthew 18:1-4 and Mark 9:35-37:
In that hour came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, "Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?"
And he called to him a little child, and set him in the midst of them, and said, "Verily I say unto you, Except ye turn, and become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."
And he sat down, and called the twelve; and he saith unto them, "If any man would be first, he shall be last of all, and minister of all."And he took a little child, and set him in the midst of them: and taking him in his arms, he said unto them, "Whosoever shall receive one of such little children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever receiveth me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me."
Jesus indicates that if anyone desires to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, he or she must be like a little child. It is well-known that if an example is not valid, an argument cannot be supported by it. Therefore, if children have sin against them that requires baptism, how can it be that Jesus presents a child as an example of one who would enter the Kingdom of Heaven? If we are to aspire to be as a child, but a child is still in sin, how can we enter the Kingdom? How can it be that receiving a little child is as receiving the Son and the Father if the little child is in his sins? The conclusion is clear: children do not have sin against them. They are in a state of innocence.
Nevertheless, to defend original sin, many will first turn to passages describing how God will visit the iniquity of fathers upon children (cf. Exodus 20:5 ). Regardless, the Scriptures show also that the punishment of sin is only for those who sin:
"The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin" ( Deuteronomy 24:16 ).
"The soul that sinneth, it shall die: the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him" ( Ezekiel 18:20 ).
It would appear on the surface that we have a contradiction between these passages: some say that sons suffer the iniquities of their father, and some say that each soul suffers for their own sins. We can, however, reconcile these passages in one of two ways:
1.God perhaps does not visit the iniquity on the first generation of sinful people, but perhaps on a later generation of sinful people. Notice, for instance, that the exile of Israel and Judah are carried out not under faithful kings like Hezekiah or Josiah, but unfaithful kings, Hoshea and Zedekiah (2 Kings 17-18, 25).
2.God describes the propensity of children to follow in their parents' footsteps. Do we not even today say, "The apple does not fall far from the tree?" If the fathers involve themselves in some sin, it is very likely that children will also. This is not an absolute and hard and fast rule, but nevertheless often accurate.
Regardless, we do not need to infer from these passages that there is some form of "original sin" that each generation inherits from their forefathers.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home