unique perspectives from six people

Monday, January 5, 2015

The Law of Baptism - Part One

FOREWORD:

I was recently given for consideration a challenging article on the topic of baptism written by Lacy Crowell. Lacy graduated from Bear Valley Bible Institute and is clearly guided with humble and pure intent by Church of Christ doctrine.  I encourage you to read her article carefully and prayerfully before continuing with the first part of my response to her article.


After you’ve read her article – please come back to this document and share with me in the process of evaluating such a theology of salvation through baptism – what I will call the “law of Baptism”.  My article is not intended as an argument with Mrs. Crowell and is more reflective of my own personal study and evaluation of the passages being used by ambassadors of the “Church of Christ” in their attempt to exclude other Christians from salvation who have not been baptized – or baptized properly.

I’ve divided this response into four parts – because so much scripture is involved.  

PART ONE:

The first passage referenced by Crowell on the topic of baptism is Acts 9, where we have the story of Saul on the road to Damascus.  He is blinded by a light from Heaven, encounters Jesus on the road and then remains blind for three days. 

What is the purpose of this passage?  While baptism occurs in the passage, it is a single word from a single sentence.  And if we aren’t trying to read into the text a meaning based on our existing biases, then the passage is most obviously about how God chose Saul for the purpose of proclaiming his “…name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel.” (Acts 9:15, NIV)
The purpose of this passage is NOT to establish a “law of Baptism” nor was it to lay out the rules for the order of operations for receiving salvation. But if we wanted to make a rule based on the events of this passage, there are several things that happened chronologically and need to be repeated so as to fulfill such a law:

  1. First, Saul was blinded by an earthly encounter with Jesus.
  2. Then it is recorded that Ananias placed his hands on Saul and that Ananias spoke Jesus’ message to Saul. 
  3. After these events, Saul regained his sight.
  4. Next, Saul was baptized.
  5. Finally, after he was baptized, Saul ate and regained his strength.
We know that Ananias was sent to Saul so that he would “see again and be filled with the Holy Spirt.” (Acts 9:17, NIV).  Regrettably, for the purposes of establishing a “law of Baptism”, we aren’t given the chronology of when Saul received the Holy Spirit in this passage.  Did Saul receive the Holy Spirit after Ananias placed his hands on him and spoke the message to him?  That is apparently what caused Saul to regain his sight…  Or was the Holy Spirit given to Saul after baptism?  Or was there something special about eating after baptism? These things are written down…so they are obviously worth having been recorded.

In the end, Paul does get baptized – so it is surely important – but we cannot state from the description of the events in this passage that baptism was the action that “saved” Saul.

Next in Crowell’s article on Baptism, Matthew 7 is referenced as evidence that many will be denied salvation – even though they claimed to believe in Jesus.  Nonetheless, it is important to take the entire chapter in context.  Here is a summary of the chapter’s events in chronological order (but please also read it for yourself):
  1. Jesus tells the people that they will be judged by the same measure they use to judge others.
  2. Jesus calls out hypocrites who point out the faults of others without first dealing with their own sins. 
  3. Jesus states that God will give generously to those who ask from Him.
  4. Jesus summarizes the Law and the Prophets by this phrase, “…do to others what you would have them do to you…”
  5. Jesus warns against taking the easy path…and states clearly that the way to life is only discovered by a few (“the narrow gate”).
  6. Jesus warns that false prophets will come, but says that we will be able to discern between true and false prophets by their fruits.
  7. Jesus further states that many will say “Lord, Lord” even performing signs and miracles “in his  name”, but Jesus will tell them on that day, “…I never knew you…” (Matthew 7:23, NIV)
  8. Of those who say, “Lord, Lord”, only those who do the will of the Father will enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 7:21, NIV).
  9. The chapter ends with Jesus urging people to to put his words into practice.  Warning that those who do not put his words into practice will be washed away like a house built on sand – while those who do put his words into practice will stand firm during the storm.
  10. Finally, people were amazed at his words. 
This chapter has nothing to do with baptism, but the author of the article references the chapter to support the concept that many who expect to be saved will – in fact – be denied by Jesus.  In the context of her article, at least some of those people who expect to be saved will be denied by Jesus because their baptism was incorrect or non-existent.  

But in the immediate context of this verse, Jesus is speaking about false prophets.  Giving us instructions on how to discern between the good and the bad through their fruits – not through their baptism.  And then he states that “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Mathew 7:21, NIV).  This statement would most naturally be referring to those false prophets whose fruits weren’t aligned with the Father in heaven.  

Nonetheless, the only stated requirement for entering the kingdom of heaven – as clearly described by this passage – is to “do the will of the Father”.  In this regard, baptism isn’t even mentioned.  

The next scripture referenced in Crowell's article is Acts 22:16, which according to the Crowll “defines calling on the name of the Lord as being done through the act of baptism, not through saying a prayer.”

But Paul isn’t giving specific instructions about baptism instructions in this passage.  In the context of Acts 22, Paul is recounting this very same experience on the road to Damascus when at the end of his story, he states that Ananias told him, “And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.’ (Acts 22:16 NIV) [emphasis mine].

In the same sense that Paul is not speaking here so as to give instructions on baptism, this is also clearly not intended to be a formal definition of the phrase “calling on the name of the Lord” as Mrs. Crowell indicates.  Paul did not precede his testimony with, “Here is how and why you should call upon the name of the Lord through baptism…”  Interestingly, the addition of the phrase, “calling on his name” does tell us the type of baptism Paul received. And to the primary and the secondary readers, this qualifier tells us that Paul was baptized in Jesus’ name.  There are other places in the New Testament where the “name” used in baptism is called into question.  

And while Mrs. Crowell doesn’t reference this next passage, I have investigated Acts 19 because of the similarity of “calling on the name of the Lord” used in Acts 22..  In Acts 19, Paul encountered some men who were alreaady baptized but had not received the Holy Spirit.  After a quick conversation, he recognized that they were baptized in John’s name and didn’t even know about the Holy Spirit – which is given by Jesus.  Here’s how the events go down:
"So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?” “John’s baptism,” they replied. Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts 19:3-5 NIV)
And there it is –  “He [John] told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” (v. 4)  And still, quite obviously, baptism happens immediately after belief.  The two seem to go together.

The most intriguing part of this story is the very next verse:
“When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.” (Acts 19:6 NIV)
Here is the summarized chronology of events from this story in the first part of Acts 19:
  1. Paul asked the disciples if they had received the Holy Spirit “when they believed” (v. 2)
  2. Here it is important to note that Paul asks these men expectantly – expecting that when they believed, they should also have received the Holy Spirit.
  3. They answered “No” because they didn’t even know about the Spirit.
  4. Paul explains to them the difference between the baptism of John and the baptism of Jesus.  Afterward, they are immediately baptized IN JESUS’ NAME (not BY Jesus).
  5. Finally, Paul lays hands upon them and they receive the Holy Spirit, speak in tongues and then prophecy.
If we are trying to establish a “law of Baptism”, then things just got more complicated.  In this passage, the Holy Spirit isn’t received through baptism – but through the laying on of hands.

-------------

This is part one of a four-part response to the use of scripture and conclusions in the article "What About Baptism?" written by Lacy Crowell.  Her original article can be found here: http://comefillyourcup.com/2013/09/09/what-about-baptism/

No comments:

Post a Comment