|
[HOME] [INDEX OF ARTICLES ] [ COPYRIGHT INFORMATION ] [ ABOUT US ] [CONTACT ]
|
By Blood And Water
The True Story and Meaning of
Christian Baptism
[Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4] [Part 5]
[Part 6] [Part 7] [Part 8] [Part 9] [Part 10]
PART 6 - Apostles’ Baptism: The Demonstration
XXVII. Demonstration of Apostles’ Baptism
We move straight from the Lord’s commissioning of baptism to the record of the apostles practicing it. Acts gives us only a few examples of the apostles’ baptizing ministry. Yet in these limited accounts, we do get a fuller picture of what the Lord’s commission meant—what baptism could and could not accomplish.
- The Purpose of Acts
1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, 3 it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; 4 so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught. Luke 1
1 The first account I composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, 1 until the day when He was taken up to heaven, after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the Apostles whom He had chosen. Acts 1
Before considering what Acts has to show us about Apostles’ Baptism, we must know why Acts was written. Acts is Part II of Luke’s account of the life and ministry of Messiah and His Apostles. Luke’s specific purpose is to clearly delineate for a man named Theophilus the exact truth regarding salvation in Christ. Because this is his purpose, how Luke treats the record of Apostles’ Baptism relative to their message is exceedingly important.
What then do we find in Acts about this? What we find is a very loose relationship between Luke’s accounts of the Apostles’ baptizing and that of their preaching regarding faith in Messiah. The two do not always appear together. Luke often records the Apostles’ preaching and/or the conversion of the hearers with no mention of any attendant baptizing—just as we found in the gospels.
Given Luke’s purpose for writing, this looseness by itself shows the reflective nature of Apostles’ Baptism. It prevents us from creating any “formula” making baptism mandatory to conversion. Were Apostles’ Baptism required for conversion, Luke had to make sure Theophilus could see it in every record of conversion. He would not have left something so vital to eternal life for Theophilus to “assume” by silence.
It’s also valuable to note that in Acts, nowhere are the Apostles recorded giving direct teaching to anyone about baptism itself—either its meaning or purpose. We only see them exhorting people to believe and submit to it. That Luke nowhere records the Apostles specifically teaching on baptism’s meaning or purpose also shows its reflectiveness of Faith Baptism.
- Centrality of the Name
Though Luke doesn’t record the Apostles actually teaching about baptism, he does give us a very clear picture through their preaching as to what they, including Luke, understood the Lord’s commission to mean—and what Theophilus would need to understand.
Given what Luke recorded of their words, it’s clear the Apostles believed that the Name of the Lord, not baptism, was the centerpiece of the Lord’s commission to them. They understood baptizing to be an accompaniment to and in testimony of the power of actual salvation, forgiveness and cleansing from sin to be found in[to] His Name. The full testimony of Peter is incontestable here. Note especially the clear cause/effect relationship between the Name of Jesus (underlined) and its effects (in bold):
2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
3:4 But Peter…fixed his gaze on him and said, "Look at us!" 6 … "… In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene—walk!" 16 "And on the basis of faith in His name, it is the name of Jesus which has strengthened this man whom you see and know; and the faith which comes through Him has given him this perfect health in the presence of you all. 19 "Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away…”
4:8 Then Peter … said to them, “… 10 let it be known to all of you … that by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, …by this name this man stands here before you in good health…12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved." 18 And when they had summoned them, they commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. 29 "And now, Lord, … grant that Your bond-servants may speak Your word with all confidence, 30 while You extend Your hand to heal … through the name of Your holy servant Jesus."
10:43 "Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins."
The total thrust of Peter’s first testimony to the Jews after the Lord’s commission as well as to the Gentiles was that the power of forgiveness, healing and salvation all came directly through the Name of Jesus. All power was in the Name. All salvation was in the Name. All forgiveness was in the Name. All healing was in the Name. (Note that the council was afraid of Peter’s teaching in the Name—teaching which explained nothing about baptizing. The council was not afraid of Peter baptizing—an otherwise common practice!)
Seeing the whole record this way, it’s clear that the power was not in baptizing, which, compared to the Name, receives but incidental mention and no explanation. Peter only explained the power of the Name. To him, this Name was the focal point of the Lord’s commission.
Nor was Peter alone in this understanding. Ananias reaffirms the centrality of the Name in the washing away of sin accompanied by baptism:
22:16 `Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized and wash away your sins calling on His name.' 9:18 And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and [then] he got up and was baptized. 28 And he was with them… speaking out boldly in the name of the Lord.
See once more how the water that washes away sin is the water of the Name of the Lord. (See also how Paul’s scales of blindness fell off by faith before, not after, he received Apostle’s Baptism.)
In examining Luke’s entire record of Apostles’ Baptism, we discover the same emphasis on faith in the Name of Jesus throughout. His accounts of baptizing are secondary to this. Factually, Luke makes many many references to the Name of the Lord, the power of His name, faith in His Name, faith in Him, etc. with no reference to baptism. However, he never mentions baptism unaccompanied by reference to the Lord’s Name or to faith in Him. (Please see the Appendix on references to baptism and faith in Acts.)
All this reveals the reflective nature of Apostles’ Baptism—a baptism that solidifies visible discipleship and signifies the cleansing of heart through faith into the water of the Lord’s body. (If you were Theophilus, how could you conclude anything else?)
- The Reflection Disperses
Thinking back to our picture of the tree by the pond, the tree’s reflection is strongest where the pond actually touches the tree at its base. But as we move across the pond further and further from the real tree, the reflection begins to disperse. It becomes “wavy” and fractured as the wind and other elements move about on the pond and create ripples.
So too, as Apostles Baptism moves further and further in time and place from the Lord’s original commission, we find a similar dispersion in its practice and emphasis. The pattern deteriorates as the reflection moves away from the tree of Calvary and across the pond of New Covenant history.
From a general overview of Acts, we easily see that the closer the ministry of baptism was to the original Jewish audience that heard (and rejected) Messiah, the more intensely concurrent with initial repentant faith it was exhorted and conducted.
Immediately after the crucifixion, resurrection, commissioning and ascension—Peter’s urging the Jews of their need for conversion and baptism is so intense and links them so closely as to give an appearance that they are inseparably of one and the same effect. So too with Ananias’ baptizing of Paul. As he said to Paul, “Get up and be baptized and wash away your sins calling on His name.”
Yet as the years pass from the founding events of the New Covenant and the gospel travels from Jerusalem to the furthest reaches of the gentiles, the emphasis on Apostles’ Baptism diminishes, becoming more and more incidental to preaching of the word. Again remember, this dispersion does not happen generations later. It is within the immediate time frame of the first Apostles and is part of an account designed to show a man what is essential to salvation.
After Acts 12, Luke’s focus shifts from the Jerusalem church under Peter to Paul’s ministry throughout the Roman world. Significantly, there is not one recorded mention of baptism in any of Paul’s sermons to the gentile people and rulers. Meanwhile, though Luke clearly shows that Paul continues baptizing converts, his mention of his doing so is sporadic. Again, what does this communicate to Theophilus about the way of salvation?
**********
In its totality, we gain from Luke’s testimony a real picture of Apostles’ Baptism as an after-image of the Lord’s true baptism from the cross, a reflection subject to change in emphasis against the unchangeable core reality of salvation by faith in the Name of Jesus Christ. If Theophilus is looking to Luke for a true account of conversion and the meaning of “Jesus’ orders” to the Apostles, there is simply no way he can conclude that baptism itself is intrinsic to the receiving of eternal life.
[In Part 7: Apostles' Baptism: The Teaching]
Chris Anderson
New Meadow Neck, Rhode Island
First Love Ministry
- a ministry of Anglemar Fellowship
http://www.firstloveministry.org4/04
Webmaster littleflock@netzero.net
Page updated September 6, 2005
