However, the general view
was that baptism was
vital because in it Christ connected water, word and spirit.
For instance:
Tertullian
(155-220) The Necessity of Baptism for
Salvation
Basil
the Great (329 - 379) on
Baptism
Erasmus'
emphasis upon a rational
interpretation
of Luther's "faith only"
led Zwingli in
1525 to conclude also from Calvin that "if salvation was by grace,
if even faith was a direct work of God by the Holy
Spirit,
then there can be no
place for schemes of
religious life or thought which allow for the ex opere operato efficacy
of baptism."
Basil defines the
universal understanding of
the connection between Word, Spirit and Water until the time of John
Calvin.
Therefore, 1500 years of
belief and practice about Biblical Baptism was altered by a Latter
Day Prophet who grasped that Calvinism could not tolerate the total
history of scholarship
So-called
believer's baptism demands the
same real,
literal presence of Christ
just like the Eucharist. It is similar to pagan baptism in that the
individual is totally passive and CANNOT
even believe
without a direct movement
of God's Spirit to point out or identify one as predestinated.
Those
who believed
in predestination, like the Jews
and later
Calvinists such as the Puritans,
"were
obsessed with a
terror that they would not be
saved.
Conversion
became a central
preoccupation,
a
violent, tortured drama in which the sinner and his spiritual
director wrestled for his soul.
Frequently
the penitent had
to undergo severe humiliation or experience real despair of God's grace until he
appreciated his utter dependence upon God." (Karen Armstrong, A
History of God, p. 283).
Therefore, it is
impossible
to believe in the Baptist form of baptism without at the same time
believing in Calvinistic predestination. And this discounts the
finished work of Christ.
This
was based on humanistic
rationalism: that religon must be based on "logical conclusions"
rather than simple faith in the clear statement of the Bible that
"baptism saves" because that is the time and place Christ assigned to
save us.
It
was not, in the future,
to rely on the teachings of the Bible because, whatever one is
taught, if God has predestinated you then you will be informed
directly by the Holy Spirit.
This
means that to base
faith and practice on the Bible is not only useless but is hostile
toward God Who has already made up His "mind."
This does not prevent
Calvinists teaching
"faith only" to shift the blame and claim that it is being
RATIONALISTIC to try to understand the Bible. In reality, the High
Church view of a direct revelation depend on their rational minds
which they confuse with the Mind of The Spirit. If so then the Spirit
contradicts the teachings of Christ and the apostles and bible toters
are considered dangerous.
"The
difference
between Luther
and Zwingli's methods shifted the
debate from a discussion about real presence, in the Eucharist along with other dogma.
At Marburg Luther argued
against his opponents' use of logic more than against their
theological stance on the presence
of
Christ (Kittleson 207).
For
Luther feared that their use of reason would then be applied
to other issues, like
baptism, and begin to
unravel Evangelical theology.
He
feared that this
would place some
authority in the human ability to
reason,
instead
of
authority being found
in God's
Word
alone.
On
this key argument, it can
be said that his objection was not specifically to Zwingli's view of
the Eucharist.
"It
was at least in part the
influence of Erasmus
who emphasized a rational interpretation of the Scriptures that would characterize
Zwingli's preaching in Glarus,
Einsiedeln, and as priest of
Great Minster, Zurich. Zwingli believed that
the
Word would give light and life to
those who read it,
but
not to everyone who read it.
"It
does so only where a true
response is kindled. In
other words, it calls
for a decision of faith." This work could only take place, in Zwingli's
estimation, as a
result of the illumination of the Holy
Spirit.
Because
of the error that the
death of Christ had not relieved the guilt of Adam's sin, it was
believed that chidren inherited this ORIGINAL SIN. Baptism or
sprinkling "a bit of dust to bury the body" was the teaching of
baptismal regeneration.
It
was against this that
Zwingli argued. Many false teachings such as the trinity had no
Biblical foundation but was invented in attempting to silence Arius.
Therefore, Zwingli was opposing Rome and not the Bible.
"The
second
key
doctrine for Zwingli, and another
foundational belief within Protestantism, was justification by grace
through faith. With this belief, Zwingli repudiated Rome's
teaching that external baptism could of itself cleanse
from sin. Zwingli's
interpretation of the Scriptures led him to believe that "if
salvation was by grace,
if
even faith
was a direct work
of God by the Holy Spirit,
then
there can be no place for schemes of
religious life or thought
which allow either for the merit of human works or for
the ex
opere
operato efficacy of sacramental
observances."
"Justification became the sovereign and creative declaration of God by which
those
who are
elected to faith in
Jesus Christ are accepted as righteous on the merits of
Christ."
This
was a monumental shift for anyone to make in
opposition to the
Catholic Church's traditional view of soteriology, and thereby earned
Zwingli a position
alongside Luther and Calvin as a Reformer in his own right.
"Zwingli
even made the proper
distinction between rational, intellectual assent,
and the necessity for a movement
of the whole
nature by the direct action of the Holy Spirit. Zwingli's insistence
on justification
by grace did not
mean
the negation of
the Law.
The
Law was still seen as a part of God's
will for man as a guide
to the believer and a warning
to the unregenerate.
However, it is
easy to misquote Zwingli who
thought that baptism was not a church duty but that of the
family.
"To
Zwingli, the
child was born with an "inherited frailty" which inevitably would
give
rise
to a sin
nature in each person.
"To
Zwingli,
baptism was more a pledge
of what we ought to do rather than a
testimony to what God has already done for us."
Although
Zwingli was apparently
weak in developing a theology of baptism, especially in relation to
its sacramental effectiveness, certainly he helped to lay the
groundwork that would be built upon by later Reformed theologians. Quoted
from. Rev. Christopher C. Arch,
M.A
Max Lucado whose Baptists
friends have
confiscated a church of Christ insists that 1 Peter 3:21 means that
we are saved even by calling God "father" and we PLEDGE to be good
boys. However, baptism is an ANSWER only in the CALL AND RESPONSE:
God calls us all through the Gospel and we ANSWER by requesting A
holy spirit or A clear conscience:
Webster: Pledge: 1. The condition of being given or held as security for a
contract, payment, etc
The
like figure whereunto even baptism
doth also now
save us (not the
putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the
resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1
Peter 3:21KJV
The
NIV is Calvinistic and
Faith Only and therefore often goes to trouble to translate words
with no textual authority.
Therefore,
the definition of
words and other versions prove that it is at the time and place of
water baptism that we ASK for God to give us a clean conscience which
is the gift of A holy spirit.
And
corresponding to that, baptism
now saves
you--
not the removal
of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good
conscience-- through the resurrection of Jesus
Christ, 1 Peter 3:21NAS
Baptism,
which corresponds to
this, now saves
you,
not as a removal
of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for
a clear
conscience, through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21RSV
(That,
by the way, is what
baptism pictures for us: In baptism we show that we have been saved
from death and doom by the resurrection of Christ;[c] not because our
bodies are washed clean by the water but because in being baptized we are
turning to God
and asking him to cleanse our hearts from sin.) 1 Peter 3:21LIV
This
view led predominately
Baptist slave owners to stake their fortune on their racist views and
depending on saviours like Robert E. Lee to prove that BAPTISTS were
uniquely the ONLY TRUE KINGDOM OF GOD. As uniquely American Religions
which are not really part of historic Christianity, Mormonism claims
the West and Baptists the South and South West as a replacement of
the Catholic church.
We might be cursed if we
rejected the skill and
courage of men like Luther and Zwingli. However, many of their
beliefs are reactionary
against
Catholicism.
Zwingli believed in two
forms of relationship. The first was that with God through His
invisible church - a mystical union by faith. The second was with the
community through the visible church. Baptism was an absolute
necessity for membership and privileges.
To accept Zwingli's
baptism
is NOT to accept any previous teaching about baptism. Indeed, we will
see that because Zwingli was urgent to INCLUDE the pagans who had not
been baptized, that his baptism is quite identical to PAGAN
BAPTISM.
LUTHER
never rejected the
meaning of baptism clearly taught in the Bible
"In
these words you
must note, in the first place, that here stand God's commandment and institution, lest we doubt that
Baptism is divine, not devised
nor invented by men. For as truly as I can say, No man has spun the
Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer out of his head,
but they are revealed and given by God
Himself,
so
also I can boast
that Baptism is no human trifle, but instituted by God Himself,
moreover,
that it is most
solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be
baptized or we cannot be saved, lest any one regard it
as a trifling
matter, like putting on a new red coat.
For
it is of the greatest
importance that we esteem
Baptism excellent, glorious, and exalted, for which we contend and
fight chiefly,
because
the world
is now so full of sects
clamoring that Baptism is an external thing, and that external
things are of no
benefit.
Luther
also pointed out the
same idea Jesus expressed about REJECTING THE COUNSEL OF GOD. To the
elite, baptism was a show of contempt for life and the world and they
were not going to do something which they understood from secular
baptism as humiliating and subservient. See
Luther on FAITH ONLY and BAPTISM prior to
Zwingli's change to try to make Calvinism fit where it clearly would
not fit the Bible.
"Why?
Because the person is
nobler and better. Here, then, we must not estimate the person
according to the works, but the works according to the person, from
whom they must derive their nobility.
But
insane reason
will not regard this, and
because
Baptism does not
shine like the works which we do, it is to be esteemed as
nothing.
Zwingli's
FAITH ONLY with
salvation prior to baptism was to SAVE the pagans. However, as Jesus
tells us, it was a reluctance to accept the words of Jesus when HUMAN
RATIONALISM wanted to believe something else.
LUTHER
would say that the ROOT
of the dogma of FAITH ONLY is human pride which cannot accept that
the humiliation of water baptism can save the likes of them. Why?
Why, by accepting Calvinism they were saved WITHOUT BAPTISM, this
proved that God had predestinated them and therefore to submit to
baptism questioned their own RATIONAL CONCLUSIONS.
BELIEVER'S
BAPTISM today
means that one is SAVED and that baptism is just an outward sign.
However, the original intention was another RATIONALISTIC attempt to
be like God and include infants where Catholics had excluded them
without sprinkling (which isn't baptism):
"Eschatology. Here again Zwingli departed further from Augustine and the mediaeval theology than any other
Reformer, and anticipated modern
opinions. He believed
(with the Anabaptists) in the salvation of infants dying
in infancy, whether
baptized or
not.
He
believed also in
the salvation of those heathen who loved truth and righteousness in
this life, and were, so to say, unconscious Christians, or pre-Christian Christians.
This
is closely connected with
his humanistic
liberalism and enthusiasm for the ancient classics.
He
admired the
wisdom and the virtue of the Greeks and Romans, and expected to meet in
heaven, not only the
saints of the Old Testament from Adam down to John the Baptist, but
also such men as Socrates, Plato, Pindar, Aristides, Numa, Cato,
Scipio, Seneca; yea, even such mythical characters as Hercules and Theseus. There is, he says, no
good and holy
man, no faithful soul, from the beginning to the end of the world,
that shall not see God in his glory.
"This
liberal extension of Christ's kingdom and
Christ's salvation beyond
the limits of the
visible Church,
although
directly opposed to the
traditional belief of the necessity of water baptism for
salvation, was not
altogether new.
"Justin
Martyr,
Origen, and other Greek
fathers saw in the scattered truths of the heathen poets and philosophers the
traces of the pre-Christian revelation of the Logos,
and in the philosophy of the Greeks
a schoolmaster to lead them to Christ.
See
how Rubel Shelly says that
while John
was remembering old
fragments of the
gospel and using theology and his personal agenda, composed or
narrated his gospel account only on the demand
of the Ephesian Elders and for his own
personal agenda. Shelly
sees John as getting the LOGOS idea from the Greek
Hermes, Mercury or other "gods"
seen as the carrier of information. Along with this goes the equally
pagan view of baptism. All of this PERVERTS the Scriptures as
delivered to us.
The
humanists of the school of Erasmus
recognized a secondary inspiration in the classical
writings, and felt tempted to pray:
"Sancte
Socrates, ora pro
nobis, Zwingli
was a humanist, but he had no sympathy
with Pelagianism.
On
the contrary, as
we have shown previously, he traced salvation to God's sovereign grace, which is independent
of ordinary means, and he
first made a clear distinction between the visible and the invisible
Church.
He
did not
intend, as he has been
often misunderstood, to assert the possibility of salvation without Christ. "Let no one think," he
wrote to
Urbanus Rhegius (a preacher at Augsburg), "that I lower Christ; for
whoever comes to God comes to him through Christ .... The word,
"He
who believeth
not will be condemned,"
applies
only to those who can hear the gospel, but not to children and heathen
.... I openly confess that all infants are saved by Christ, since
grace extends as far as sin.
Whoever
is born is saved by Christ from the
curse of original
sin.
> If he comes to the knowledge of the law and does the works of the law (Rom. 2:14,
26),
> he gives evidence of his
election."
(Schaff)
This
has come to mean that one
is born under LAW and must do the works of the law. Once convinced
that he is utterly helpless, he turns to Christ. This legalistic
wrestling with Law instills the belief that baptism as Christ's MEANS
of bestowing grace is just another work of the Law. Again we note that:
Those
who believed
in predestination, like the Jews
and later
Calvinists such as the Puritans,
"were
obsessed with a
terror that they would
not be saved.
Conversion
became a central
preoccupation,
a violent, tortured drama in which the sinner and his spiritual
director wrestled for his soul.
Frequently
the penitent had
to undergo severe humiliation or experience real despair of God's grace until he
appreciated his utter dependence upon God." (Karen Armstrong, A
History of God, p. 283).
The
Bible and 1500 years of
scholarship agreed with Jesus that salvation was placed, by Him, in
connection with water baptism were we ACCEPT THE COUNSEL of God for
our lives. Zwingli's baptism, on the other hand, was truly a
legalistic work which denied the ORIGINAL sacrifice of Christ as
having any value to them before they had PERSONALLY abandoned all
hope after being cycled through the Law of Moses:
While followers of
Zwingli and
Smyth had good intentions, their theology would not work without
reinterpreting
the teachings about baptism .
Not only must the
horrified sinner get cleared
of ORIGINAL SIN and do the WORKS OF THE LAW, they must have...
the
crucifixion fulfilled in them through a direct operation of the
Holy Spirit because, among many, God had predestinated it
so.
"Since
there was no other
minister to administer baptism, Smyth baptized himself and then proceeded to
baptize his flock. An
interesting note at this point that should be brought to bear is that
the mode of baptism used was
that of pouring, for immersion would
not become the
standard for another
generation."
Before
his death,
as seems characteristic of Smyth, he abandoned his "Baptist" views and began trying
to bring his flock into the Mennonite church. Although he
died before this happened, most
of his congregation did join themselves with the Mennonite church after his death.
Zwingli or modern Baptist dogma
of FAITH ONLY
has absolutely no meaning outside of the Calvinistic ELECTION or
PREDESTINATION. Baptism is then just a token or visible confirmation
for the benefit of the organized church that we ARE one of the
selected few. Early Baptists did not just see this as "joining the
church" but believers who had not been baptized were not allowed to
participate in the Eucharist. Therefore, they were saved in promised
but not allowed to partake of the means of bestowing grace.
"Luther,
on the one hand,
insisted in the eucharistic controversy on the most literal
interpretation of the
words
of institution
against
all
arguments of grammar and
reason; and yet, on the
other hand, he exercised the boldest subjective criticism on several
books of the Old and New
Testaments,
especially
the
Epistle of James
and the Epistle to the Hebrews,
because
he could not harmonize them with his
understanding of Paul's doctrine of
justification."
"As
a reaction against the mysteries within Catholicism, and
not as well-thought-out
theology, men like Zwingli formulated a new doctrine in the world. This doctrine was
later adopted by John
Smyth
and other separatists as a fundamental tenet
of a new creed.
Since the early 1600s groups developed which grew into a modern
system of mysteries or sacramental religion.
This
translates as
GNOSTICISM and not CHRISTIANITY.
John Smyth,
claimed by Baptists, in a Short Confession of Faith, noted that:
(11)
That faith, destitute of good works,
is vain; but true and living faith is
distinguished by good works.
(12)
That the church of Christ is a company of the
faithful; baptised after confession of sin and of faith,
endowed with the power
of Christ. [ 1993a ] [
1993b ]
(13)
That the church of Christ has power delegated to
themselves of
announcing the word, administering the sacraments, appointing ministers,
disclaiming them, and also
excommunicating; but the last appeal is to the brethren of body of
the church.
(14)
That baptism is the external sign of the remission of sins, of dying
and of being made
alive,
and therefore does
not belong to
infants. [ 1993 ]
He did not share
the common Baptist view of
baptism, but in
order to exclude
infants noted
that baptism is the outward sign of the inward
work of faith "which works." Of course, it is obvious that God purges
our inward heart of sin as our bodies are washed with pure water.
Water does not wash the soul clean but without it God does not act.
This is His predestinated plan.
1729
Goat Yard
Declaration of Faith A Declaration of the Faith and Practice
of the Church of
Christ at Horsely-down,
under the Pastoral Care of Mr. John Gill, &c.
XI.
We believe that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ordinances of Christ, to be continued until
his second coming; and that
the former
is absolutely
requisite to the latter;
that
is to say, that those only
are to be admitted into
the communion of the church, and to participate of all
ordinances in it, who upon profession of their faith, have been baptized by
immersion, in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
An
ordinance means "directon or
command of an authoritative
nature.. A decree of
Deity."
(Webster)
Because
these ancient scholars
understood that God's grace is mininistered only to those who are in
the church or the body of Christ, to make baptism necessary for
church membership meant that it was an absolute command of
Christ. Therefore, baptism and the Lord's
Supper were not sacraments but ordinances. A sacrament is "a mystery,
Gr. musterion, or a
secret."
Any restoration of
BELIEVER'S BAPTISM which is
POST 1500 and rejection of Christian Baptism is the urge, like
Zwingli, to play God and INCLUDE Baptists and other Calvinists as
"just as good as I am." However, this ecumenical urge to JOIN THE
BAPTISTS will never be met with friendship. Ecumenical has always
meant, "You agree with me and we can fellowship." Since you are
probably considered a CULT, your baptism has no value because it is
traced to Christ and not to an unbroken line of Baptist
clergy.
For instance, Baptists
claim to be the only
"one true church" because it believes that it can trace its
existance
through an unbroken chain back to John the Baptist:
BUT: "Only Scriptural Baptist
churches can make a
legitimate claim to an unbroken succession back to the time of
Christ and the apostles. Christ
only built one
kind
of church and that
church is described in detail in the New Testament.
The
only churches
meeting the requirements of that description today are true Baptist
churches.
Baptist
churches have existed
in every age since their founding by Christ, though they have not
always been known by that name. We do not deny that there are those
in other so-called "churches" that have been born again by the grace
of God. We do deny, however, that these man-made organizations are true
churches of our Lord
Jesus Christ.
We
might say that churches of
Christ have an unbroken connection with Christ and they were ALWAYS
known by that name. John Smyth called his group the church of Christ and while claimed by
Catholics the church
Fathers considered themselves churches of
Christ.
The
churches of Christ rejected
all relationship to the law of Moses such as tithing and
music.
The
churches of Christ always
practiced baptism IN ORDER TO the forgiveness of sins even before it
adopted infant baptism
We
noted above that what is
claimed as Baptist called themselves the church of Christ in order to honor the
husband of the bride or the
Head of the body. Therefore, the Baptists like all modern churches
must endorse a reformation or restoration in order to even be close
to the New Testament Church:
BUT:
"If one thing could be said of the Church in the 1500's it would be that it had
strayed
far
from the Biblical standard and was very corrupt. However, men like
Martin Luther, Ulrich
Zwingli, and John Calvin
stood up and reclaimed the Biblical, historical doctrines of the
early Church. This call for reform
reclaimed the following: the absolute authority of
Scripture; the unconditional sovereignty of God
over every aspect of life; salvation by grace through faith alone;
the
purpose of man
being to glorify God;
and
man's right and
responsibility to read
and study the Bible for himself in light of history, rather than depending
solely on the
Church to do it for him."
Of
course, in the Luther link
above, we note that his Sola Fide was identical to that of Thomas
Campbell: faith must have an object and without baptism it is not
faith.
Believer's Baptism--Back
Under Legalism
A
fundamental part of the
doctrine of John Smyth and Zwingli is the term: "Believer's
Baptism." This new (called
radical at the time
that it departed from 15
centuries of history)
idea of baptism is not based upon reading the Bible for oneself.
Rather, it depends upon theologians
uderstanding all of the Baptism
passages in ways which no translator has ever seen fit to give to the
world. Zwingli would say that "baptism does not save" but go on to say
"without faith." This form of believer's baptism intended to deny that
infants needed to be baptized.
Believer's Baptism Britannica:
One
of the most dramatic differences between the reformers was the
radicals' practice of believers' baptism. The radical Reformers,
especially the Anabaptists (whose name means “rebaptizers”), preferred
adult baptism because adults could exercise free will and accept
baptism. Infant baptism, from their viewpoint, cheapened the standard
of church membership and was not designated or foreseen in the New
Testament documents that chartered the church. Michael Sattler (c.
1500–27), Menno Simons (1496–1561), and Balthasar Hubmaier (1485–1528)
led the opposition to infant baptism. They were determined to follow
the example of Jesus, who underwent baptism as an adult. They also
aspired to be “buried” (in water) with him, as St. Paul had said
baptized people would be. “New birth” would come from this act, and the
reborn believers would restore the church.
We
repeat the statement to
show that BELIEVER'S BAPTISM is an intense, works oriented form of
almost self-redemption from the Law of Moses. However, a third member
of the "god family" or Holy Spirit had been defined as doing what the
human mind could not do: not even believe.
as
the
crucifixion fulfilled in them through a direct operation of the Holy Spirit because, among many,
God had predestinated it so.
"Since
there was no other
minister to administer baptism, Smyth baptized himself and then proceeded to
baptize his flock. An
interesting note at this point that should be brought to bear is that
the mode of baptism used was
that of pouring, for immersion would
not become the
standard for another generation.
Before
his death,
as seems characteristic of Smyth, he abandoned his "Baptist" views and began trying
to bring his flock into the Mennonite church. Although he
died before this happened, most
of his congregation did
join
themselves with
the Mennonite
church after his death.
The
Britannica on
"Believer's Baptism" in Protestantanism notes that:
"When taken out of the historical
context of St. Paul's teachings in the letters
to the Romans
or the Galatians and transferred to their own times, the Reformers'
teaching of justification
relied heavily on the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit, in
effect,
made
Christ's
action contemporaneous with the sinner's quest.
"God
was working
now
on behalf of those in need. Through preaching,
humanity learned of Jesus Christ's sacrifice and death.
If the
individual believed this historical narrative and,
more
importantly,
if
by the power of the Holy Spirit he believed that
it
was told
and enacted for
him,
he stood before
God in a new light.
"Grace
was not infused into him
to the point that he became acceptable and pleasing to God. Instead,
while the individual was
still a sinner, God
accepted him favourably and justified him.
"Christ's
death on the cross
was then the only
"transaction" that
mattered between God and man.
The
sacraments
reinforced the relation and brought new grace.
That
is, rather than accepting
the ONCE FOR ALL sacrifice of Christ, a believer's baptism actually
BESTOWED grace. This makes "believer's baptism into a WORKS by which
he ACQUIRES more grace.
"The teaching of the Reformers becomes
most intelligible when seen against the Western Catholic
doctrines (e.g., sin, grace, atonement), as they
saw them.
"Sometimes
the phrase total
depravity was used to
describe the human condition, though it must be said that the term
had connotations in the 16th century that were different from those that it has today.
It was used not so much to provide lurid connotations for
descriptions of the depth of sin but rather to describe its
extent;
man
as a total
being was in trouble.
Even
good works, piety, religiousness, and
efforts, apart from
justification by grace through faith, fell under God's curse.
On
the other hand, the
justified sinner could be described in the most lavish terms, as one who could be "as
Christ" or even sometimes "a Christ."
Note:
This is a form of trans or con-substantation: the
bread becomes the literal flesh
of Christ or it has no value. That is, Christ did not have the power
to infuse life into baptism as the reinaction of His death, burial
and resurrection. His body must
be destroyed and brought into life at the hands of the priest to
have value.
Baptists claim that it must be at the hands of a Baptist traceable in
an unbroken line back to Christ
In
the same way, "believer's
baptism" holds that the person must literally be a form of or even
must be Christ Himself for His sacrificial blood to have any
effect.
This
means, of course, that the
believer must pay for
their own sins by becomming Christ.
However,
originally the
statement simply meant that you don't baptize infants
but believers. It is left for a more modern and radical
interpretation to say
that one is saved at belief and therefore baptism is not effective as
a means but a sign. However, then and now, one is not allowed to be a
member of the body of Christ until after baptism.
The
fatal flaw is that one is
SAVED and is yet a SINNER. Otherwise we would LIMIT the grace of
God.
"Those
who have heard this
Protestant teaching outlined through the centuries have regularly seen
the difficulties it
raises insofar as the portrait
of God's
character is concerned.
Protestants never
came up with logically satisfying answers to the resultant questions, though they
were convinced that they were
faithful witnesses to biblical teachings concerning the mystery of God's nature. The
central question:
"if everything depended
upon God's initiative
"and yet the majority of people are not
saved,
"does this not mean that God is
responsible for
creating humans only to
have them suffer;
"is
he not guilty of the worst
kind of cruelty by being
the sole agent of their damnation?
John
Calvin said that he
"gagged on Calvinism." Those who reject the counsel of God for their
lives will gag God and He will spit them out of His mouth.
The
dogma of faith only must not be understood
as simply a one-step plan of
salvation. Rather, we are looking at a Protestant version of the
repudiated Catholic mysteries. This mystical faith is
not a produce of reading or
hearing about Christ. Calvin admits that this was the ordinary
meaning but as a reaction against Catholicism God has redefined
faith.
Not
behind the mysteries one
jot or tittle, John Calvin wrote in such a way that preachers
preaching BELIEVER'S BAPTISM should get off the payroll and let God
do His own picking.
"But they do not consider, that when the
apostle makes hearing the source of faith, he only describes the ordinary economy and
dispensation of the Lord, which he generally observes in the calling
of his people; but does not prescribe a perpetual rule for him, precluding his employment of any
other method; which he has certainly employed in the calling of many,
to
whom he has given the true knowledge of himself in an internal manner, by the illumination of his
Spirit,
Bruner
speaks for most of those who reject Baptism
following faith acquired, according to Paul, by hearing the Words of
Christ (Romans 10). Rather, salvation is a result of God "bursting
through" and giving you faith. And to believe Paul is, according to
the mysteries,
insanity:
"God can never be found along any way of thought; for indeed this idea
of God bursts through and destroys all the
fundamental categories of thought; the absolutely antithetical
character of the basic logical principles of contradiction and
identity.
To want to think this God for oneself would
mean insanity." (Brunner, Emil, Revelation and Reason, pp 46f.)
Remember that we noted that an ordinance is an
absolute command. However, A sacrament
is "a mystery,
Gr. musterion, or a secret."
Therefore,
to the mystery
religions reformed out of the master
mystery religion, baptism is not
an ordinance to be obeyed by everyone. Christ did not accomplish His
work at one time and place in history.
Rather,
baptism is a mystery
enjoyed only by those who have been chosen out of the masses, given
God's high
sign,
has been accepted
by the circle and then has, by their permission, been baptized to
enjoy "all of the rights and privileges" of that mystery group. A web
site laments that about half of Southern Baptists are not baptized
for this purpose. It also laments that people are being baptized upon
their confession without undergoing the mysteries of initiation. In other
words,
they see baptism as an ordinance to be
obeyed rather
than a sacrement or
sacred mystery.
To
the Sacramentarians, the
once for all sacrifice of Jesus has no value unless it, like the
bread and juice of the euchrist, is turned into a reality
just for the one who
believes and when he believes. And even
he can understand
this mystery only by a direct operation of the Holy Spirit.
"The
Catholic system of Christianity, both
Greek and Roman, is sacramental and sacerdotal. The saving grace of
Christ is conveyed to men through the channel of seven sacraments, or "mysteries," administered by ordained priests
who
receive members into the church by baptism, accompany them through
the various stages of life, and dismiss them by extreme unction into
the other world.
A
literal priesthood requires a literal sacrifice, and this is the repetition of Christ's one sacrifice on the
cross offered by the priest in the mass from day to day.
The
power of the mass extends not only to the living, but even to departed
spirits in purgatory, abridging their sufferings, and hastening their
release and transfer to heaven.
See the Mormon need for a priesthood and baptism for the dead.
"Zwingli and Calvin reduced the sacraments to signs and seals of grace which is
inwardly communicated by the Holy Spirit. They asserted the sovereign causality of
God,
and the independence of the Spirit who "bloweth where it
willeth" (John 3:8). God can communicate his gifts freely as he
chooses. We are, however, bound to his prescribed means.
The
Swiss Reformers also emphasized the necessity of faith, not only for a
profitable use of the sacrament (which is conceded by
the Lutherans), but for the reception of the
sacrament itself. Unworthy communicants receive only the
visible sign, not the thing signified, and they receive the sign to
their own injury. Schaff
This is so certain a
mystery that the believer
actually becomes CHRIST and so sure of their standing with God that
further dialog is wasted.
This
leads to arrogance and
door knocking trying to find others so absolutely confident in their
personal experience, or to others whom they can impute
lostness.
The
Greek word APPEAL means
that at the time and place our bodies are washed with water we
REQUEST from God a cleansed conscience or an unobstructed
consciousness. This has the same meaning as A holy spirit as a
gift.
The
RSV
Baptism,
which
corresponds to this, now
saves you, not as a
removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear
conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21RSV
The
NIV is a modern
commentary and not a translation:
and
this water symbolizes
baptism that now saves
you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge [response] of a good
conscience toward
God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21
The
Bible, on the other hand,
treats the shed blood of Christ as a point in history event looking backward and
forward. Therefore, while
people for 1600 years had looked back to the cross, people now
demanded that the cross be brought to them.
While
believers cannot save themselves, they must repent before
they are baptized:
"Jesus died once and for
all
(Heb. 7:27; 9:25-28; 10:10-14). In contrast, the mystery gods were vegetation deities whose repeated deaths and resuscitations
depict the annual cycle of nature.
"Unlike
the initiation
rites
of the mystery cults, Christian baptism looks back to what a real,
historical person -- Jesus Christ -- did in history.
Advocates
of the mystery cults believed their "sacraments" had the power to give
the individual the benefits of immortality in a mechanical or magical way,
without his or her undergoing any moral or
spiritual transformation. (Ronald Nash, Was the NT influenced by
pagan religions)
The mysteries penetrated the Medieval
mind and led to the belief
that "God imputes righteousness to a sinner." Not so. Salvation
depends upon our
being perfectly righteous. However, we are not personally righteous.
Not even God's Spirit could make us righteous because He does not
live within sinners. Therefore, the only way God can accept us is to translate
us
into
Christ Who is perfectly righteous.
This cannot happen
until our old man "dies" and is buried in connection with His own
death in which He cancelled all sin for those who would become part
of His body. He said it: He meant it.
He
that believeth
and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be
damned. Mark 16:16
However,
the mysteries insist
upon a personal experience or personal drama of Christ coming to us
personally to instill faith.
Once
this mystery has been experienced and proven by faith,
the initiate was still not in
the ancient fellowship. Rather, he must undergo a period of probation
and then tell his experience to the insiders. They, in turn decide
whether to initiate him.
You
must understand that a new
definition of faith has been explained. The most important faith is
that Christ did it just
for you because you were predestinated and
the Holy Spirit
(Who is Christ) proved it to you by being called to descend to you.
Contrary
to all of this reinterpretation of Jesus, Peter and
Paul, when the Eunuch wanted to
be baptized Philip just said: "If you believe
you may." This was belief in the finished work of Christ and not faith that Christ was
going to die again just for him.
This
simple transaction once
for all washed away the old washings of spirit and fire in which the candidate became the Sacrifice to, as little gods, pay for
their own sins.
In
much of Christ's teaching
there is a repudiation
of pagan practices.
Therefore, with this background, let us look as a typical pagan form
of baptism which, along with its rituals, has found its way into some
Protestatentism. Many of the worst distortions of baptism and the
Lord's Supper were developed after the time of Christ and did not
influence Christianity.
Both
before and after
Christianity there were many forms of baptism and it is clear that
"baptismal
regeneration" was a
product of adopting
pagan mysteries. When
Zwingli and then John Smyth threw away all of the historical meaning
of baptism, we noted above that John Smyth still practiced pouring. Therefore, it is clear
that the
mystery baptism within Catholicism was not corrected because the
Reformers reacted rather than return to the Bible.
We
will look at one of the
forms of baptism which undoubtedly influenced both Catholicism and
the Reformers:
Baptism in the Mystery
Religions
We have shown that many early reformers saw
baptism
as an ordinance or a command of Christ to be obeyed for the remission of sins.
Zwingli rejected baptism of
infants but taught that baptism was just a sign or sacrament. Furthermore, we showed
that to call an
act a sacrament is to defend the Catholic system of mystery religion
more like Babylon than Jerusalem. The baptism-rejecting reformers
clearly identified baptism as a part of a mystery system of religion
where the priest (preacher)
administers the sacraments.
Therefore,
it is not far
fetched to look at baptism in some of the pagan religions which
clearly fed Rome and some of the Reformation.
Mithraic: "A period
of preparation preceded the initiation in each of the
mysteries. In the Isis
religion, for example,
a
period of 11 days
of fasting, including abstinence from meat, wine, and sexual
activity, was required before the ceremony.
The
candidates were segregated
from the common folk in special apartments in the holy precinct of
the community centre; they were called "the chastely living ones"
(hagneuontes).
"In
all the mystery religions the candidates swore an
oath of
secrecy; the oath of the Isis Mysteries is preserved on papyrus.
Before
initiation, a confession of sins was expected. The candidate sometimes
told at length the story of
the faults of his life up to the point of his baptism, which was commonly a
part of the initiation ceremony, and the community of devotees
listened to the
confession.
It
was believed that the rite
of baptism would wash away all the candidate's sins, and, from that
point on, his life would be changed for the better, because he had enrolled himself in the
service of the saviour
god.
"In
the Mithraic ceremonies, there were seven degrees of initiations: Corax
(Raven), Nymphus (Bridegroom),
Miles (Soldier), Leo (Lion), Perses (Persian), Heliodromus (Courier
of the Sun), and Pater
(Father). Those in the lowest ranks, certainly the Corax, were the
servants of the community during the sacred meal of bread and water
that formed part of the rite.
"The
initiation ceremonies
usually mimed death
and resurrection. This
was done in the most extravagant manner. In some ceremonies,
candidates were buried or shut up in a sarcophagus; they were even
symbolically deprived of their entrails and mummified (an animal's
belly with entrails was prepared for the ceremony). Alternatively,
the candidates were symbolically drowned or decapitated. In
imitation of the Orphic myth of Dionysus Zagreus, a rite was
held in which the heart of a
victim, supposedly a human child, was roasted and distributed among
the participants to be eaten.
"The
baptism could be either by water or by fire,
and the rites often included actions that had an exotic flavour. Sulfur torches were
used during the
baptism ceremony; they were dipped into water and
then--contrary to
the expectations of the observers--burned when drawn out of the
water. In a dark room a script would suddenly become visible on a
wall that had been prepared accordingly. Instructions still exist for
producing a nimbus effect--the appearance of light around the head of
a priest. The priest's head was shaved and prepared with a protective
ointment; then a circular metal receptacle for alcohol was fixed on
his head; it was set aflame in a dark room and
would shine for some
seconds. In the Dionysus and Isis mysteries, the initiation was
sometimes accomplished by a "sacred marriage," a sacral copulation.
Two cases are known in which a priest speaking from the statue of the
god ordered a credulous woman to come to the temple and be the god's
concubine, the part of the god being enacted by the priest.
Note:
While Jesus and Paul followed a system of teaching the Words of
Christ, at times in the form of songs or cantillation (modern singing
or harmony was not practiced),
the
misunderstanding of Baptism among Catholics went along with
instrumental music. This music was a sacrament and had to be performed
by ordained clergy upon
instruments which had been purged of their sins by sprinkling of
water or baptism.
Thereafter,
music was believed
to be a mystery
tool
to force the
demons to flee from church or funeral. The Parting Bells were rung to give the
dead person a
head start on the devils. Therefore, just as in the mysteries of
paganism, music was a magical way to control the gods or
demons.
"The
initiation ceremonies were usually
accompanied by music and dance
and often included a large cast of actors. In the Dionysiac
societies, especially elaborate
provisions were made for mimic
representations. The names of the sacred roles varied from place to
place; among the roles
were: Dionysus and Ariadne (a vegetation goddess and wife of
Dionysus), Palaemon (a marine deity), Aphrodite (the goddess of love
and beauty), Proteurhythmos (the inventor of elegant rhythm), the
"foster-father of Dionysus," Kore, Demeter, Asclepius (the god of
medicine), Pan (the god of flocks and shepherds), Curetes
(long-haired
youths), nymphs (minor
nature goddesses), shepherds, sileni and satyrs (creatures of the
wild, part man and part beast), maenads (female attendants who shared
in the nocturnal orgiastic rites of Dionysus), the "guardian of the
grotto," and centaurs (a race of beings half man and half horse)
|
|
The
pantomimus, dressed like a tragic actor in a cloak and long
tunic, usually performed solo, accompanied by an orchestra that included cymbals and other rhythm
instruments, flutes, pipes, and trumpets. The libretto of the piece was sung
or recited by a chorus and was usually adapted
from a well-known tragedy. Both the music and the
librettos of the pantomimes were considered to be of little artistic value. The talent and skill
of the pantomimus himself were of supreme importance, and the greatest performers enjoyed the favour of
wealthy patricians and even emperors, such as Nero and Domitian.
|
"The
ceremonies always contained a prayer for the
welfare of the emperor and for the good fortune of the whole Roman
Empire. In fact, the amalgamation of religion and politics
was sometimes so close that the
designation
"imperial mysteries" is used. The pattern of imperial mystery
ceremonies could vary widely. This was especially true of the
Dionysiac rites.
"In the
clubs of
the upper
middle
class
and wealthy, for
example, the festivals were chiefly social events. But the members of
these communities were grateful
for the security and
peace
and for the
opportunity to make a good living that the emperor guaranteed to
them. They felt loyalty toward the Roman Empire and expressed this by
ceremonies of the imperial mysteries.
"Dionysus
was the patron god of
the important international society of actors,
and their reunions were celebrated in the
mode of Dionysiac Mysteries.
When
an emperor
travelled in the empire, responsibility for dignified receptions of
him was handed over to the society of actors. Because his route was
known beforehand,
a
voyage of the emperor was
turned into a series of pompous festivals that were organized in
a manner closely resembling mystery ceremonies.
"The
meetings of the mystery
clubs were often named after the common meal. The Dionysiac meetings
were called stibas ("straw") because the
participants ate their dinner
sitting on straw.
The
meals of the
followers of Sarapis
and Attis
were called kline
("couch"), because the diners
lay on couches.
(See Amos 5; 6 for a description of the Marzeach).