Earliest teaching on Baptism

[JohnJones]

Justin Martyr, First Apology (Defense of Christianity) to the Roman government, circa 150 AD

Chapter LXI.-Christian Baptism.

I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated ourselves to God when we had been made new through Christ; lest, if we omit this, we seem to be unfair in the explanation we are making. As many as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, "Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Now, that it is impossible for those who have once been born to enter into their mothers' wombs, is manifest to all. And how those who have sinned and repent shall escape their sins, is declared by Esaias the prophet, as I wrote above; he thus speaks: "Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from your souls; learn to do well; judge the fatherless, and plead for the widow: and come and let us reason together, saith the Lord. And though your sins be as scarlet, I will make them white like wool; and though they be as crimson, I will make them white as snow. But if ye refuse and rebel, the sword shall devour you: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it."

And for this [rite] we have learned from the apostles this reason. Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice, by our parents coming together, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked training; in order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe; he who leads to the laver the person that is to be washed calling him by this name alone. For no one can utter the name of the ineffable God; and if any one dare to say that there is a name, he raves with a hopeless madness. And this washing is called illumination, because they who learn these things are illuminated in their understandings. And in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the name of the Holy Ghost, who through the prophets foretold all things about Jesus, he who is illuminated is washed.

------------------------------------------------
Justin's Doctrine on Baptism

For Believers Only

1. "As many as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true" are baptized.
2. He "who chooses to be born again" is baptized.
3. Baptism is for "him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins"
4. One of the very purposes of baptism is for us to choose our rebirth so that we "may become the children of choice and knowledge."
5. "Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice" we cannot be reborn without our choice and knowledge.

Baptism is where regeneration\rebirth takes place

1. "Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated."
2. Baptism is so that we "may become the children of choice and knowledge"
3. Baptism is for "him who chooses to be born again"

Baptism is where the remission of sins is first received

1. Baptism is so that we "may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed"

By Immersion

1. "Then they are brought by us where there is water" -- they are brought to the water, not the water brought to them.
2. Those who are baptized (having believed and repented) "obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed"
3. "in the water" indicates immersion, seeing a man cannot be said to be "in the water" if he is merely sprinkled.

 

[JohnJones]

This doctrine is plainly the doctrine of the church of Christ, not of the Catholics nor the Baptists. It is plain then that neither Catholics nor Baptists then existed and that both are excluded from being the one true church, as are all that agree with either of them in their doctrine of baptism (such as the Eastern Catholics and all the rest of the Protestants). The church of Christ, then, alone teaches that baptism is for believers only, by immersion only, and is where remission of sins is received.

Baptists may well teach that baptism is for believers only and by immersion only, but they reject the plain Scripture (Acts 2:38) that remission of sins is received in baptism, and thus their baptism is nothing. Catholics may well believe that remission of sins is received in baptism, but they reject the plain Scripture that baptism is by immersion only (Rom 6:4) and that only believers may be baptized (Acts 8:37), and thus their baptism is nothing.

The church of Christ, then, alone teaches that baptism is for believers only, by immersion only, and is where remission of sins is received. The church of Christ, then, alone teaches the truth about baptism. The church of Christ, then, alone has the one baptism which can confer the remission of sins upon the recipient. Justin Martyr, then, could not have been a Catholic, nor a Baptist, nor an Eastern Catholic nor Protestant. Justin Martyr could only have been a member of the church of Christ, which alone teaches that baptism is for believers only, by immersion only, and is where remission of sins is received, and whose baptism alone can profit the recipient.

 

[constance]

What about the Didache? It's supposed to be from about 70-100AD.

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

Constance

 

[Peter]

Constance, thumbs up.

Of course the OP makes a very strong case for Orthodox Christianity ( as in EO). We hold that baptism is by immersion, for believers and for the remitting of sins.

Peace.

Rdr. Peter

 

[constance]

Constance, thumbs up.

Of course the OP makes a very strong case for Orthodox Christianity ( as in EO). We hold that baptism is by immersion, for believers and for the remitting of sins.

Peace.

Rdr. Peter

I think the Didache encourages immersion baptism first and foremost - the pouring method is "if you have neither" living water (running water like a river?) or other water (still water like a lake or pond? a mikveh?)...
There is much archaelogical evidence of 1st and 2nd century baptismal sites & they are built into the riverbank - for immersion baptisms.

You say "We hold that baptism is by immersion, for believers..." I thought that Greek EO baptized infants...am I misinformed?

Constance

 

[Peter]

Not at all. We do baptize infants. And it is for the remitting fo sins. There is no contradiction here.

Peace.

Rdr. Peter

 

[constance]

Not at all. We do baptize infants. And it is for the remitting fo sins. There is no contradiction here.

Peace.

Rdr. Peter

Can you clarify? Original sins? Future sins?

Constance

 

[R.J.S]

Not at all. We do baptize infants. And it is for the remitting fo sins. There is no contradiction here.

Peace.

Rdr. Peter

Is that scriptural?

 

[Diane_Windsor]

JohnJones,

Do you have any degree in history? If so, what period did you focus in on?

Diane

 

[Peter]

Dear Constance and RJS,

The seperation between Eastern and Western definitions of certain terms and subjects can be substantial. This is certainly the case of baptsim and it's correlation to sin, or the remittance thereof. As a former holder of Western doctrine and theology, I know how these are loaded areas of discussion.

Even though we may use the same words, we most definately do not use the same definitions to those words. (As an example: In America a cookie is a sweet snack item, like an Oreo. In England a cookie is, well, a lady of the evening. Huge difference!)

In like fashion the East and West concept of sin and what must be done with it are vastly different. In the East there is no huge dept that a sinner owes God that only God can pay. There is a great gulf fixed due to our own sin. This gulf is spanned by the combined work of the crucifixion AND ressurection.

In connection, the act of remittance is different. Salvation in the East, being a pure work of God's Grace, is not held by the one receiving the grace, but rather the One who gives it. However, in God's great goodness, He allows us to interact with Him and this grace. One of these acts is the act of baptism. It is one single act in a life time of acts that allows us to "choose you this day whom you will serve." For we Orthodox, everyday is "this day." (And I am not speaking of losing our salvation, which is foolishness to Eastern thinking.)

So, is baptism for sin committed or will be committed? Yes and no.

Peace.

Rdr. Peter

 

[davidoffinland]

From Finland.

You all have to consider that in the NT knows only baptism in the name of Jesus, for example in Acts 2:38, 8:16 (others verses omitted). While the "Trinitarian" formula occurs only in MT 28:19, again Didache 7,1 and Justin Apol, i,61. It may be unthinkable that the Apostolic Church disobeyed the express command of the Lord which it consider as the highest authority.

Shalom, David.

 

[Peter]

David, I dont follow your comments.

Peace.

Rdr. Peter

 

[davidoffinland]

From Finland.

Peter...just a quick note saying the during the time of the Acts of the Apostles, baptism was only in the name of Jesus (see references). What may be interesting to note is...did the early church in the first decades(30 to the death of James 60AD) baptize using the names of the Father,, Son and Holy Spirit? Then, I have to agree with the bk of Acts that it was only in the name of Jesus; and the Trinitarian formula (if you please) did not develope until much, much later and wrote about first in the Didache (AD90s).

Shalom, David.

PS I forgot to mention something that the passage in Mt 28:19 also has a textual issue. Scholars have debated that this verse is original...some claim it is not. Eusebius, the church historian, who may have not been a Trinitarian, in his writings about the Council of Nicea in 325AD, he quotes the verse without Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

 

[davidoffinland]

From Finland.

Another quick note stating there is a good source on baptism in the 1st CT perspective. It has important things about the 1st CT practices and what it means to be baptized "in the name." Go to:

http://www.torahresource.com/engdwnld.html#Anchor-Th-32206

and click on to the "great commission" article #121. It is a pdf... I couldn´t get the pdf connection but with the above I could.

Shalom and blessings for this weekend.
David.

 

[Peter]

To single out Jesus as the sole initiator of baptism is to deny His ontological union with the Father and the Holy Spirit. This is a heresy. You cannot seperate the Son from the Father and the Holy Spirit. This has been the teaching of the Church from the beginning.

Peace.

Rdr. Peter

 

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

Hi John,

I just have a couple of comments on your post.

Justin Martyr, First Apology (Defense of Christianity) to the Roman government, circa 150 AD

Chapter LXI.-Christian Baptism.
. . . .
I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated ourselves to God when we had been made new through Christ; . . . .And this washing is called illumination, because they who learn these things are illuminated in their understandings. And in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the name of the Holy Ghost, who through the prophets foretold all things about Jesus, he who is illuminated is washed.

------------------------------------------------
Justin's Doctrine on Baptism

. . . . .
Baptism is where regeneration\rebirth takes place

1. "Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated."
2. Baptism is so that we "may become the children of choice and knowledge"
3. Baptism is for "him who chooses to be born again"

You choose to ignore the fact that many would have their entire families baptized.

By Immersion

1. "Then they are brought by us where there is water" -- they are brought to the water, not the water brought to them.
2. Those who are baptized (having believed and repented) "obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed"
3. "in the water" indicates immersion, seeing a man cannot be said to be "in the water" if he is merely sprinkled.

I hate to point this out, but it does not say by immersion, although triple immersion was the commonly accepted method; it was not feasible for those near death and bedridden or facing martyrdom when ample water was not available, which is where the practise of triple pouring (sprinkling has never been used) derived from.

BTW, the 'Teaching of the Apostles' (Didache) is actually the "Earliest Teaching on Baptism". It is from the 1st Century and specifies using living (i.e. running) water, when available, otherwise cold water; but warm water if these are not available. There was obviously some flexibility in the customary form.

Yours in Christ