The Assurance of Baptism

[Light of the East]

And Philip said [to the Ethiopian], “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” [be baptized]

• “A man who knows that he is saved by believing in Christ does not, when he is baptized, lift his baptism into a saving ordinance. In fact, he is the very best protester against that mistake, because he holds that he has no right to be baptized until he is saved.” – Charles Spurgeon

I'll ask you again. Why was this not taught until 16 centuries after Christ and the Apostles?

 

[Light of the East]

I don't know what the first Christians did or believed outside of what the Bible teaches that they did and believed.

I stick with that scripture as my guide for what is right to do.

There was no Scripture for 400 years until the Council of Carthage put it together. So who taught the first Christians to baptize babies and pass that tradition on down to the next generation? How did they even know what to do without the Bible to guide them?

When you say you will stick with the Scripture, what you are really saying is that you will stick to YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Scripture and ignore the entirety of Christian history, the martyrs for the faith, and all that the Church taught in favor of your own understanding.

When you read the Early Fathers of the Church, you are seeing how the very first Christians understood the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. If "believer's baptism" had been taught to them, they would have spoken of it, taught it, and you would find evidence that such an idea was being taught in the first four centuries before the Bible.

You can't find it. There is no evidence that anyone ever believed such a thing until Roger Williams and the Anabaptists came along 16 centuries later.

You need to think about these realities.

 

[Pethesedzao]

Im going to chime in.

Baptism means everything to me, but it's not the seal of my salvation. Only the Spirit of the Living God is that.

That is what we look to in order to know we are saved. Ephesians 1:13-14 as its not something we can do, it's not a work. The Holy Spirit testifies within our Spirit that we are children of God. Romans 8:16

That's our assurance. Baptism is a sacrament which to myself, an I think many Baptists, a visible and outward expression of an inward reality that exists, in those true in heart, prior to the sacraments fulfillment - not a vessel.

As Peter says, it's the pledge of a clear conscious toward God. God commands it, we obey in response to our salvation. Only the regenerated and justified can do this. Not in the hopes of eventual regeneration.

There are 3 baptisms: baptism into Christ, baptism with the Spirit, and water baptism; only the first one saves.

 

[Pethesedzao]

Philip the Evangelist is the father of the Baptist movement

 

[Light of the East]

There are 3 baptisms: baptism into Christ, baptism with the Spirit, and water baptism; only the first one saves.

Never taught by the Early Church. Not taught until 16 centuries after Christ and the Apostles. They taught that water baptism baptizes you into Christ (Romans 6:3) and that it removes sin (Acts 2:38) giving you new life.

Why was this not taught until the Anabaptists came along 16 centuries after Christ?

 

[Pethesedzao]

Never taught by the Early Church. Not taught until 16 centuries after Christ and the Apostles. They taught that water baptism baptizes you into Christ (Romans 6:3) and that it removes sin (Acts 2:38) giving you new life.

Why was this not taught until the Anabaptists came along 16 centuries after Christ?

Water baptism does not baptize you into Christ; Romans 6:1-3 is referring to the baptism which takes place immediately one is born again.

 

[Light of the East]

Water baptism does not baptize you into Christ; Romans 6:1-3 is referring to the baptism which takes place immediately one is born again.

Once again, that is not what the Apostles taught to the next generation. The Apostles taught that baptism gives you new life, puts you into Christ, and forgives sin.

Wouldn't you rather believe what the first Christians taught than what some chap decided was right some 16 centuries later?

 

[lsume]

God gave us baptism to help assure us that we are indeed united to Christ. Sadly in many churches (even Reformed churches) baptism is treated the opposite way. When we preach about baptism we often say things like: "Don't think you're saved just because you're baptized!" And "This is just a ceremony. Baptism alone doesn't save anyone!" While there is some truth to these things, they totally miss the point of baptism.

Baptism was given to us as a sign and seal of the covenant of grace. We are meant to "use" our baptism as a tool of assurance. How do we really know that we are united to Christ? We cannot see our union with Christ as it is a spiritual reality. Paul says we can know by looking at our baptism:

Romans 6:1-3 - What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

Paul says - "Think about your baptism! Don't you know that you're united to Christ and called to live a holy life?" Paul thinks that our baptism should mean something to us.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 - Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Paul says that we used to be unregenerate sinners but we are no longer. God changed us. How do we know that God changed us? We were baptized! This doesn't mean that baptism automatically results in regeneration. But it does mean that baptism is given to us as a tool to help assure us that we are indeed regenerate. If we have faith, then as surely as we have been baptized, we have been regenerated to newness of life.

So Christian, what does your baptism mean to you?

Only The Baptism of Fire and The Spirit will ever get anyone to Heaven. What a man does in the water Baptism is beautiful when understood after the aforementioned Baptism. Once Baptised in The Holy Spirit, the water Baptism becomes clearly understood.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Wouldn't you rather believe what the first Christians taught than what some chap decided was right some 16 centuries later?

Not when your denomination is the one defining what was "taught" by the first Christians and looking outside scripture for that definition.

Scripture defines, not your interpretation, not tradition. Scripture. It's God breathed. Tradition of men is not.

And thanks to God directing men of God who gave their lives, we can sit and read those words for ourselves.

 

[Bruce Leiter]

God gave us baptism to help assure us that we are indeed united to Christ. Sadly in many churches (even Reformed churches) baptism is treated the opposite way. When we preach about baptism we often say things like: "Don't think you're saved just because you're baptized!" And "This is just a ceremony. Baptism alone doesn't save anyone!" While there is some truth to these things, they totally miss the point of baptism.

Baptism was given to us as a sign and seal of the covenant of grace. We are meant to "use" our baptism as a tool of assurance. How do we really know that we are united to Christ? We cannot see our union with Christ as it is a spiritual reality. Paul says we can know by looking at our baptism:

Romans 6:1-3 - What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

Paul says - "Think about your baptism! Don't you know that you're united to Christ and called to live a holy life?" Paul thinks that our baptism should mean something to us.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 - Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Paul says that we used to be unregenerate sinners but we are no longer. God changed us. How do we know that God changed us? We were baptized! This doesn't mean that baptism automatically results in regeneration. But it does mean that baptism is given to us as a tool to help assure us that we are indeed regenerate. If we have faith, then as surely as we have been baptized, we have been regenerated to newness of life.

So Christian, what does your baptism mean to you?

I underwent two baptisms, one with a Methodist christening when I was an infant and another with a liberal church's immersion in an empty sanctuary at 12 when I was confirmed. The trouble is that I didn't become a Christian believer until I was 16 in a Baptist church. Then, I became a Reformed believer in college and joined the Christian Reformed Church. If the CRC believed that either one of my baptisms saved me the way some people do, I wouldn't have joined that church.

My baptism is the outward sign pointing to the real inner baptism that caused my new birth with God's gifts of faith and repentance. It doesn't matter to me when that outward ceremony of baptism takes place. I believe that it's God's welcome of the person into his community of faith and human promises to live for him or parents' promises to raise the infant in the Christian faith.

 

[Light of the East]

Not when your denomination is the one defining what was "taught" by the first Christians and looking outside scripture for that definition.

Scripture defines, not your interpretation, not tradition. Scripture. It's God breathed. Tradition of men is not.

And thanks to God directing men of God who gave their lives, we can sit and read those words for ourselves.

First of all, it's not my "denomination." It is the Christians of the first five centuries who really laid the foundation of orthodox and proper belief, so you cannot lay that at the feet of my "denomination." All you have to do is read what the first Christians themselves say in plain language without any "definition."

Here is a selection from the eleventh chapter of the Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 130) describing baptism:

“This means that we go down into the water full of sins and foulness, and we come up bearing fruit in our hearts, fear and hope in Jesus and in the Spirit.”

So here we see that before the Bible was canonized, before even two generations of Christians had passed, the understanding of baptism is that it cleanses from sins. This is in accordance with Acts 2:38, which also says that baptism washes away sin.

Here is a selection from chapter 16 of the ninth Similitude of the Shepherd of Hermas (early second century):

They were obliged,” he answered, “to ascend through water in order that they might be made alive; for, unless they laid aside the deadness of their life, they could not in any other way enter into the kingdom of God. … For,” he continued, “before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive. And to them, accordingly, was this seal preached, and they made use of it that they might enter into the kingdom of God.” (Shepherd of Hermas)

BTW - When Arias, the God-denying heretic, stood before the Council of Nicea and tried to defend his idea that Jesus is only a created being, he did so from Scripture alone. He did the same thing that the Jehovah's Witnesses do - pulled lines of Scripture out of context and then said, "See? The Scriptures state that Jesus is not God and is subordinate to the Father."

It was Holy Tradition that rebuked his madness. Holy Tradition simply means "that which has been taught from the beginning." From the beginning, it was taught that the Scriptures and the words of the Apostles taught that Jesus is God.

Your interpretation of the Scriptures is not correct, and the history of Christianity shows that.

 

[Light of the East]

Only The Baptism of Fire and The Spirit will ever get anyone to Heaven. What a man does in the water Baptism is beautiful when understood after the aforementioned Baptism. Once Baptised in The Holy Spirit, the water Baptism becomes clearly understood.

Not what Christianity taught for 1600 years.

 

[Light of the East]

Water baptism does not baptize you into Christ; Romans 6:1-3 is referring to the baptism which takes place immediately one is born again.

Nope.

This is what the Christians of the first century believed:


Here is a selection from chapter 16 of the ninth Similitude of the Shepherd of Hermas (early second century):

They were obliged,” he answered, “to ascend through water in order that they might be made alive; for, unless they laid aside the deadness of their life, they could not in any other way enter into the kingdom of God. … For,” he continued, “before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive. And to them, accordingly, was this seal preached, and they made use of it that they might enter into the kingdom of God.” (Shepherd of Hermas)

and this:

Here is a selection from the eleventh chapter of the Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 130) describing baptism:

“This means that we go down into the water full of sins and foulness, and we come up bearing fruit in our hearts, fear and hope in Jesus and in the Spirit.”

and this also:

Next consider the second century bishop of Lyon, St. Irenaeus (b. 115-130, d. around 200 AD). In his work titled Against Heresies, he writes,

And when we come to refute them [i.e. those heretics], we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith. (A.H., I.21)

 

[Hazelelponi]

First of all, it's not my "denomination." It is the Christians of the first five centuries who really laid the foundation of orthodox and proper belief, so you cannot lay that at the feet of my "denomination." All you have to do is read what the first Christians themselves say in plain language without any "definition."

Here is a selection from the eleventh chapter of the Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 130) describing baptism:

“This means that we go down into the water full of sins and foulness, and we come up bearing fruit in our hearts, fear and hope in Jesus and in the Spirit.”

So here we see that before the Bible was canonized, before even two generations of Christians had passed, the understanding of baptism is that it cleanses from sins. This is in accordance with Acts 2:38, which also says that baptism washes away sin.

Here is a selection from chapter 16 of the ninth Similitude of the Shepherd of Hermas (early second century):

They were obliged,” he answered, “to ascend through water in order that they might be made alive; for, unless they laid aside the deadness of their life, they could not in any other way enter into the kingdom of God. … For,” he continued, “before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive. And to them, accordingly, was this seal preached, and they made use of it that they might enter into the kingdom of God.” (Shepherd of Hermas)

BTW - When Arias, the God-denying heretic, stood before the Council of Nicea and tried to defend his idea that Jesus is only a created being, he did so from Scripture alone. He did the same thing that the Jehovah's Witnesses do - pulled lines of Scripture out of context and then said, "See? The Scriptures state that Jesus is not God and is subordinate to the Father."

It was Holy Tradition that rebuked his madness. Holy Tradition simply means "that which has been taught from the beginning." From the beginning, it was taught that the Scriptures and the words of the Apostles taught that Jesus is God.

Your interpretation of the Scriptures is not correct, and the history of Christianity shows that.

Its your denomination.

I'm out of this pointless discussion. I joined to learn, not have pointless banter over which extra biblical traditions can take the place of or override scripture..

 

[Tree of Life]

That is not what the Early Fathers of the Church said. They spoke of going "down into the water dead in sins and arising to new life."

The ECFs views were not as developed as Medieval theologians. They spoke in biblical terms about the waters of regeneration but to say that they taught baptismal regeneration would be anachronistic as this doctrine wasn't developed until the Medieval era.

What you may be a bit confused on is when people are baptized and then fall into sin and away from Christ. What they have done is to break their covenant with Christ and will come under the covenant curse of the oaths which they made.

This would be contrary to the gospel. The newness of the New Covenant is the covenant faithfulness of Jesus. Jesus is the servant of the New Covenant who merits the blessings of the covenant for all who are in him. Jesus also bears the curse of the covenant in his cursed death on the cross (something Roman Christians deny). In that sense, the New Covenant cannot be broken because our covenant head is the God-man Jesus Christ. Grace and salvation is purchased for us by Jesus on the cross and applied to all the elect. He saves his own to the uttermost as he always lives to intercede for them.

 

[Light of the East]

Its your denomination.

I'm out of this pointless discussion. I joined to learn, not have pointless banter over which extra biblical traditions can take the place of or override scripture..

You don't want to learn. That's rather obvious.When someone is given FACTS with QUOTES and you still refuse, you weren't here to learn in the first place.

 

[Tree of Life]

My baptism is the outward sign pointing to the real inner baptism that caused my new birth with God's gifts of faith and repentance. It doesn't matter to me when that outward ceremony of baptism takes place. I believe that it's God's welcome of the person into his community of faith and human promises to live for him or parents' promises to raise the infant in the Christian faith.

Would you be surprised to learn that this is not the Reformed view?

 

[Light of the East]

The ECFs views were not as developed as Medieval theologians. They spoke in biblical terms about the waters of regeneration but to say that the taught baptismal regeneration would be anachronistic as this doctrine wasn't developed until the Medieval era.

This would be contrary to the gospel. The newness of the New Covenant is the covenant faithfulness of Jesus. Jesus is the servant of the New Covenant who merits the blessings of the covenant for all who are in him. In that sense, the New Covenant cannot be broken because our covenant head is the God-man Jesus Christ. Grace and salvation is purchased for us by Jesus on the cross and applied to all the elect. He saves his own to the uttermost as he always lives to intercede for them.

Sir, I say this kindly and without teeth - you do not know the covenant AT ALL.

The Covenant of God is made with the One who is the Covenant Head over the whole human race. That is Jesus the Christ. Hebrews shows us that He is the Great High Priest in the heavenlies (Hebrews 7-10) and offers an eternal YOM KIPPUR to God the Father.

Now if you understand Leviticus and YOM KIPPUR, you should know that the High Priest offers the covenant to God with a sacrifice that the covenant may be renewed by that sacrifice. In this, Jesus represents humanity and acts on our behalf as Covenant Head. Through Him, all mankind is restored to God, according to St. Paul in Romans 5: 18-19.

BUT ..........

That is not OUR COVENANT. Our covenant is with Christ and is separate from the New Covenant which He entered into with the Father. How do we know this? Because we use the analogy we have been given in Scripture - that of marriage. Christ is referred to as the Divine Bridegroom and we are the Bride of Christ as the Church. Marriage is a covenant, so much so that the Puritans used to correctly (about the only thing they got right theologically) refer to it as "The Covenant of Marriage."

It is, like all covenants, a RELATIONSHIP, not a CONTRACT, and there is no more intimate relationship than marriage. But like all relationships, you can violate it and even destroy it by your actions. No man keeps covenant for another. That is not how covenant works. We each have to make our own covenant with Christ, which puts us in Christ, and as a result, we are also in covenant with the Father through Christ's covenant faithfulness, which will never fail because the Blood of the Covenant, offered in the heavenlies in the eternal YOM KIPPUR, cannot fail either.

So as long as we maintain our covenant faithfulness with Christ and keep that relationship, we are blessed to be in the Covenant of God through His faithfulness. This is where the Reformers utterly failed to understand the proper application of covenant.

 

[Light of the East]

The ECFs views were not as developed as Medieval theologians. They spoke in biblical terms about the waters of regeneration but to say that they taught baptismal regeneration would be anachronistic as this doctrine wasn't developed until the Medieval era.

This should embarrass you:


Next consider the second century bishop of Lyon, St. Irenaeus (b. 115-130, d. around 200 AD). In his work titled Against Heresies, he writes,

And when we come to refute them [i.e. those heretics], we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith. (A.H., I.21)

I understand. I was once in the PCA and kept in darkness myself by the teachings of men like R.C. Sproul, James Boyce, and others who never quoted that which would have DESTROYED Calvin's teachings. And it does take a lot of work, sweat, and prayer to overcome the fear of becoming part of the Apostolic faith. I understand.

 

[Tree of Life]

Sir, I say this kindly and without teeth - you do not know the covenant AT ALL.

lol.

The Covenant of God is made with the One who is the Covenant Head over the whole human race. That is Jesus the Christ. Hebrews shows us that He is the Great High Priest in the heavenlies (Hebrews 7-10) and offers an eternal YOM KIPPUR to God the Father.

Jesus is only the covenant head for his body. He only mediates for his body.

Now if you understand Leviticus and YOM KIPPUR, you should know that the High Priest offers the covenant to God with a sacrifice that the covenant may be renewed by that sacrifice. In this, Jesus represents humanity and acts on our behalf as Covenant Head. Through Him, all mankind is restored to God, according to St. Paul in Romans 5: 18-19.

Wrong. Only Jesus' sheep benefit from his mediation.

BUT ..........

That is not OUR COVENANT. Our covenant is with Christ and is separate from the New Covenant which He entered into with the Father. How do we know this? Because we use the analogy we have been given in Scripture - that of marriage. Christ is referred to as the Divine Bridegroom and we are the Bride of Christ as the Church. Marriage is a covenant, so much so that the Puritans used to correctly (about the only thing they got right theologically) refer to it as "The Covenant of Marriage."

The author of Hebrews says that we are in the new covenant relationship that Jeremiah spoke of if we are in Christ. So, again, you are wrong.

It is, like all covenants, a RELATIONSHIP, not a CONTRACT, and there is no more intimate relationship than marriage. But like all relationships, you can violate it and even destroy it by your actions. No man keeps covenant for another. That is not how covenant works. We each have to make our own covenant with Christ, which puts us in Christ, and as a result, we are also in covenant with the Father through Christ's covenant faithfulness, which will never fail because the Blood of the Covenant, offered in the heavenlies in the eternal YOM KIPPUR, cannot fail either.

So as long as we maintain our covenant faithfulness with Christ and keep that relationship, we are blessed to be in the Covenant of God through His faithfulness. This is where the Reformers utterly failed to understand the proper application of covenant.

I'm afraid that you don't understand Christ.