 |
|
|
MISUNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT BAPTISM AND THE COVENANT (2)
| |
|
|
|
Now we have to come to a closer biblical look about the Holy Baptism. You have said that the baptism of children is Roman Catholic. But that is terribly wrong! The Roman Catholic Church came forth of the first Christian Church and became a false church because the Roman Catholic Church turned the biblical doctrine into a false doctrine, including many idolatries. Rome is the Antichrist! Also Rome's doctrine about baptism became an idolatry too. Any well-thinking Christian human being who considers the Roman Catholic baptism ritual, can make an easy conclusion of Rome's false doctrine. You can check it for yourself. But the idolatry of Rome about baptism (of children) does not mean that there is no biblical baptism of children. I will show you the Scripture.
Remember, Rome did not make its own doctrine, NO, Rome has FORGED the APOSTOLIC DOCTRINE into a false doctrine with the Bible in her hands and the Word on her lips, also concerning the Holy Baptism. It was not Rome that started with baptism of children, oh no, the baptism of children took place in the New Testament already in the First Christian Church, started at the day of Pentecost. Also the circumcised Jewish believers have been baptized, because Christ has completely fulfilled the law, also the ceremonial law concerning circumcision.
Circumcision as a sign of the covenant was bloody, because Christ had to come yet. But baptism is un-bloody, because Christ is crucified already. Christ was circumcised as a Child, because He had to fulfill the law and had to undergo the requirements of the law. But as our Finisher of faith He was baptized to finish our faith in eternal salvation, NOT FOR HIMSELF, BUT IN OUR PLACE (Matth. 3:15). What does it mean? The baptism of Christ was deputy. The (strict)Baptists understand the baptism of Christ as being an example. But Christ has not been baptized as an example, OH NO, but instead of His people as our Surety. "By so much was Jesus made a Surety of a better covenant", Hebr. 7:22.
Christ is baptized, for He says to John the Baptist: "For thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness", Matth. 3:15. So, the baptism of Christ belongs to the requirements of the law, "to fulfill all righteousness."
Using the baptism of Christ as an example for adult-baptism, is pure legalistic, because the baptism of Christ belongs to the fulfilment of the law. Now it must be clear that Christ does not need baptism for Himself. Christ does not need anything for Himself. He is the almighty Son of God, righteous, holy and completely sinless, having all the power and the might in heaven and on earth.
Secondly, it means that baptism becomes legalistic if people count in a two fold sense concerning salvation, namely: "faith plus baptism". That way of baptism is making the holy sacrament of baptism a legalistic ticket to become a member of the church. Paul teaches the opposite of your wrong understanding of being the CHURCH, when he says: "Is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision [or baptism] by faith and uncircumcision [or non-baptism] through faith", Rom. 3:29-30.
In the baptism of Christ the whole Church has been baptized. Also in His death the whole elected Church has died. Christ was baptized being a sinner by the imputation of the sin of the first Adam. He didn't need it for Himself, but only to be a Surety for His people, to be a deputy in stead of us.
Further: the baptism of Christ took place when He was an adult. Why? To give a proof that He was a willing Surety for His people to carry away all their sins in His own body and not pushed by another. Besides, Christ did not become a believer before His baptism, but He is the Finisher of our faith from His birth. But He started His official service as Prophet, Priest and King when He was 30 years old, so, first He had to be baptized to fulfill all righteousness.
The first baptism with water in the Scripture starts by John the Baptist. He baptized to the baptism of true conversion for those who confess their sins with repentance. However, the baptism of John pointed to Christ Who was to come. "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire", Matth. 3:11. The final fullness of these words we can find in Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit was poured out. But the baptizing with the Holy Spirit happened also by Jesus Himself. "He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost", John 20:22. This kind of baptism with the Holy Spirit was necessary for the disciples to preach the Gospel with the authority and anointing of the Spirit and to be inspired by the Holy Spirit (in the fullness at the day of Pentecost) to write the Bible books without any error, by the divine Author, the Holy Spirit Himself.
And that was also the seal after Christ's baptism when the Holy Spirit came upon Him. And later on, on the mountain, the Father pointed to His Son: "And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is My beloved Son: hear Him." Luke 9:35. We have to hear and obey Him, not our self made church rules. And because Christ was (and still He is) the Surety of His people and anointed with the fullness of the Holy Spirit, He, the Son of God, has the right, the might and the power to baptize His people with the Holy Spirit and also to bless the children with the Holy Spirit being regenerated and receiving the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Mark 10:14).
You claimed that the blessing of the children by Christ, when He laid His hands upon their head, was a totally different thing than baptism. But then you don't understand what spiritual baptism is. Remember, what did John the Baptist say? "He [Christ] shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire!" The blessing hands of Christ is far above the baptism with water! When Christ blesses us with His engraved hands and His divine promises, then we are baptized with the Holy Spirit. That blessing means regeneration, forgiveness of sins, justification, sanctification and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit can only happen when our sins are forgiven. Easter cannot be after Pentecost and not the opposite way either. Easter and Pentecost happens sometimes at the same moment, but Easter is first in order and then Pentecost follows at the same time.
Again, when Christ blesses the young children, saying: "Suffer the little children to come unto Me, and forbid them not: for of such is the Kingdom of God" Mark 10:14, those children were regenerated, justified and sanctified in Him and they received also the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
When you decrease the blessing of the Lord Jesus to a lower level than water-baptism for believers, then you are closer to Rome than you think. Besides, the thought that Christ needs some baptism-water to save His people, is ridiculous. His blessing means baptism with the Holy Spirit (Mark 16:16).
By the way, in another sense, Rome also teaches your kind of misunderstanding of baptism in the framework of Mark16:16: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." Rome claims (like you) that the expression "is baptized" in the text means baptism with water. Many believers (like you) understand this text literally, but the spiritual meaning has nothing to do with baptism with water, but with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
Again, Rome understands it literally and that is also the reason that because of that false opinion dying babies must be baptized before they die, otherwise they are for ever lost. Rome uses baptism as a part of salvation too. "Without baptism you cannot be saved, because your last sins are not forgiven", Rome says. But that is a terrible accusation against the righteousness of Christ. Not baptism, but only the imputation of the righteousness of Christ we need to appear before God and for our salvation. Mark 16:16 does not mean that baptism is a part of salvation, no, only faith counts, the text says. Why the is baptism mentioned in the first part of the text? Because the baptism with the Holy Spirit goes always along with true faith. You cannot separate faith from a spiritual baptism as the other part of salvation. All the separations between faith and (spiritual) baptism are Roman Catholic. Rome teaches the imputation of the righteousness of Christ as the first part of salvation and the second part as the impartation of the Holy Spirit to be saved. It is blasphemy. That is because of a terrible misunderstanding of the exegesis of Mark 16:16.
Now, do you (still) believe baptism after faith is the second part of salvation? Do you believe in the framework of salvation in the order "faith PLUS baptism with water"? That is just Rome's doctrine! Mark 16:16 says: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." That means that true faith goes along with the baptism with the Holy Spirit and therefore is was not needed that Christ mentioned baptism and faith the same time in Mark 16:16b. So, that means in the second place that there is a lot of false belief also under very religious PARTAKERS OF THE LORD'S SUPPER, but that kind of false believers have never received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, nor the insurance of faith. That is the biblical exegeses and meaning of Mark 16:16.
So, why do you only baptize people with water after they have believed, my friend? What about the murderer on the cross then? Was he ever baptized with water? But say, was he saved or not? And was he baptized with the Holy Spirit or not? But he has never been baptized with water, right? To be baptized with water is not a part of salvation, but only a sign of the covenant. Inwardly called people and outwardly called people carry the same sign. But only God's true children are circumcised in their heart and baptized with the Holy Spirit and in the death of Christ.
I tell you one more thing. We, as members of the Church of the Reformation, confess Baptism after faith too, but only for converted heathen (Matth. 28:19) in a situation of mission of the Gospel. When a heathen desires to become a Christian and to be a member of the church, then first he must become a true believer. That happens in the first place on the mission fields and sometimes in the church. But when a male-heathen comes to a true faith in Christ, then he will be baptized and ALSO his entire household (wife and children). Even the unbelieving woman and children are sanctified by the man. "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean, but now are they holy", 1 Cor. 7:14.
Not only in the framework of marriage, but also in the congregation of Christ and therefore all members of the household have to be baptized. Paul baptized the keeper of the prison (a heathen) after he believed in the Lord Jesus PLUS all the members of his family. You can read it in Acts 16:33-34: "…and was baptized, he and all his, straightway. And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house."
Or would you dare to say that the children of the keeper of the prison and the husband and children of Lydia a seller of purple were not involved? Do you say that also on your knees in the presence of the Lord? My friend, you have no biblical escape in this. The apostles baptized complete households and that does not mean that all the children of a household were true believers, but they must be baptized, because they were not heathen anymore, but sanctified by there believing parent(s).
Your understanding of baptism is because of your literal understanding of the doctrine of baptism, but the doctrine of the Scripture, also the doctrine of baptism we have to understand spiritually. When you remain accusing and condemning baptism of children as being a Roman Catholic act, then you cross the border of the doctrine of Christ like a false prophet, my friend. And that is the reason that I write you this letter. Not to change your mind, that is only God's work, but only for Christ's sake and for the glory of His divine Truth and Name.
You asked me to point to a place in the Bible as a proof for baptism of children, because it is not literally mentioned in the Bible.
Answer: In the first place I ask you the opposite: point me a place where baptism of children is prohibited?! In the second place I have to say again that there are many places in the Bible that women and children are not literally mentioned by their names. For example, when we read the generations of Abraham to Christ in the book of Matthew, chapter 1, you read only the males. Matth. 1:1-4: "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham. Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judah and his brethren; and Judah begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; and Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon."
Where are the women? Are they not involved? Of course! The man is born out of the woman. But the line of biblical generations is mentioned from man to man, because of CHRIST. He is the Son of God, the Seed of Abraham and He, the Word, became FLESH. That means that His Church is involved with and in Him. Christ can never be without Flesh, namely His Church. Are all the members of His Church mentioned by name in the Bible? In a certain sense, yes, but do you know what I am saying? If it was so, the books of the world could not contain the truth and the words of Jesus. "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen", John 21:25.
What I want to say, is, that many times women and children are not mentioned by name in the Bible. For example we can read it in Matthew 14:21: "And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children." And in Matthew 15:38 we read it again: "And they that did eat were four thousand men, beside women and children." Were there not women and children attending? Of course, but they are not mentioned and counted. Also, when Paul said in 1 Cor. 1:16: "I baptized also the household of Stephanas", his wife and his children were involved. But only the name of the man, the head of the family, is mentioned. And in the case of Lydia, only Lidia is mentioned, because in Christ there is no man and no woman. Also, when Christ is mentioned, His Church is involved. And be sure, many members of the Church of Christ (of the body of Christ) are little children and even a multitude of unborn infants. Christ says to the murmuring Pharisees and Scribes: "Have ye never read, "Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings Thou hast perfected praise?" Matth. 21:16.
What did you say? Little children and unborn babies cannot believe? Friend, don't be so foolish. Don't listen to the devil. Listen to the Holy Word of God in Rev. 19:5: "And a voice came out of the throne, saying, "Praise our God, all ye His servants and ye that fear Him, both small and great!" AND WITHOUT FAITH, NOBODY CAN PLEASE GOD. It is spiritual abortion, my friend, to claim that unborn and little children cannot believe. If you say it like you have said, then faith IS A WORK that only can be done by (grown ups) adults. But faith is not a work of men, but a gift of God as an instrument to get free mercy, and a work of the Holy Spirit, also for (unborn) babies. If you make faith dependent upon adulthood, than faith is a work of men. If you think that the Holy Spirit is not able to give babies real faith, than you are more Roman Catholic than Rome itself.
You said: "It is an exception when an unborn child is regenerated."
I tell you: It is an exception for any person (adult or infants) to be regenerated! Don't say such foolish things, my friend. The Lord keeps you and everyone responsible for any idle word. I am sure you need true repentance, my friend, about your slandering of believing infants and the baptism of children which happens in the Name of the Father, in the Name of the Son and in the Name of the Holy Ghost.
I have said that not all the covenant-children are children of heir to Christ, because if all the baptized children were saved, then it would be impossible that the Christian unbelievers will be punished with a double punishment of God's covenant-wrath. According to your opinion there is no covenant-wrath, but what about the killing of the millions of Jews in World War II? What did these unconverted covenant-people say in Matthew 27:25? This: "His blood be on us, and on our children." God heard that terrible prayer and visited their children with a covenant-wrath in the death of millions of them. You can also see it in different places in the Bible that God punishes people in the framework of the covenant with His covenant-wrath. That covenant-punishment is much more terrible then the punishments which hit the ungodly world.
Finally, I have to say more strongly that your opinion about church membership is contrary to the doctrine of the Lord's covenant. People can become a member of the church after they are baptized as a believer. But what about the other church-goers? Do they belong to the heathen in your opinion? If so, do you collect money in the church from heathen then? Do you accept money and/or other gifts from blind and unconverted heathen? Or are they second-hand Christians? Now say, what are they in your opinion?
According to the Scripture there is ONE holy Catholic Church on earth, namely the true people of God. But in the framework of the covenant it is not all Israel what Israel is called. "Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink: For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness", 1 Cor. 10:1-5.
In the Old Testament Church there was no outward separation between converted and unconverted covenant people. And the New Testament Church is build on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief Cornerstone (Ef. 2:20). And in that Church there are always hypocrites and foolish but baptized virgins. "Five of them are wise and five are foolish", Christ said. That is what the Lord Jesus says about the revelation of the visible Church. Only the Lord makes the difference. He shuts the door (also by means of the foolishness of the preaching) for the foolish virgins when they are trying to enter in the wedding of the Lamb. The wise virgins have no say in this. God is the Judge of hearts. I am not saying that the church is allowed to invite unconverted people to the Lord 's table, oh no. We have to preach that the Lord's table is only for the true children of God, for the strengthening of their faith. So, faith has to be there. And all those who the Lord has called to preach the Gospel, have the divine calling to preach the distinction between true faith and false faith, also between true doctrine and false doctrine. But in a covenant-situation nobody can become a member of the covenant of God by baptism. We ARE members of the covenant because of the line of our believing generation until the thousandth generation (Psalm 105:8). And that is the reason that we AND our children must be baptized. That has nothing to do with converted or unconverted members of the church, not even with their belief or unbelief, but with the requirements of covenant itself. God requires in the visible framework of His covenant that all the members must be baptized to carry a sign of the covenant to be separated from the world in outward sense. And in spiritual sense the Lord's people are circumcised in their hearts. But the Lord wants a distinction between a baptized people and the ungodly inhabitants of the world. And out of that baptized generation He has elected some people to be a living member of the Body of Christ. And that Body will be increased by His sovereign pleasure, by the conversion among Jews and heathen.
The Body of Christ
"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one Body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked: That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way", 1 Cor 12:13-31.
Dear friend, how can you suffer with those who suffer because of Christ's sake, if you refuse to have communion with other members of the Body of Christ who are baptized as a child? In that case, your church -and all churches that refuse other members of Christ from the Lord's table- are no more than a legalistic sect. Anyone, who separates the Body of Christ between those who are baptized after faith and those who are baptized as a child, even though both members are baptized with the Holy Spirit, are members of a legalistic sect.
Now, I have warned you, my friend, be honest for God and people, that I have given you several biblical proofs that your opinion about baptism and to become a church member is contrary to the Word of God and also contrary to the doctrine of Christ discovered by the Reformation, namely the justification of the ungodly. Baptism can never be a proof of true faith and true faith is not a foundation for baptism. The only proof of a true faith is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ in the framework of Gal. 2:19, saying: "For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God."
The justification by God, in the court of conscience of a hell-deserving sinner, that counts to stand for God. God is a God who justifies the ungodly. But in your opinion baptism is a ticket to be a member of the Church of Christ. But that is a very legalistic doctrine. You cannot please God with faith PLUS baptism with water. That "PLUS" is Roman Catholicism. I have said that the Word of God is clear about the baptism of converted heathen after faith, but after faith all the members of that household must be baptized and their children's children until the end of the world. Why? Because the promise of the covenant belongs to us and our children and to all that are afar off (Acts 2:39) As many as the church shall call and baptize? NO! "As the Lord our God shall call!" That means with an inward calling to be justified as an ungodly and at the same moment to be baptized with the Holy Spirit. However, faith or no personal faith, our children must be baptized, because the Lord God requires it. He requires from us that we deliver our children in His hands (Mark 10:14) to be called or not, to be saved or lost for ever. God is the Sovereign and what He wants, must happen.
So, we are all members of the church, children of the covenant, as many as the Lord our God shall call to be heir of Christ. Inward calling is only up to God and not up to the church. Baptism with water is not an entry-code to be a living member of the Church, only true faith counts. Faith makes us owners of the inheritance of Christ. "And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified together", Rom. 8:17.
However, the visible revelation of God's covenant makes no separation between the members of the church, converted or unconverted, with the exception of the Lord's Supper. Partakers of the Lord's Supper must be true children of God. That has to be preached and if there are members who use the Lord's Supper in an unworthy manner, the key of the discipline should be applied. Paul teaches us in 1 Corinthians 11:29: "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body."
But again, God makes the difference by His sovereign election and an inward calling on this side of the grave. He gathers His Church with a capital letter and the church with a small letter has to serve all the members in accordance to the institutions of Christ and the keys of discipline. That biblical doctrine includes the baptism of all the children who are born in the framework of the covenant, otherwise you play games with God's covenant in contrary to the will of God: "Suffer the little children to come unto Me, and forbid them not, for of such is the Kingdom of God", Mark 10:14.
How can we bring our children to Christ if we refuse to baptize them? In that case we will displease God, Christ and the Holy Spirit. And that is the way it works in the Baptist churches, but is that your intention? I cannot believe that. There is much more to say about this matter, but now I have to say: So will it be. May the Lord bless His own Truth for the sake of His glorious Name and for the salvation of our souls and the souls of our children. And He will do that until the end of the world. So, do not forbid them to be baptized, be not a stumbling block for them, because our children are children of the covenant. Only God can claim them and nobody is allowed to separate them (outwardly) from the covenant. And God will establish His covenant with Abraham and his Seed (Christ), from child to child, for it says: "He hath remembered His covenant for ever, the Word which He commanded to a thousand generations", Ps. 105:8. Amen.
Kind Regards,
Rev. G.P.P. Burggraaf
|
|
|
|
|
|