Baptism

Why must people confuse the "plain meaning" of scripture when it does not fit within their theological paradigm?

I have read, heard, and researched from countless evangelical, free, protestant 'church' communities that baptism is not necessary for salvation or that it's something symbolic that is really not a 'big deal' in the life of a believer. Yet there are other protestants that say that baptism is necessary and that it is okay for infants to be baptized. Well, what is it? Aren't they all using the same Bible?!

A local community 'church' says that it's important to be baptized but that it does not save you. However, they seem to forget or to gloss over some important verses from 1 Peter 3:18-21, where Peter speaks about how Noah and his family were saved through water and that "this prefigured baptism, which saves you now." Baptism is the first step towards living in Christ. Indeed it initiates the person into the family, so to speak. Faith in Christ and baptism are necessary for salvation. I believe it's in the confusion about the efficacy of the sacrament itself where things begin to come into contention. But I must back it up further by defining what exactly is a sacrament and even further to show that this sacrament has been explained the exact same way for 2000 years down through the ages by Christ's Church, the Catholic Church, which according to St. Paul is the "pillar and bulwark of Truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).

Taylor Marshall over at Called To Communion says,

"Sacramental baptism is the means by which Christ regenerates the soul, washes away original sin, and incorporates a person into His mystical Body. It infallibly confers grace. Christ said that unless a person be baptized, he cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven (cf. Jn 3:3-5). And since God “wills all men to be saved” (1 Timothy 2:4), it was fitting that this sacrament might be administered by anyone and with an element that is universally available – water. Whereever there are humans, there is water. The universal desire for humanity’s salvation can be discerned by God’s generosity in this regard.

Since baptism is necessary for salvation, Pope Gelasius I (pope from AD 492 till 496) decreed that the baptisms of laymen and laywomen were valid and accepted by Christians everywhere. Sacred Tradition even records that the Ethiopian Eunuch, baptized by St Philip in Acts 8, brought back the saving sacrament of baptism to Ethiopia."

I've also recently sent an e-mail to a local protestant community church pastor concerning their baptism brochure. I will reprint the conversation in full:

Hello and good day,

Sorry this is out of the blue, but I wanted to make you aware of something that I saw in your brochure on baptism that I found on the internet. I'm slightly local and I know some people who attend [church name]. They like it there and browsing your site I found this brochure. It made me curious and so naturally, I want to find out. :)

I looked at the baptism brochure and I find that there are some things that do not make sense to me. All I am looking for is clarity. Specifically, and I guess the one that stands out the most to me, is when it describes that "It is important to understand that baptism does not “save” you." Why was the word "save" put in quotes? Why can't baptism and faith in Christ, working hand in hand, save you? Does it have to be either/or? Can it be both/and?

The Bible clearly states in 1 Peter 3:21 that " ²¹ and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (NIV) [emphasis mine]. How does that verse get reconciled with what is stated in the brochure? Does it just get dismissed if it doesn't fit? It seems to me that it effects salvation because of Christ's Resurrection. God can set aside anything to be holy, right? Is it much of a stretch (on our part) to grant God the power to use water in this way? I find elsewhere that in Titus 3:5-7, St. Paul states "He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, ⁶ whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, ⁷ so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life." (NIV). Again, how does that verse get reconciled with what is stated in the brochure? Clearly, to me, the washing being spoken about is baptism. In John 3:3-5, he records that, "³ Jesus replied, 'Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again'.⁴ 'How can someone be born when they are old?' Nicodemus asked. 'Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born! '⁵ Jesus answered, 'Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.⁶ Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit' " (NIV). When I read this passage of scripture, I cannot but help think of baptism. Christ seems to clearly state that it is required of all believers not just symbolically to be baptized, but that it actually is necessary for salvation; albeit just one piece of the puzzle. Or what about what Jesus commanded at the end of Matthew's gospel, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" Matt 28:19 (NIV). I just find that there are numerous examples in the Bible that are overwhelmingly in favor of the fact that baptism does indeed have a hand in one's salvation.

The Spirit clearly has involvement in all aspects of the believers life. It seems that, even from a cursory reading, baptism as stated in scripture effects some piece of salvation. I can't find any verse in the Bible that says "baptism does not save you" or something to that effect. Quite the opposite. And just because it is not mentioned in a particular verse does not mean that it is not essential. Can I clarify my thinking?

Moving on, another aspect that stood out to me was the last paragraph on the back. The one which states, "Some churches baptize infants. At Crosspoint we don’t. We only baptize those who have made a decision to believe in Christ’s death as a payment for their sin. In the Bible, men and women were baptized following their belief in Jesus. Therefore, if you were baptized as a baby, we encourage you to be baptized by immersion as a believer." Focusing more on the aspect of getting baptized again, where in sacred scripture does it require someone to be baptized again if they were previously baptized as a child? One time should suffice! If someone is baptized "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" it's a valid baptism, correct? As stated by Jesus Himself, "Spirit gives birth to spirit." Wouldn't that be the same Spirit that someone has throughout their life working in them and with them? It doesn't go away or not work because someone else wished that the person be baptized as a child. Isn't that how the covenant was passed on in the days before Jesus? The Jewish parents would circumcise the child to indicate that they too were a part of the covenant family. Through a parent's faith, they want their child to be set aside for Christ and to grow knowing him. In the Bible other people's faith also procured healing/salvation/miracles for their friends (i.e.- the paralytic that was lowered through the roof by his friends). Why is it frowned upon if someone is baptized as an infant? Christians have been doing it for 2,000 years to my knowledge starting with the apostles. Why the change and what is the reasoning behind what was written in the brochure? Is it more to show people of a particular church that a person is serious about joining? Is it a mis-trust of God that he couldn't have worked through the first baptism, so just to make sure, it must be done again? Especially if there is a record of this person being baptized, I do not understand why it should be done again? Could you help me understand the reasoning? (Sorry for all the questions!)

I ask all these things in charity and I truly want to know how these can be reconciled with what some parts of the Bible say and with what is contained in the brochure. My curiosity sometimes gets the best of me :) Please do not think of this as an attack. We are called to defend our faith when necessary and there are many things that are hard and difficult to sort through and understand. We build each other up as Christians. I eagerly await your response. Have a very blessed day!

Faith seeking understanding...

And his response was this:

Thanks for the note.

Regarding the idea that baptism doesn’t save you…the quotes don’t really mean anything, and probably need to be removed to avoid confusion I guess. The truth we are trying to convey in that section is Ephesians 2:8-9. That we are saved only by grace, through faith. Not by any ‘good works’ we do. We believe that baptism is going public with your faith. It is an outward profession to the community and church family around you that you have given your life to Christ, and follow Him in all things. It represents that we are dying to self, and the old creation is gone, and the new has come (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Regarding the baptism of infants. We encourage people who have been baptized as an infant, if they have now put their faith and trust in Christ for salvation, to follow Jesus’ example in baptism. It is not a requirement that we put on people, simply an invitation that if they are being led by the Spirit to take that step now as a student or an adult to respond. We have people who were baptized as infants, and yet have not done it as an adult. We’re ok with that. We also have people (just this last Sunday, we baptized someone like this) who were baptized as an infant, but now as a student/adult, want to take that step of obedience following their decision to give their lives to Jesus and follow Him as their Lord and Savior.

I hope that helps clarify our beliefs and practices. I’m thankful your friends enjoy [church name]. God bless!

Not to be harsh, but this is not the answer that I was hoping to receive. I wanted something more deep and more "convincing." I suppose this is the best he can do though as a protestant minister. How can we foster more fruitful dialogue?

The Bible...

... is a Catholic book.

*gasp*

Yep. Wonderfully, authentically, Catholic.

So good.

"He saves in time of trouble..."

Often in the course of life, a man must make some tough decisions. These decisions can and do affect not only him, but others as well. The true quest, as I am coming to find out, is not necessarily the end result, but the journey itself. Getting from point "A" to point "B" will undoubtedly happen. It is the way that one gets there that truly allows a man to grow into what he should become and must become in order to be what God wants him to be.

A true leader must make decisions that are tough and that others might not understand until they look back at a distance. A true Christian must take up His cross and follow Him. But His yoke is easy and His burden is light. We are not given more than we can handle. And Christ assures us that He is with us always, even unto the end of the age.

I don't know how much more obvious God can get. It is my perceptions, 'mis' or otherwise, that oftentimes get in the way of me truly seeing what the Lord has laid out for me. I am hesitant not because I don't trust God, but because I don't trust myself and my ability to make decisions. I know that I can, it is the act of doing that I seem to be shying away from.

I must take heed of the words, "Fear not, for I am with thee: turn not aside, for I am thy God: I have strengthened thee, and have helped thee, and the right hand of my just one hath upheld thee." -Isaiah 41:10.

Or these great words from the Old Testament that have always brought comfort to me, "My son, when you come to serve the LORD, prepare yourself for trials. Be sincere of heart and steadfast, undisturbed in time of adversity. Cling to him, forsake him not; thus will your future be great. Accept whatever befalls you, in crushing misfortune be patient; For in fire gold is tested, and worthy men in the crucible of humiliation. Trust God and he will help you; make straight your ways and hope in him. You who fear the LORD, wait for his mercy, turn not away lest you fall. You who fear the LORD, trust him, and your reward will not be lost. You who fear the LORD, hope for good things, for lasting joy and mercy. Study the generations long past and understand; has anyone hoped in the LORD and been disappointed? Has anyone persevered in his fear and been forsaken? has anyone called upon him and been rebuffed? Compassionate and merciful is the LORD; he forgives sins, he saves in time of trouble." -Sirach 2:1-11.

2 Cor 6:1-10

Okay, this is appropriate:

2 Cor 6:1-10

Brothers and sisters:
As your fellow workers, we appeal to you
not to receive the grace of God in vain.
For he says:
In an acceptable time I heard you,
and on the day of salvation I helped you.
Behold, now is a very acceptable time;
behold, now is the day of salvation.
We cause no one to stumble in anything,
in order that no fault may be found with our ministry;
on the contrary, in everything we commend ourselves
as ministers of God, through much endurance,
in afflictions, hardships, constraints,
beatings, imprisonments, riots,
labors, vigils, fasts;
by purity, knowledge, patience, kindness,
in the Holy Spirit, in unfeigned love, in truthful speech,
in the power of God;
with weapons of righteousness at the right and at the left;
through glory and dishonor, insult and praise.
We are treated as deceivers and yet are truthful;
as unrecognized and yet acknowledged;
as dying and behold we live;
as chastised and yet not put to death;
as sorrowful yet always rejoicing;
as poor yet enriching many;
as having nothing and yet possessing all things.

Creation and the Bible Alone

Recently I returned from vacation with my girlfriend's family. We traversed throughout Kentucky and had a lot of fun. The end of the vacation, though is what I will focus on.

Her family are staunch fundamentalist Bible alone people. Very good people and very good Christians. I really do love them. As the final stop on the vacation we went to the Creation Museum. Now, being a student of science and reading as much as I do, I immediately had some qualms about going. However, because I was with them, I was obliged to check it out. My poor girlfriend who knows my position on things was also a bit apprehensive. She was getting stomach pains as well, albeit for a different reason.

We arrived and being the guy that I am, I pocketed my rosary in case I needed to squeeze something. The first thing that we viewed was a show in the planetarium. That was probably one of my favorite things of the day. Basically it was an exercise in the expansiveness of the universe and how God created it all. Great. I have no problem in acknowledging that God created everything. The dicotomy that these types of Christians place unecessarily on science and faith is unwarranted. They mentioned a few times how the universe is only about 6,000 years old and used the fact that scientists say that some blue giants cannot have existed very long because their life expectancy is shorter. So they can't figure out one tiny aspect of creation. Okay. There are many things that we do not know that we are still trying to understand. Things do not operate according to our rules. We form the rules from what we observe. That does not necessarily mean that the universe is only 6,000 years old. I will give them that the production was very interactive and I enjoyed the space traveling and seeing how much of the universe has been actually mapped. It put in perspective how small that we really are in the big picture.

Next was the walk through the actual museum. When you hold the Bible to be a scientific treatise, then you can expect to see some gross miscalculations such as placing humans with dinosaurs. Immediately there were people placed in a display with some dinosaurs. As I said before, with what I have read and with what I believe, it seems to me that people are trying to present a world view that does not mesh with what we have figured out. In one instance they celebrate science and it's discoveries of the universe and the next instance, they hold contempt for what it has discovered that goes against their preconceived belief. Especially when it comes to time.

I have come to believe that my faith is only strengthened by the fact that God can choose to create in his own way and in his own time. Without the confines of the Church to interpret scripture and without the proper understanding of the context a particular verse or book of scripture this can lead to many different conclusions. As was shown by the walk through the museum. The most hurtfull aspect of the walk through was how they alleged that the Church had placed tradition over the Bible. Typical Protestant reasoning and "history." What did Luther have to do with the creation debate? They placed him there though nailing his 95 theses to a door. What I also found interesting was the fact that they had on display (on loan) the Codex Sinaiticus, which by the way, includes all 73 books of the Bible as decided by the early Church. They lumped themselves in with the early Church, yet failed to recognize the promise that Christ made to the Church in the first place, that She would be led into all truth. I doubt that many who go to the museum realize what truly the whole history of Christianity means.

I enjoyed seeing the fossils and the dinosaur sculptures, but again the time frame they placed them under was not sitting right. What I found most interesting was the fact that they even had a sign (in the corner) that mentioned that "even though there have been no human bones found along with dinosaur bones doesn't mean that they didn't coexist." Huh!? The simple fact that they mentioned this was indicative of the grasping for straws. I realize that there are scientists who are doctors and such that believe in the 6 day creation, but I believe they are starting with the wrong assumptions. Does it really hurt your faith to say that God might not have created the world in a literal 6 days? If you are going to take the Bible literally why not believe in John 6? How about the fact that Genesis was written for a specific people to help them understand that indeed God created everything that we see? Or the fact that people were already used to the 7 day week at the time it was written? Maybe it was written so that people would understand how God creates rather than the time that he creates it in? I believe in Adam and Eve. There was a specific time in history that God gave his greatest creation a soul. Did we disobey? Absolutely. We are fallen, but we are not stupid. Reason is a gift from God and God does not deceive. If he does, then he is not God.

I think you can see what I believe. I could be wrong, but I do have some faith in science. Not the same faith that I have in God, but a trust nonetheless. If you look at all the advances that science has given us, maybe it is indicative of other things as well. Science itself is not inherently evil. The misconception lies within the fact that according to the creationists, it has to be "either/or" instead of "both/and." What makes science evil is the way that people use it (i.e.- fetal stem cell research or contraception.) The scientific method is used to figure out the cures to diseases and to make new vaccines and to further the human exploration of all of God's creation. I do not have a problem acknowledging all that science has done and I know that God did everything. Will we find out some evidence for or against the creationist position? I do not know. So far, what we have found has lent credence to what scientists are saying about the world and the universe. Until I see some conclusive sound evidence to support the creationist view, I will continue to trust what science has so far found.

On another note, this whole thing depends on how one reads the Bible and what it has to say. If you are interpreting to your own belief and apply it to some preconceived notion then you can interpret the Bible to fit anything that you want. I totally believe that the Bible is God's inerrant word. But when you read something you need to realize the whole context of the work and what the author wants to convey. Since the Bible is a collection of books put together by the Church she is the rightful interpreter of it. As St. Augustine says, "I would not believe in the Gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not influence me to do so."(Against the letter of Mani, 5,6, 397 A.D.)

Maybe I am being too harsh on people. But with this mindset pervading amongst certain fundamentalist Christians, I cannot but help try to understand where they are coming from and how to me they seem very off in their thinking and interpretation of scripture. I suppose that this is another instance of the logical outcome of the complete rejection of Church authority and the emphasis on the Bible alone.