|
|
|
|
Home |
AUTHORITY
IN THE BAPTISM
By
Rosco Brong
THE
BAPTISM COMMANDED FROM HEAVEN IS COMMITTED ONLY TO BAPTISTS
Having
been buried with him in the baptism in which also ye were raised with (him)
through the faith of the energy of the God, the one having raised him from the
dead? (Col. 2:12, literal translation.)
Our text describes
the one baptism of the New Testament authorized as a continuing ordinance of
God. First administered by the first Baptist on direct command from Heaven, it
was continued under the direction of Jesus by the disciples constituting the
first Baptist church, and finally committed to that same church for
administration to the end of the age. "The
baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of
men?" (Matt. 21:25). A right answer to this question must lead to a
recognition of the authority of Jesus as Head of His church, even as
Jewish priests and elders reasoned long ago.
ONLY ONE BAPTISM
In a literal sense
the Bible teaches only one baptism, that is, one kind of baptism, as a New
Testament ordinance. This is immersion in water of a born-again believer by the
ministry of a New Testament church for the purpose of providing a symbol or
figure of the faith professed.
Other literal
immersions, bathings, or washings are mentioned in the New Testament, but the
Greek uses a different noun from the one used for New Testament baptism.
Jesus spoke of His
sufferings as a baptism, but of course this is figurative language. John said
that Jesus would baptize in the Holy Spirit and in fire, but this too is
figurative, as baptism is properly a dipping in water. The first Baptist church
in
It remains true that for New Testament purposes there is literally one baptism (Eph. 4:5), and therefore our text (Col. 2:12) refers to it literally as "the baptism." The definite article is used also in Romans 6:4, "We were buried with him through the baptism with reference to the death."
BOGUS
BAPTISMS
As our text makes
clear, the baptism of the New Testament involves a burial in water and a raising
of the buried body as a picture of the burial and resurrection of Christ.
Obviously pouring or sprinkling do not afford such a
picture, and if men call such rites baptism the term is bogus when so applied.
Baptism is done
through the faith of the operation or energy of the very God Who raised Christ
from the dead. This rules out Campbellite and other
so-called baptisms of false faiths. The one baptism is an expression of one
faith in one Lord. (Eph. 4:5.)
Now, to demand
this faith in the person being baptized while denying its necessity in the
administrator of baptism is a gross inconsistency.
Any man, woman, or
child with physical ability can imitate in word and deed the outward form of
scriptural baptism, regardless of the religious or irreligious character
of anyone involved, but if the act is not performed by divine authority it is
bogus.
AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATION
Certainly the only ultimate and absolute Authority is God Himself, and certainly all Christians will agree in theory that baptism, as well as every other act of Christian service, must be in submission to His authority to be acceptable in His sight.
Differences arise, however, with regard to subordinate authority in
administration. John the Baptist
was a man sent from God with authority to baptize (John 1:6, 33), and the first
disciples of Jesus got their authority directly from Him (John 4:1, 2). When
Jesus went back to Heaven did He commit administrative authority to anyone in
particular, or did He leave it to be assumed by anyone in general? Subordinate
authority may be explicit, implicit, or assumed. Both explicitly and implicitly Jesus committed to His church the responsibility of making disciples, baptizing
them, and teaching them to observe all His commandments. (Matt. 28:18-20.)
Attempts by other persons to exercise this authority are assumption based on
presumption.
Practically all
Christendom has substantially agreed for over 19 centuries that Jesus committed
to His church the administrative authority for carrying on His work.
In recent years,
the most destructive attacks upon church authority have been made by advocates
of the universal invisible church theory, according to which all saved persons
are members of this imaginary church. But if Jesus commissioned disciples merely
as disciples to administer baptism, then sprinklers, pourers, and Campbellites,
not to mention Catholics (or at least genuine disciples among them), have equal
authority with Baptists, since there are almost certainly some saved people in
all these groups.
On the other hand,
if by some feat of mental acrobatics the Baptist apologist for alien immersion
insists that only the authority is unimportant, while the scriptural form,
subject, and motive of baptism must be maintained, it need only be said that
both subject and motive are unscriptural where divine authority is flouted. In
alien immersion nothing remains but empty form.
DISPUTED CASES
Some disputants
have tried to build an argument on the fact that inspired history in Acts does
not give details of church procedure in connection with recorded baptisms. So
they assume that at least some of these baptisms were administered by individual
disciples without church authority.
One answer to this
problem, if it is a problem, is simply that in some exceptional cases God the
Holy Spirit could have, if He so wished, given personal direction to an
individual to administer baptism rather than directed through church action,
which is His more normal procedure. Upon any person claiming such authority
today lies the burden of proof to show that he is
prompted by the same Holy Spirit in harmony with apostolic doctrine. More likely
he is prompted by his own fleshly pride to promote his own heresy.
Another answer, conclusive for saints who honor God's Word, is that if we are going to assume something beyond what is written concerning the generally faithful servants of God, let us assume that they were obedient rather than disobedient with reference to service which God approves in His Word. It is just as easy, and much more honoring to Christ and His body, the church, to assume that all baptisms recorded in Acts with divine approval were performed with church authority, explicit or implicit, as to assume that Philip or Ananias, for instance, acted without such authority (Acts 8:38; 9:10-18) just because the details are not recounted in the scripture.
A
MATTER OF DOCTRINE
We are told in
Acts 19:1-4 something of baptism without authority. At
The Bible does not
say that these men had John's baptism. The Bible says
that "they said, Unto John's
baptism." That is, they claimed to have, perhaps they really believed
they had, John's baptism.
Attempts to
distinguish between John's baptism and later
Christian baptism, attempts to make the doctrine of John the Baptist and of the
apostle Peter different from the doctrine of Paul---such attempts are mere
hogwash. When these disciples showed their ignorance of New Testament doctrine while claiming the baptism of John, Paul immediately summarized the teaching of John as identical with that of all true New Testament teachers, "saying unto the people, that they should believe. . .on Christ Jesus."
The point is that New Testament doctrine must accompany New Testament baptism. Only so do we have the baptism of our text, "through the faith of the energy of the God that raised him (Christ) from the dead."
So instructed, the
disciples at It is always so.
Where Christ is honored, His Word is believed, His body is respected. The
authorized administrator of the baptism that pictures His gospel is the church
that he instituted and that He promised to be with to the end of the age. This
is the only kind of church that believes and obeys His Word and so can teach
other disciples to obey Him.
|
|
Location |
|