Analogies, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Explanation by analogy does not usually convince people on the other side of an argument. Why is that? Usually it is because we don't set up our analogies quite right. I can point to several, but one will suffice. This one is stolen from here. It is used to show that those of us in the perseverance camp have disguised works righteousness. It goes like this:

Suppose there is a man named Fred that falls in love with a woman named Deloris. They want to get married. Love is all that is needed to marry. They went to the church to get married, but the minister told them they need a blood test. They left the church, went over to the local health clinic, and got their blood tested. They went back to the church with blood test certificate and got married.

Now, it is said that the story illustrates how Reformed people get things mixed up. They claim that faith alone is sufficient for going to heaven. However, if someone does not have works, then they do not have faith. So faith and works is required to get to heaven. This is seen in this lovely little story about Fred and Deloris. All they need to get married is love. But if they don't have a blood test, they can't get married. Thus love and a blood test are both required to get married. So it is with faith and works in the Reformed way of perseverance. Slam dunk, isn't it. Tight logic -- right?

No. Here's why. In the Reformed doctrine of perseverance, the requirement to enter heaven is justification before God. The sequence of Reformed salvation is:

(1) God's calling results in regeneration of the person (also known as being born again).
(2) When a person is regenerated, God enables faith in the person. The instant the person is regenerated saving faith springs forth.
(3) The instant saving faith springs forth, God, according to the Bible, uses that faith as the cause of declaring once and for all that the person is justified.
(4) A characteristic result of saving faith is that a person will, over a long enough time, perform works pleasing to God. Not perfectly, but there will be some works. And that person will persevere to the end of their lives.

At the very instant a person is justified, that person will enter heaven upon death or Christ's return. If the person were to die moments after exercising saving faith, before there is a chance to do works, that person will enter heaven.

If we examine the love story of Fred and Deloris, we'll find a problem in our little analogy. The analogy is an allegory. Things in the story stand for something. Here are some:

(1) Fred and Deloris represent people.
(2) Love represents saving faith.
(3) The blood test represents works.
(4) Marriage represents heaven.

The problem is that in the story, Fred and Deloris, to fit the Reformed order of salvation, must be able to have the option of skipping the blood test, because all that is required is love. That's not possible in this little love story analogy. The analogy fails to model the Reformed view of salvation, thus the model is a failure.

The problem with those who use this story to try to illustrate Reformed salvation is that they get confused with concurrent effects and identify those as causes of other effects that do not case those effects. To illustrate this confusion, let me give an analogy in this little story.

We have a forest. A forest ranger named Jeff and his assistant, Joe, notices that when lightning strikes a tree, these things things happen:

(1) There is lightning.
(2) There is loud thunder.
(3) The tree splits into pieces.

Jeff says the lightning caused (a) the split tree, and (b) the thunder. However, the tree was split only by the lightning. Joe, on the other hand, says that lightning and the thunder caused the split tree. Jeff says that lightning always produces thunder, which is the sound caused by the lightning, but the thunder does not cause the tree to split. Joe, on the other hand, argues that lightning and thunder are always present when the tree splits, hence both are causes of the tree splitting.

You can see that Joe has gotten things a little mixed up. This is precisely the same kind of mix-up when people charge those who hold to perseverance have made faith plus works the requirement for justification. Simple analysis using this analogy shows this charge is false. Works and perseverance are caused by saving faith, just as thunder is caused by lightning. Further, saving faith causes justification, the requirement for entering heaven, just as lightning caused the tree to split. However, works and perseverance do not cause justification, just as thunder did not cause the tree to split. To say that works and perseverance cause justification shows the same kind of confusion that Joe had in saying that thunder was a cause in splitting the tree.

The thing about analogies is that the side that creates a particular analogy usually likes the analogy. Opponents of that side almost always do not like the analogy. Often it is because the analogy does not fit the particular circumstances under analysis. Sometimes it fits the circumstances, but because it doesn't fit their particular viewpoint, the analogy is not liked and rejected.

So, what is it for the lightning and tree analogy? Does it help? Does it hinder? Am I missing the point?

Assurance Discussion Observations

Discussions on assurance of salvation can sure bring in a lot of interested people. Thank you to all who have participated. I think the conversation has died down now. Here are a few observations (take this with a grain of salt):

(1) The home blog field has its advantages. I felt more comfortable discussing this at my own blog than at others. Does anyone else feel that way that his or her home blog is more comfortable? I sensed that with at least one other.

(2) I think I gained a better understanding of some of the other people's concerns. I think some of the others also gained a better understanding of my view, but not everyone. Generally speaking, there seemed to be two sides. One held the view of "Once Saved Always Saved" (OSAS) which views that once saving faith was exercised, that person is always saved, even if they later completely loose their faith and repudiate Christ. The other side held to perseverance, where once a person exercises saving faith, God will provide the grace for them to persevere.

(3) I noticed that the OSAS people viewed assurance as a subcomponent of saving faith, which the perseverance group viewed assurance as part of faith, but not necessarily a part of saving faith. Further, the OSAS group viewed saving faith as assent to propositions only, while the perseverance side saw there were characteristic results of saving faith. I can understand the OSAS’s interest to keep works away from salvation, that is a very laudable and essential goal. However, in their zeal to keep works out of the equation, they confuse the concept of results of faith and stipulate that perseverance means that the results enter in as the cause of justification. This is one area where the perseverance and the OSAS group goes around and around without getting any closer to a resolution. Being on the perseverance side, and interacting with some of the OSAS side, I find this very curious. Of course I’m right, my side is logically coherent and fits with Scripture. But the OSAS people have some very bright, biblically committed people. I am puzzled why they have so much trouble understanding this. I really do. But I’ve also found in teaching computer classes, some very bright people can’t understand recursion. I’m wondering if this is a concept some get, and some don’t.

(4) Another issue was how to define belief. The OSAS group seemed to narrow in on one particular passage in John (namely, John 3:16) and pull a definition, complete with a lot of assumptions, right there. The perseverance group looked at the entire book of John to see how the word belief was used and came up with a definition that fit over the entire context of John.

(5) I saw I was not precise enough in my original post. My first diagram needs to be changed, along with some of the opening remarks. Sometime in the future I will rewrite the post, keeping the old one for reference. This discussion was very fruitful, at least for me.

(6) There was a little bit of name calling, but not much. Perhaps I dabbled in it when I said perseverance was optimistic while OSAS was pessimistic. I was called on it and I offered some justification in how I used it. There were some other descriptions of the perseverance side, but I find those rather humorous. Most people see through these kinds of things, unless perhaps you’re a strong partisan for that side using those adjectives (hmmm, perhaps I need to evaluate pessimistic).

(7) I think we all suddenly ran out of steam after midnight of all the discussion. Various issues were left unaddressed (and as unbiased as I am, most of them were on the OSAS side ;-).

Thank you everyone for the delightful conversation.

Federal Vision

In the ongoing discussion on assurance, the topic of Federal Vision was raised. I found an interesting website on Federal Vision with some documents from some presbytaries in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) and the General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). Federal Vision is to be distinguished from the concept of Federal Headship (see theopedia, wikipedia). Some Reformed groups are strongly opposed to the Federal Vision, other Reformed groups say that Federal Vision has been unjustly tarred and feathered without a proper hearing. What do you all think?

FAQ - What is Assurance?

This is part of a series of FAQ's:

(1) FAQ - What is Faith?

(2) FAQ - What is Repentance?

(3) FAQ - What Does Born Again Mean?

(4) FAQ - What are the Means of Grace?

(5) FAQ - What is Perseverance?

Plus a background article: Causality and Logical Conditionals.

In the Christian world, assurance refers to the conviction that one is in a state of grace where is justified or in right standing before God, and that person will ultimately be saved, glorified and enters heaven. This state of grace happens when a person exercises saving faith (see FAQ – What is Faith?).

Saving faith in Jesus Christ and the assurance of being in the state of grace are not identical things. Peter tells us: “{10} Therefore, brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble; {11} for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you.” (2 Peter 1:10-11, NASB). This indicates that faith and the assurance of being in the state of grace of salvation are two separate things, otherwise Peter would not be writing about making sure that you are called and chosen (both actions are done solely by God). John also writes that belief and assurance of eternal life are two separate things, “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life.” (1 John 5:13 NASB). The passage indicates that belief and knowing you have eternal life are two separate things. Further, these passages show it is possible to be in the state of saving grace (brought about by faith) without the assurance you are in that state of saving grace.

How does one gain the conviction and assurance that he or she is in a state of saving grace? There are five elements:

(1) An intelligent understanding of the nature of salvation.
(2) The recognition of the immutability of the gifts and calling of God.
(3) Obedience to the commands of God.
(4) Self-examination.
(5) The inward witness of the Holy Spirit.
(1) An intelligent understanding of the nature of salvation. A believer should know the magnitude of their salvation. It is not merely forgiveness of sins and entry into heaven. Faith makes the believer a disciple of Christ. More than that, faith joins the believer in union with Christ, makes the believer a joint heir of Christ to God.

(2) The recognition of the immutability of the gifts and calling of God. Romans 8 tells us that God is the actor of salvation (see Ordo Salutis, Part 1). God’s foreknowledge and election are based on his own counsel and will, not on foreseen action on the believer. Individual salvation is based on God’s immutable plan; anyone or anything, including the believer who is in God’s immutable plan, will not derail it.

(3) Obedience to the commands of God. “And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.” (1 John 2:3 NASB). Disobedience brings God’s displeasure. Furthermore, it removes the light of God’s countenance. This wounds the assurance of the believer. This is not salvation or justification by works. Obedience is the fruit, the result of the kind of faith that is saving faith (see FAQ – What is Perseverance?). Obedience gives evidence we have exercised saving faith and that we are saved. “Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God.” (1 John 3:21, NASB)

(4) Self-examination. 2 Peter 1:10 tells us to make our calling and election of God sure. The list things to examine are included in the passage just prior. You ask yourself, am I a joint heir of God? Do I show the indications of being a child of God, being made into the likeness of Christ? Am I showing an increasing level of goodness, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, brotherly kindness, and love? When we look at our lives and see growth, we have hope: “Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, {2} through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God. {3} And not only this, but we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance; {4} and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope; {5} and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.” (Romans 5:1-5, NASB).

(5) The inward witness of the Holy Spirit. Paul tells us the Holy Spirit tells believers they are children of God: “For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, "Abba! Father!" {16} The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God…” (Romans 8:15-16 NASB). Believers develop through the Holy Spirit the ability to intimately cry out to God in distress or at any time. Believers have the confidence, given by the Holy Spirit that they are adopted sons of God. Further, the Holy Spirit directly communicates to our spirit that we indeed are children of God.

It should be noted that the Holy Spirit is at work in all five elements. It is the Holy Spirit that opens our minds to the Scripture and teaches us about salvation and the immutability of God’s calling and gifts. It is the Holy Spirit that stirs our heart to obedience and into increasing obedience.

Assurance is cultivated through the means of grace (see FAQ – What are the means of Grace?). God is present in his Word, the sacraments, and in prayer. These are the usual means God uses to strengthen the faith and also the assurance of faith to the believer.

Questions:

How soon does the assurance of faith enter a new Christian’s life? It depends. For some, their conversion is dramatic and decisive, and the Holy Spirit immediately and dramatically confirms their state of grace. The fruit of faith is instantaneously apparent in obvious repentance and changed attitudes. Such a person often has a strong assurance of faith. On the other hand, others have gone through a gradual conversion experience. They may know at one year they were not believers, but sometime over the next year they came to have faith in Christ. They might not see dramatic changes. As a result, they may not feel or have a strong conviction of assurance.

Does a lack of assurance mean that a person is not saved? No, not necessarily. It may mean the person has an immature faith and does not understand the nature of salvation, or the immutability of God’s gifts and calling. It could be that person is struggling with sin. A person that does not feel assurance should seek the means of grace, putting him or herself in worship services where the Bible is rightly preached, and read the Bible, take communion, and pray.

Doesn't faith imply assurance? Faith contains an entrustment to Christ for salvation. Since the whole Trinity is working in your salvation, the logical implication is that you are saved. However, assurance that you are saved; that you will persevere to the end is not something that is automatically felt as a deep conviction within people. Assurance is not a simple syllogism. The conviction is a grace given by God. The conviction can be lost at times, but there are ways in which it can be nurtured.

Footnote: I am indebted to John Murray, “The Assurance of Faith” in the Collect Writing of John Murray, Volume 2: Systematic Theology (The Banner of Truth Trust, 1977), pp. 164-177.

A Father's Eagle Scout Charge

I had the great joy of seeing my son officially receive his Boy Scout Eagle rank this past Saturday. I gave him a charge at the end of the Scout court of honor. This is an excerpt of my charge to him.

Now you have completed another major milestone in your life. You have earned the rare Scouting rank of Eagle. As your father, I want to charge you with three things:

1. Remember the foundation of your life.
2. Nourish yourself.
3. Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.

Remember the foundation of your life. What I am about to say will come as no surprise to you. As delighted as we are in you, as our son, and in your achievements, you are corrupted with sin, as are the rest of us. This is a real and serious problem. You, me, all of us justly deserve death because of this. Jesus came, lived, died and rose again. In his death, Jesus paid for that sin. In his life, Jesus gives you his right standing with God. You have placed your faith in Jesus, and as a result, Jesus’ death covers your sin, and Jesus’ life gives you Jesus’ right standing with God and makes it yours. You had a huge debt that has been forgiven. You’ve been adopted into God’s family; you have an inheritance that is beyond your imagination. Christ lives in you. Always, always look to Christ. Never forget what God has done for you.

Nourish yourself. Just as our bodies need physical food to sustain life, grow, and develop, so does our whole being need spiritual nourishment to sustain life, grow, and develop. The Old Protestant Reformers called these activities the means of grace. These are the Word, the Sacraments, and prayer. These are called the means of grace, not because they magically save you, but because God has promised to be there in these means of grace. The prime way God strengthens you is through his Word. God is present whenever the Word of God is preached, and whenever you read your Bible. You may not feel God is there, but God tells us he is there. God is present in communion, spiritually, in a very real way. In communion, God will strengthen and nourish you. In prayer, you come before God and interact with him. Prayer is not merely the technique to change ourselves to the sovereign God. God uses prayer as a means to accomplish many things, from healing, helping people, and accomplishing many, many other things.

Love God with all your heart and love others as yourself. What is the most important commandment in the entire Bible? Jesus was asked that question:

One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?" "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these." (Mark 12:28-34, NIV)

If you read the Scout Oath and the Scout Law, you will see that all of the Oath and Law fit within the parameters of loving God and loving others as yourself. Love God and love others with all that you do each day. This is a tall order to live up to. How do you do it? Go back to the foundation of your life. It is Jesus Christ, his life, his sacrificial and atoning death on the cross, and your clinging to Christ alone for your forgiveness of sins and your right standing before God. Think upon that and your life will be filled with faithful gratitude. Remember the means of grace, the Word, the Sacraments, Prayer. This is how you walk in life, growing, being fashioned by God for service. Finally, love God with all your heart, and love others as yourself. If you do that, you will more than fulfill your duties as an Eagle Scout.

FAQ – What is Perseverance?

“They, whom God hath accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.” (Westminster Confession of Faith, 17.1)

What is perseverance? Simply stated, it is the condition where a person, who has placed their faith in Christ (see FAQ – What is Faith?), and who also is repentant (see FAQ – What is Repentance?), will continue on in the faith and will never ultimately fall away from the faith.

The foundation of a believer’s perseverance is in God’s election, or God’s predestination. Paul tells us that all whom God predestined, God will ultimately glorify (Romans 8:30). God is the guarantor of perseverance. The following diagram illustrate where perseverance fits in the order of salvation:

God, in his predestinating an individual, will call that individual to life. In that action, God regenerates the person (in other words, that person is born again). Upon regeneration (rebirth), faith and repentance naturally occur. Faith is the instrumental cause of justification. At the same moment, God adopts and definitively sanctifies the new believer. Out of this comes perseverance, which is done through the strength of God with cooperation of the believer.

Perseverance is not the same as “once saved, always saved.” The concept of “once saved, always saved” has in it the idea that once someone has exercised saving faith, then no matter what that person does, including repudiating Christ, that person is still saved. The Bible has no concept of that kind of perseverance. For instance, James tells us that faith without works is dead. Even the demons have better theological insight than us, so much so that they shudder with their knowledge of God. Intellectual insight, even assent to the facts, is not enough. Saving faith is the faith that ultimately produces the fruit of works.

Does perseverance negate Sola Fides, faith alone? In other words, doesn’t perseverance mean we are saved by faith and works? No. The instrumental cause of justification is faith. This faith arises from a regenerated person, a reborn person. As a result, with God’s guarantee of glorifying the person, the person will endure and persevere in the faith. To say that the biblical teaching of perseverance means we are saved by a mixture of works and faith is to misunderstand the fundamental cause from the effects. Faith is the efficient cause of justification; perseverance is the effect of saving faith. Thus, when James warns us that faith without works is dead, he is telling us that a life without works is an indication of the improper kind of faith – it is not saving faith.

If someone falls away, does that mean they did not have saving faith? The answer is we cannot see into the heart and life of others, nor know the future. There will be times when the life with God will ebb and flow. There certainly can be times of great stumbling. But, those who have saving faith will not fall away completely. In due time they will continue and persevere in the faith.

Perseverance should not be seen as a dour, cheerless duty. Rather, it is a delightful promise that God will complete the good work he has begun within you. The good news is that if you have placed your trust in Christ, then you will endure. God guarantees it.

Family Gatherings

We're an early 21st century family. With my oldest daughter and son-in-law over, we mix talk with Internet discussion. We'll look at Wikipedia for answers to various questions. Jared is emailing me info on Douglas Wilson, and we talk about paedobaptism, while my son is perfecting ways of manufacturing hydogen gas, putting them into balloons and exploding them. Then we settle to read, talk.

This is how you're family operates too, isn't it?

What Kind of Evangelical Are You?

Here is an interesting survey on what kind of evangelical are you? I scored as an Orthodox Presbyterian (they don't know about Presbyterian Church in America). There is a similar survey for Christian denominations (I scored as PCA/OPC).

I took a job survey and scored highest in most fit for an Advertising Manager, follwed by Advertising Sales Agent, then Astronomer. Software Engineer, which is my trade, was 13th. Embalmer was 54th, just above Human Resources Manager, which was just above Lawyer. Clergy ranked 90th, so you can count your blessings I'm not your pastor.

So, I missed my calling in life. Advertising. On second thought, I'll keep my daytime job.

What is an Evangelical?

Once upon a time, in an a long ago age, a series of movements swept across portions of Europe known as the Reformation. The heart of this movement was the recovery of the good news, or using a transliterate Greek word, euaggelion, or to anglicize, evangel -- which means the good message, or "gospel". The good news was that we are saved by God's grace through faith alone in Christ alone. In the Reformation, both the adjective and noun, evangelical, referred to those who followed the particular teachings of Luther, in contrast to Calvin. It would come to refer to all Protestants who held to the subsitutionary atonement of Christ, the necessity of personal faith in Christ alone for salvation, and the Bible as the sole authority about God and our relation to God. During the Reformation, the five solas came out as slogans of the movement, sola Scriptura (the Bible alone is the Word of God), Solus Christus (salvation is through Christ alone), sola gratia (God's grace alone is the efficient cause of salvation), sola fide (salvation is accomplished through faith alone, and not works or a combination of works and faith), soli Deo Gloria (our worship is directed to God alone and for God's glory). These slogans, just like the five-points of Calvinism, are not the only beliefs of ancient evangelicals, but rather are some of the most obvious distingushing marks of an evangelical.

The word evangelical has changed. Ted Haggard, who has recently become more famous in scandal, was the president of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE). He defined evangelical as: "I define an evangelical as a person who believes Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that the Bible is the Word of God, and that you must be born again."

Tedd Haggard was not someone I would instantly recognize in the Christian world. In fact, until September of 2005, I never heard of him before. I first heard of him in this interview done by Issues Etc, a Missouri Synod Lutheran radio program hosted by Todd Wilkin. This is from the Issues Etc website, in MP3 or Windows Media. It was eye opening then, and it is very interesting to hear after all that has happened recently.

How do you define the word Evangelical?

Why MetaSchema?

Every once in a while someone will ask, why did you name your blog MetaSchema? In my former life I ran around with a different moniker that, if you didn’t know what it meant, with a little research you could identify my theological background. The problem was that I would be pigeonholed. So, when I decided to be “reborn” into the blogisphere, I dropped my old alias and sought to choose a more theologically neutral name. But what name?

My trade is software engineering. I work with a variety of computer languages and with databases. Metaschema is a database term to describe the underlying structure that organizes the database. The word comes from meta, which is derived from Latin which means “situated behind”, or transcending, and schema, which is derived from Greek which means “a structured framework or plan”. I use metaschema in a broader sense than a database term. When I see the world, I am struck by its beauty, its organization, its rational structure, even when peering into the realm of quantum physics -- order in the chaos. There is more than just the laptop I’m typing on, or the trees, the birds, the streams, the mountains that I also enjoy. As I gaze in awe through my telescope at the Great Nebula of Orion, or look through the microscope at a tiny organism, I arrested by the structure I see that points to an order that transcends it.

I am a devote Christian. This blog is my playground for exploring this transcending order, whether it is in nature or theology. For this reason, I tend to be more on the abstract side, rather than the practical. I am fascinated with things, which on the surface look paradoxical. Can there be an omniscient God and human freedom? Can the universe be self-caused? Is an infinite God knowable in any sense by finite creatures? What kind of order and patterns can we see with God and his interaction with the universe? Is faith rational? These are the kinds of things I like to play with. That’s why I named the blog MetaSchema.

While I chose a more theologically neutral name, you can still catch the drift of my perspective. At least the name doesn't scream it out any more.

How Do You Know God Doesn't Exist?

Fred (not his real name) loved to hang around in Christian Internet discussion groups. He is an atheist. He would listen to a discussion, and then ask, how do you know that God exists? His favorite phrase was that God was an extraordinary claim that required extraordinary proof. Several in the discussion group would share about the design of the universe, how precise it was and how that indicated a designer. For Fred, none of the evidence cited ever reached the extraordinary level that he demanded.

After watching this a few times from the sidelines, I asked Fred, how do you know that God doesn't exist? That is an extraordinary claim that you can absolutely rule out the existence of God without examining all the facts in the universe. How can you assert that? Fred answered that a supreme being is not likely. I asked, how you do you? That is an extraordinary claim to make, before examining all the evidence that such a being cannot exist.

Fred got frustrated and rather short tempered. He said I was being unfair. In reality, all I was doing was using the same approach he was using on the rest of us. I told Fred that if his method of questioning was valid for us, it was also valid for him too. It was funny that he didn’t see it that way.

Often, Christians are pressed to defend God. However, Christians also have the right to press others for why they hold their particular views, particularly when those Christians were first asked why they believe the way they do. The interesting thing is that world views that are not based on a rational God have an irrational foundation. In some of the next blog entries I’ll explore this more.

FAQ - What is the Proper Mode of Baptism?

Baptism is one of the two sacraments or ordinances of the Church. For centuries, from the post-apostolic era until 1633, the dominant practice was to baptize infants and children of Christian households (paedobaptism), and converts to Christianity. The mode practiced was pouring or sprinkling. Even the Baptists up until 1633 baptized by sprinkling. It was the Particular Baptists in 1633 that started baptizing by immersion.

What is the correct mode? Our Baptist friends argue that the Greek word for baptism, baptizo, has as the root meaning “to dip” or to “immerse”. In Greek literature, baptizo did not always mean dip or immerse. There are many examples in Greek literature where the Greek word baptizo means to sprinkle or to pour. “…baptism is a myriad-sided word, adjusting itself to the most diverse cases… Whatever is capable of completely changing character, state, or condition of an object, is capable of baptizing that object.” ¹

In the New Testament, baptizo may sometimes mean dip, there are several contexts where it means simply to wash. I’ll cite two examples²:

(1) “When the Pharisee saw it, he marveled that He had not first washed before dinner.” (Luke 11:38, NKJV)

The Pharisee was surprised that Jesus did not wash (baptizo, was not baptized) before dinner. The remark was addressed to Jesus as a person, not to a part of him, such as his hands. Without question this Pharisee did not expect Jesus, or the Pharisee himself, to immerse himself before dinner.

(2) “³For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands in a special way, holding the tradition of the elders. ⁴When they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other things which they have received and hold, like the washing of cups, pitchers, copper vessels, and couches.” (Mark 7:3-4, NKJV)

The word used for wash is baptizo. The New Living Translation describes the type of washing: “The Jews, especially the Pharisees, do not eat until they have poured water over their cupped hands, as required by their ancient traditions.” (Mark 7:3, TNLT). Notice in Mark 7:4 that couches were baptized (wash is translated from baptizo). This clearly was not a washing done by immersion.

Sometimes it is argued that John 3:23 implies baptism by immersion:

“Now John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there. And they came and were baptized.” (John 3:23, NKJV).

There were many springs of water near Aenon (which means springs). Springs were needed for the many people that came to John for the support of life. Streams in Israel were formed by springs which are usually shallow. To say this passage proves John baptized by immersion in an exegetical stretch.

It is also argued that the various New Testament descriptions of baptism imply immersion, by the “going down into the water” and the “coming up out of the water.” These are seen in Matthew 3:16, and Mark 1:9-10 in Jesus baptism, and with the Ethiopian eunuch’s baptism in Acts 8:36-39). If you read the passages carefully, you will see that the separate act of baptism (whatever mode it was) was a separate act that came after going down in the water and preceded coming up out of the water. Further, Acts records that both Philip and the Ethiopian went down into the water and came up from the water, indicating that the going down and coming up were not part of the baptism itself. Also, since the Ethiopian was reading Isaiah 53:7-8, he had just previously read Isaiah 52:15: “So shall He sprinkle many nations.” (KNJV) It was this previous passage that might have made the Ethiopian to think of baptism in the first place. It is possible that the Ethiopian might have been familiar with Ezekiel 36:25: “Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols.” (NKJV). The evidence seems to indicate that the Ethiopian was baptized by sprinkling.

Another note to consider is that going down into the water, to the knees or thighs, would have made the procedure of pouring and sprinkling or pouring much easier for the person performing the baptizing, to raise the water from the surface to the top of the person’s head.

We need to note several other baptisms, the baptism of Saul (Acts 9:11-18), the baptism of Cornelius’ household (Acts 10:25-48), and the Philippian jailer’s household (Acts 16:32-33). Each of these baptisms was done in homes. Few homes would have facilities to fully immerse people, so baptism could not have been done by immersion. In the case of the jailer, the baptism took place after midnight, and it is hardly likely that Paul would have taken the jailer’s household to a river after midnight.

The conclusion from looking at the examples of baptism is that the mode was baptism was sprinkling.

If we consider the book of Hebrews, the book characterizes all ceremonial sprinklings in the Old Testament (Hebrews 9:13) as baptisms (Hebrews 9:10 – washings in this verse comes from the Greek baptismos, baptisms). Hebrews, and the Apostle Peter also speak of Christians being sprinkled with Christ’s blood:

“let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.” (Hebrews 10:22, NKJV), this alludes to Ezekiel 36:25: “Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols.”

“to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.” (Hebrews 12:24, NKJV)

“elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied.” (1 Peter 1:2, NKJV), this alludes to Isaiah 52:15: “So shall He sprinkle many nations…” (NKJV).

The water of baptism represents the sprinkling of the cleaning blood of Jesus. The most natural way to apply the water is the way the blood of Christ is described to be applied to us for the cleaning of sin, through sprinkling.





Footnotes:

1 Classic Baptism, James W. Dale, p. 354.

2 I am indebted to Robert L. Reymond, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith, pp. 930-935 (from the first edition) for the outline and content of this discussion.

Other articles in the FAQ series:

What is Faith?

What is Repentance?

What does Born Again Mean?

What is the Means of Grace?
What is the Proper Mode of Baptism?