Keep sharing good news without ads.
Ephesians 4:5
All right everyone grab your Bibles and turn with me to Hebrews, not Hebrews, Ephesians. The light's got to me. Ephesians chapter 4. Ephesians chapter 4 and we will continue on in our series through Paul's letter to the churches in Ephesus.
We will be revisiting verse 5. The title of today's message is simply One Baptism. If you would please stand with me for the honoring and reading of God's holy infallible and all-sufficient Word. For the sake of context I will begin in verse 1 and continue on through verse 6.
This is the Word of God. Therefore I, the prisoner in the Lord, exhort you to walk worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, being diligent to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
There is one body and one spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. The grass withers and the flower fades, but the Word of our God endures forever.
Amen? Amen. Go ahead and have a seat. If you've been with us for the past few weeks you will know that we are working our way through verses 4 through 6. And verses 4 through 6 are crucial to our understanding both of what it means to be a Christian but also how to live as the church.
In fact, it is the foundation of our very unity, which is after all what we are commanded to be after. Paul begins this section of Scripture by telling us that we are to walk worthy. That is, that we are to be humble, we are to be gentle, we are to be patient, we ought to bear with one another in our midst in love.
And doing so proves the doctrine that we believe, right? Walking worthy means to live in such a way that the scales, as it were, were balanced. That you are living your doctrine and your doctrine is informing your living.
And then he begins by telling us not just what that looks like but who that looks like, namely the triune God of the Bible. And so we get to these verses and we see that there are these three sets of three, all based around one particular person in the Trinity.
First the Spirit, second the Son, and third the Father. The first one, of course, speaking of our unity in the Spirit. The second, which we are exploring now, our unity in the Son. Or you could say the unity purchased by the Son.
And so right now we are looking at particularly the Son's baptism. And we saw that he is the one Lord of all. We've seen that it is one faith about him that we are to be rooted in, and now we are looking at what it means to take baptism seriously in regard to our unity purchased by the Son.
Now as soon as I say the word baptism and reformed circles, it automatically produces a certain level of fear. And the reason for that is because we don't all agree on who should receive baptism or even in totality what baptism is really about.
Which is somewhat ironic, right? Because this part of Scripture is teaching us how we ought to think about certain things, pivotal things, foundational things, and why those foundational things are to produce unity.
And yet when we talk about baptism, we are oftentimes divided. And that's unfortunate that things are that way. But it is the reality nonetheless. Before we look at what baptism is, I want to just say something on the front end that I think will help govern our hearts as we look at this particular text.
And that is this, that what's really important about baptism is the spiritual reality that baptism itself symbolizes. Its symbolism transcends the particularities of, say for example, motes. That is how one is baptized.
And it's to some degree more important, although it's not disconnected as you will see, than who gets baptized. Really when we're talking about one baptism, we're talking about a baptism that unites every single Christian who bears the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.
In other words, what I'm trying to say is that the essence of baptism is found not in the water itself or necessarily or not necessarily even the receiving of it, but in the reality to which it points.
That is, spoiler alert, the believer's death to sin and a resurrection to a new life in Christ Jesus. Baptists believe and have believed. Also, if you didn't know you were in a Baptist church, you are.
That baptism, at least from the human side of things, is an outward sign of an inward reality. A testimony, in other words, to the grace that God has bestowed upon the sinner that has been received through faith in Christ.
In other words, as we think about baptism, what we really need to understand is that at its core, at its essence, it is a holy drama putting on display the beauties and glories and excellencies of Jesus Christ and his gospel.
This is so true, in fact, that even Presbyterians agree with me on this fact. Thomas Watson once said, baptism is the gospel in water. And so, as we look at this text, let us be enthralled, let us be completely drowned, as it were, in the realities that what baptism is, above all else, is a picture of what God has done in Christ through the power of his Spirit for undeserving, ill-deserving sinners.
Amen? Amen. With that being said, we do have to draw some lines in the sand, lovingly, of course, but the Bible tells us to do that. So, if you would, the first thing that I want to do is ask a series of questions.
Now, of course, if you're visiting for the first time, this seems somewhat topical. We are moving verse by verse through the book of Ephesians, and that is the general way that we do things. We believe that exegetical and expositional preaching is the best diet for God's people, but we also understand that sometimes, given specific subjects, particularly as it pertains to baptism, we have to back up a little bit and see what the Bible has to say from Genesis to Revelation.
Now, we have to engage in a type of biblical theology that is completely, utterly dependent upon the text before us. And so, though it's not necessarily a verse-by verse exposition of these two words, it is exegeting words that exist here in its context.
Let's never forget the context. But I'm going to ask a series of questions that, honestly, the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith is going to help us answer, so that we might be able to better ascertain what one baptism actually means.
And so, the first thing that I want to do is I want to ask the question, what does the word baptism even mean? What does the word baptism even mean? Of course, we have this word here, if we look at verse 5 again, 1.
Baptism. Now, baptism is a word that is theologically drenched. It is a word that has been used and is used to promote huge spiritual realities, to talk about parts of the gospel, and it is a word that we must be familiar with.
But we must make sure that we define it properly and biblically. Throwing any definition on it simply will not do. Before we answer this question with a particular definition, I want to help you notice something interesting about the word baptism.
The word baptism is actually a transliteration and not a translation of a particular word. And the reason that that is significant is because it helps us understand both the vast confusion on the topic, but also the heart posture of the ones who translated the Bible.
And it will help us honestly define it, interestingly enough. The word baptism is actually, like I said, a transliteration. If you don't know what that means, it means the translators decided not to translate this word.
In other words, they decided not to give it a meaning. So, for instance, when we see the word humility, if you remember me talking about that a few weeks ago, and we said the Greek word pointed to the reality that this word actually means more in-depthly this thing.
And it is our English understanding of a word that correlates to that, that helps us to better understand what's happening. That's a translation. A transliteration is when they just put the word in there and sound it out in the Greek for you.
So, for instance, holy is agios in the Greek. Sometimes, you know, if you're transliterating a word, it might say, you know, Christians are agios. Nobody knows what agios is unless they study the Greek, but that's a transliteration.
Same thing here happening with baptism. Baptism here is the word baptisma, and it's derived from the lemma baptizo. And the meaning of this word is not obscure. The meaning of this word is not debatable.
The meaning of this word is not something that is hard to get at. It is littered throughout the New Testament. It was used in the Old Testament in the Septuagint. Not to mention that, but it was used elsewhere in antiquity in other Greek writings.
Imagine that. People who lived in and around Ephesus and Rome used language that would have been understood. And so the word actually means to immerse. It means to submerge. It means to dip utterly and fully.
These are all definitions that you can find with just a cursory glance at a Greek lexicon. Now, of course, people who disagree with the type of baptism we are arguing for would try to nuance this word dip to death and wind up actually obliterating the definition altogether.
But this is so true, in fact, that John Calvin even said in his commentary on the passage, this word baptized simply means to immerse, to plunge, and to absorb. In Greek antiquity it actually was used of fabric that would be dipped in ink, and it would absorb all of that ink that it would be dipped into.
So we must start with this understanding that baptizing, or the word baptism, is rooted in the idea of immersion, dipping, plunging, utterly, and fully. That's what it means syntactically. But of course, as I was saying previously, that's not the end of the story.
In chapter 29, in paragraph 1, we are given a definition of what baptism is. The London Baptist Confession gives us this definition, and it is wonderful. It says, baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament ordained by Jesus Christ to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him in his death and resurrection, of his being engrafted into him, of remission of sins, and of giving up into God through Jesus Christ to live and walk in a newness of life.
Now that's a pretty thorough answer as to what baptism is. And if you missed a lot of that, we're going to revisit it, so don't feel like you missed the world. As we begin to think about this, I want to state a few things.
Firstly, that this shows us that baptism is an ordinance. Now, the confession is not the scriptures, and my aim here is not to simply exegete the confession. It's to prove the confession to be biblically accurate.
And those are two different things. The confession is not our Bible, but it teaches what the Bible teaches, and I want to show that to be true. And as we consider that, the first thing I said is, baptism is an ordinance.
It is an ordinance. Now, this differs from the Westminster Confession of Faith, although the Westminster Confession of Faith does use the word ordinance interchangeably with the word sacrament. So you may remember this word, sacrament, being spoken of, and I like that word.
As a matter of fact, the Baptists liked that word as well. They would oftentimes use it interchangeably as well, especially in writings that existed outside of the confession of the 17th century. And so, sacrament or ordinance is seemingly inconsequential to a degree.
But it is obvious that the reason that Baptists chose this word ordinance is because they believed that it was more than just something that we should do. It was actually a command of God. Now, of course, I'm not trying to misrepresent my Presbyterian brothers and sisters, because I think that they might and would oftentimes agree with such a statement, but the thing about confessions, especially when you write them in ways that disagree with some of your contemporaries, you want to be polemical in the way that you write it.
And that is that the Baptists were really trying to help us understand that this was not an option. This was ordained by God, and that we must take it seriously. But what does baptism mean? Not only in its historical context, that it's an ordinance, and not only that it has these undertones in its definition, but what does it actually mean here, right?
The reason that people, when they were translating the Bible in the past, and I don't have time to get into this fully, is because there was a lot of debate about baptism, on whether or not it should be a believer's baptism only, or be given to infants, and the translators thought, well, the best way around this issue is to just not translate the word, right?
Because what they didn't want to do is translate it in a way that would betray the biblical text itself. They don't want to add to it, so they didn't want to say it meant something it didn't mean. It's commendable.
But they also didn't want to, essentially, pick a side, or make people think that they were picking a side, and so they chose to use a transliteration. But in context, we must ask, what does baptism actually mean here?
Not just what does it mean in its definition, or that it's an ordinance, but what does it mean here? Well, it certainly means, first and foremostly, that it is a beautiful and breathtaking illustration of robust biblical realities.
Robust biblical realities. We're trying to ascertain what is actually behind mode and recipients, and we need to understand this is a symbolic ordinance and not a saving ordinance, and we will get to that more in a moment, but it is one that is completely and utterly pointed in a direction that is not you or I.
But we are caught up into it by our unification with the Lord Jesus Christ. So we also need to understand, if we look at our definition again of the London Baptist Confession of Faith, that it is a sign of sinners' fellowship or union with Christ.
If you look back at the definition I gave you on the London Baptist Confession found in chapter 28 in paragraph 1, it says that baptism is a sign of his fellowship with him. There's two people being spoken about there.
The Christian and Christ. It's fellowship with him or union with him. This is a truth that is littered throughout the entirety of the book of Ephesians. This idea that we are, if we are a Christian, saved by the triune God of the Bible, united to him by faith.
We are hidden in him. We have put him on. This phrase, in Christ, is essentially the moniker that illustrates this truth for us. And it is the key theme, if we could say that, of the book of Ephesians.
In the book of Ephesians, this phrase, in Christ, or its various variations, in him, in the Lord, etc., are used extensively and without apology. So much so that it is used 29 times in just six short chapters.
In Christ is used 12 times, most of that being in the first 14 verses of the letter. In him is used eight times when it is referring to Christ. In the Lord, six times. And in him, three times. It is important that we understand that being baptized is reflecting the reality that we are all in Christ.
We have been brought into Christ, and of course the argument being made in context is body. But how do we make sense of such an assertion? I think if we look at 1 Corinthians chapter 10, 1 through 4, it's going to help us.
I mean, Ephesians has already helped us along these lines as it pertains to Christ, covering our sin, and all of these sorts of things. But here, Paul says something very interesting. He says, I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them, and this is a very important piece of it, and that rock was Christ.
Right? No matter if you were in the Old Testament or in the New Testament times, you were saved by one person, and one person only in his name is Jesus Christ. Amen? Amen. But you see here, it says something interesting, that these Israelites who had passed through the Red Sea had been baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
What in the world does that mean? Certainly, there is one name in whom we are baptized, and that is, according to Matthew 28, the triune God of the Bible, or in other scriptures, use Jesus in his name we are baptized, because he is the one who makes salvation possible, and it's him who we are united to, and so there must be a way that we can think about this word baptism that is salvific, especially as it pertains to Christ, but also much different and more profound.
Not that salvation can be more profound, but that the idea here of union with Christ is bound up in the idea of baptism. So when it says here that these Israelites were baptized into Moses, what they were saying, or what Paul was saying rather, is that these Israelites were transferred from the sphere of slavery in the land of Egypt, and now have been thrust into the people of God by the power of God, and we're now walking in freedom underneath the leadership of Moses, that they were one with the people of God, and they were moving along with the people of God, and God's Word and God's presence invaded their space.
So it's being completely engrafted into the entire thing. In the same way, when we are baptized into Christ Jesus, we are transferred out of the sphere of this world, that we are transferred from being governed by the flesh, and being tempted by the devil, into Christ's sphere.
So when we are baptized, we are baptized, being unified to Christ, and put into his sphere, out of Satan's leadership, and underneath Christ's leadership, headship, and care. And this way, the book of Hebrews makes the case that Jesus is a better Moses, and we of course are grafted into the body of Christ, much like Israel was grafted into the people.
Of Yahweh. But it's more specific than that, because it's not only that we are in fellowship with this Christ, we're also in fellowship with this Christ, particularly as it pertains to his death and resurrection.
Right? And we've talked about this in a lot of different ways, especially over the last couple weeks, when we talked about the content of our faith, the gospel of Jesus Christ. And baptism is simply a symbolic rehearsal of the very gospel itself, particularly as it pertains to the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ.
And why do we believe that? We believe that because Jesus told us that. Firstly, in Luke chapter 12, verse 49, Jesus begins to say something that honestly is pretty hardcore and helpful. He says this, I have come to cast fire upon the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled.
But I have a baptism to undergo, Jesus says. And how distressed I am until it is finished. Do you think that I came, Jesus says, to grant peace on the earth? I tell you, no, but rather division. For from now on, five members of one household will be divided.
These against two, and two against three. They will be divided, father against son, and son against father, mother against daughter, and so on and so forth. And he was saying also to the crowds, when you see a cloud rising in the West, immediately you say, a shower is coming, and so it happens.
And when you see south wind blowing, you say, it will be a hot day. And it happens. You hypocrites, you know how to examine the appearance of the earth and the sky, but why do you not examine this present time?
Jesus is essentially saying, I've come to do some things, but before I do that, I have to undergo a baptism. I have to undergo a baptism. And I am distressed, he says, until it is finished. Of course, this baptism is the baptism of his death, that he would drink down to the dregs the wrath of Almighty God.
It is in reference to the cup that he will have to drink that he prays not to drink in the garden of Gethsemane before his crucifixion. And if you remember, after he suffers this substitutionary death on the cross, he cries out and he says, well, it is finished.
What is finished? Atonement. The drinking of that cup. The baptism that he was to undergo. Not only that, but Paul said it in Romans chapter 6, verse 36. Romans 6, verses 3 through 6, he says, or do you not know that all of us, speaking of Christians, were baptized into Christ Jesus, were baptized into his death.
You weren't baptized into water. You weren't baptized with a second blessing by the Holy Spirit. You were baptized into Christ's death. Therefore, it says, we were buried with him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in a newness of life.
For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of his resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin.
Paul here is picking up on Jesus' imagery that he gave us in Luke chapter 12, and also being led by the Holy Spirit, confirms that, as a matter of fact, baptism is about a spiritual reality, where we are spiritually united to Christ's death, and we are unified with what it achieved, and with him personally.
And to put a finer point on this, it means particularly that there is a transfer of headship. You see in Romans chapter 6, this portion of Scripture that we just read, it does not exist in a vacuum, it is in context.
And in Romans chapter 5, verse 12 through 16, there is this lengthy discussion as to what Jesus' death, an act of obedience, accomplished. Namely, a transfer in authority, where we were once under Adam's headship, we are now under Christ's headship.
It says in verse 12 of chapter 5, through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned. For until the law, sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed where there is no law.
Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned, in the likeness of the trespass of Adam, who was a type of him who is to come. Adam is a type of him who is to come, right?
He is the second Adam. Jesus Christ is the second Adam who set right what went wrong in the garden. Where Adam failed, Jesus succeeded. Where he thrust his posterity into sin, Jesus gathers and engulfs his people in a newness of life, where they are forgiven of their sin and their trespass.
This is huge. If you don't understand this, you don't understand the gospel, and you certainly will not understand baptism. Because Jesus is not only a type of one to come, but a better version of the one to come.
As it says later on in the passage, this gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the one who had the one hand, the judgment arose from the transgression, resulting in condemnation.
But on the other hand, in other words, Jesus, the gracious gift, arose from many transgressions, resulting in justification. Justified because of Jesus' perfect work on the cross. He died that we might be purchased for God and be seen as perfect, no longer underneath the bondage of sin because of Christ's perfect righteousness.
Secondarily, baptism points to the penalty-absorbing nature and sin-cleansing nature of his work. We can see this in Ezekiel chapter 36, for example. Starting particularly in verse 25, when the new covenant is promised.
By the way, it wasn't already made clear, and I don't think it was, so my apologies. It's obvious that baptism is the sign of new covenant realities, is the sign of the new covenant. Everybody agrees on this point.
Though it's not a seal. It's not a seal as our Presbyterian brothers and sisters would assert. There's no mention of this in the Bible anywhere. The only time a seal is mentioned in the New Testament, it speaks of the Holy Spirit, and we already looked at that in Ephesians chapter 1.
It is a sign, though, and the sign points to the reality that Ezekiel 37 is speaking of. It says, then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean. I will clean you from all your uncleanliness and from all your idols.
Moreover, I will give you a new heart. So what happens when Christ sprinkles a heart with clean water? It changes. You get a new one. It says, you put on a new spirit within you, and I will remove the heart of stone from you and your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
I will put my spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes, and you will be careful to do my judgments. This is almost a parallel passage of Jeremiah 31, 31 and following, which also promises the New Covenant.
This just helps us to understand that this water piece is involved and helps us to understand that it is actually cleansing as well, symbolically. That Jesus' death is cleansing, and we are brought into union with him and his death and what it accomplished.
It also means regeneration. It imparts new life. It imparts new life. We see that in Ezekiel 37. We see that in Jeremiah 31. We have seen this union with Christ being a reality that imparts new life as we work through Ephesians chapter 2, especially as we looked at verse 4, which taught us that in Christ we are begotted, right?
We are given a special merit. We are given a special bit of grace, supernatural grace from God that saves us, and so it remains that we are imparted new life. And that is also part of the definition, right?
Not only is it a sign of this fellowship with him in his death and resurrection of his being and grafted into him, union with Christ, of remission of sins. Oh, this is huge. It is a cleansing unification, and this is important to distinguish because there are people who believe in what's called baptismal regeneration.
That is that the water itself, the sprinkling itself, actually is the regenerating. But that's damnable heresy, and it's not even worth combating because the church has been unanimously agreed upon this since we became Protestant.
This is a horrible symptom of the Roman Catholic Church, and for some reason it seems to be making somewhat of a comeback, and I don't know why that is, but I wish it would stop. But what we need to understand, and this is really what you need to take home at this juncture, baptism is not merely sprinkling water on somebody or dipping them in even to water.
It is the plunging of a soul into the grace of Almighty God that is all-encompassing. It is an immersion into the death and a resurrection of our Savior. We are raised, remember we talked about this, not only are we baptized into his death, but we are resurrected to a newness of life, and Ephesians, a little bit earlier in chapter 1 in the 1718 area, helps us to really understand that it's even bigger than that because we ascend to Christ in the heavenly places.
Now, we've been talking about baptism, and we should, but one of the things that we've skipped over is this word, one. One. And that helps us govern how we think about baptism as well. No matter how many denominations there are, no matter how many disagreements there are, no matter who's right, I think it's me, obviously, and people who disagree with me think it's them.
If there is one, there's one right answer to this thing. And the answer to that question is a unifying reality. And so you must ask the question, what are we united by? Are we united by the idea of a word?
Are we united by simply a church building in a community? Or are we unified in the gospel of Jesus Christ and what it has accomplished on our behalf? When Paul says one baptism here, he reinforces the very Putin idea that there is only one way of entering the covenant.
There's not multiple ways. I want to say that again. There's not multiple ways. And, of course, this bumps up against some of the people that would disagree with us. They would say, yes, grown-ups or adults need to be united in their repentance of sin and confession of Jesus and be baptized, but it's not true of infants.
Well, it's created a second baptism in a myriad of different ways, but more on that in a moment. Children, would you look at me for just a second? I know I've been plowing through some of this content, but I do want to make sure that you understand at least one thing.
Baptism, that is when you see somebody being dipped in water, immersed in water, put underwater by the pastor, and they're brought back up. What that's doing is it's giving us a picture. It's like a cartoon or a TV show in the most reverential way possible that is showing us what actually happens to us when we believe in Jesus, when he changes our hearts, when he saves us from Satan, sin, death, and hell.
And so it's a beautiful and awesome and amazing thing to witness. It's an amazing thing to do when you are ready to do it. As a matter of fact, it's a command from the Lord. Now, that's essentially the sermon.
That's essentially the content that I have for you as it pertains to baptism, because I believe that that's what it's about. When it says there is one baptism, it's saying that there is one unified reality, that we are, in fact, in the church, in the covenant, we are unified to the Lord Jesus Christ, and particularly united to his work, his death that was lived for you, or his life that was lived for you, his death that was died for you, and that we are united to him in such a way that it causes us to be shielded from God's wrath and to walk in a newness of life.
And baptism is a picture of this motif that we are, right, dead in sin, in our transgressions, we're in the grave, and we have been brought to a newness life by the power of the Spirit as the gospel is proclaimed, and that's a beautiful, transcendent, spiritual reality that I think most of us, no matter if you are convinced of a more paedo-baptist covenant theology or a baptist one, can get on the same page of, at least to some degree.
Now, the second part of this, I want to discuss some implications of what I just said, because the truth is we can't leave it there, especially with all of the questions surrounding us in the Reformed community, and also in church history, and also questions that we might have as well.
Well, why can't infants be baptized, and why are you arguing for this particular idea or definition of baptism? Well, the confession answers this question as well. So we're going to ask the question, firstly, who is baptism for?
Right, we've seen what it is and what it means, namely that we are united to Christ, we are immersed in the grace that he has given to us, and we are one in him, and that we have been ultimately baptized into Christ, which means we've been baptized into his body, which is Paul's point here.
He's the head, we're the body. But in chapter 29, in the second paragraph of the confession, it says these are who baptism is for. Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ, these are the only proper subjects of this ordinance, this commandment ordained by God.
In other words, it's not to be given to men and women who just happen to be deficient in age, but rather those who have been united to Christ, right? It's his death that we've been united to. And Christ does not mediate for those outside of union with him.
So what must be said is that baptism is for repentant sinners who have placed their faith in Christ and desire to be obedient to him. Or you know, the other way, only those united to Christ are baptized into Christ.
Now, does that mean that Christians can't give a false profession and be dipped in ineffectual water? No, that can happen all the time. People give false professions of faith all the time. People are deceived all the time.
The Bible makes this irrefutably clear. But that is not the problem of baptism. That is not the problem. That's not God's problem. That's the problem of the one who is deceived or is deceiving. But baptism is to represent an inward reality.
An inward reality that is not given to us by the water, but the Word. And what I mean by that is, 1st Peter says in chapter 1 verse 23 through 25, for you have been born again. You've been regenerated, in other words.
You've been thrust into Christ's union, not of corruptible seed, but incorruptible. That is, through the living and enduring Word of God. For all flesh is like grass, and all its glory like the flowers of grass.
The grass withers and the flower falls off, but the Word of the Lord endures forever. That sounds familiar, does it not? And this is the Word which has been proclaimed to you as good news. So what is the good news?
It's something that is preached about Jesus Christ from the Word of God that God uses to effectually change and regenerate and cause to be born again those whom would be baptized. Baptizing is a sign of a very real and robust biblical reality.
The water does not do it, but grace through the preached Word does it. You can think about it this way. John Bunyan helps us here. He says, baptism is a token of grace, not the cause of grace. So baptism is the acknowledgment of the and resting in the reality of grace that has been freely given to the sinner, namely unification the Son Jesus Christ, and in so doing unification with the rest of his body.
He continues, water can never wash away sin, only the blood of Christ can accomplish that mighty task. Amen? Amen. And so, who is it for? Who is baptism for? It's for the person who has made a credible profession of faith because God and Christ does not unite unbelievers to Christ.
He just doesn't. Now, before moving further, which I am going to do, to discuss objections to what I'm saying, I need to say this just so it doesn't get lost. Before attempting to answer a few common objections, I want to state at the outset that I don't have, nor do Baptists in general have, anything against children.
We love them. We love infants. As a matter of fact, it has been dubbed by some Presbyterian-friendly people in our midst that we are, quote unquote, the best Presbyterian Church in Tulsa, and the reason for that is because we actually take the discipling of children seriously, and we actually take the confession seriously, and so, you know, even though I'm trying to make this argument, it's because I want to be incredibly biblical and lift high the name of Jesus Christ.
It has nothing to do with me not wanting babies to be baptized. I want babies to be baptized. I want them all to grow up in the fear and admonition of the Lord, being pushed to gaze at the Lord Jesus Christ and his beautiful gospel, and when they make a credible profession of faith, I want to get them in the water as soon as humanly possible.
That is great news. That is amazing news when that happens, and so I think and believe that children, as the Bible teaches, are in fact a blessing and heritage from the Lord, and so does every single pastor at this church.
We want to make sure that that is said, but with that said, we want to make sure that our love for children, which is insanely biblical, right? Jesus said that the kingdom belongs to such as these. Our love for children ought never to drive us away from gospel realities.
As beautiful as children are, as amazing as they are, we should never use that love to twist or neglect the clear teaching of Holy Scripture. I also want to say, before moving on to these objections, that this is an in-house debate.
It is clear from the early particular Baptist writings, it's clear in the Bible, that mode of baptism, though not unimportant, is not the most important thing, and so in no way am I saying that Presbyterian brothers and sisters who disagree with me are kicked out of heaven.
I'm not saying that, right? I'm not saying that they are, you know, kicked outside of the kingdom. I'm not saying that they are maliciously trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. I think that they are trying to do the best with the data that they have before them.
I think that they just are inconsistent, but we can always pray God for our blessed inconsistencies, and so I don't want this to be seen as an attack, but a loving challenge to reconsider maybe some previously held presuppositions while also helping us understand what baptism is.
The first objection that is often lobbed at this interpretation is that baptism is clearly for households in the New Testament. Baptism is clearly for households in the New Testament, and of course, then, it is extrapolated.
If it's for households, then it means there must be a baby in a household, because what baby or what household would not have a baby, right? Well, that's a logical fallacy, and it's assuming too much, right?
It's assuming far too much, and so while the New Testament does make use of this word households, it, you know, may not mean what advocates of the contrary position think it means. One passage that is used to say this is Acts 16 verses 31 through 34.
This is kind of the premier text as it pertains to, you know, when a person is saved, has repented and believed the gospel, that that means that their family should be baptized, right? The story, of course, is the story of the jailer that is converted by Paul while he is in prison, and I want you to look at this text.
It says, "...and they," that being Paul and his companion, "...believe in the Lord Jesus," so he's telling this man to believe in the Lord Jesus, that is to adopt the one faith, to trust in him as Lord, "...and you will be saved, you and your house.
And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his household, and he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized.". He and his household, "...and he brought them into the house and set food before them and rejoiced greatly with his whole household because he had believed in God.".
Now, there are quite a few things that you need to take notice of this before you just adopt the idea that, look, people can get baptized if, or infants can be baptized because it says here that the household was baptized, but I want you to take notice of a few different things.
The first one, which I'm not going to get into a lot because there's some Greek work that needs to be done here and we need to keep moving, but different translations translate the end of this verse differently, specifically the NIV.
At the end of the verse here, it says that his household rejoiced greatly, that he rejoiced greatly with his whole household, and it says here in the LSB, "...because he had believed in God.". The NIV translate that as a more corporate thing, that they believed in God.
Other translations do the same, and there is either a textual variant situation happening there, or it is a different way of translating the Greek, and so I would commend that to you for further research, but the ones that are the most pressing and the ones that make the most sense to bring up and focus in on a little bit more are these things as it pertains to both the New Testament priority and pattern of what's actually happening here.
You see, it says here that Paul told them to believe the Lord Jesus, and then you will be saved, and he did not get baptized before that, obviously. He got baptized after that, but when after that? Well, if you look a little bit further on, it says, "...and they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his household.".
So he tells this jailer, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, believe the gospel, which also carries with it, especially if you look at the rest of the New Testament. You've repented, right? You can't have belief and true faith without God doing a work in you and changing you, and you're repenting.
You'll be saved. You and your home. And then they, Paul, and I'm guessing, I would assume by the way that the plain reading of the text is, the jailer went to their house, went to the jailer's house, or at least wherever they were at.
I assume it's a house because it says household, but if you're just thinking about household as a family unit, then maybe it was somewhere else. But they went there, and they said they spoke the word of the Lord to him.
The question is, what is the word of the Lord? Well, in context, the word of the Lord is most certainly what the Lord says in his word about baptism, about the gospel of Jesus Christ, right? In context, believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.
This is taught from beginning to end, Genesis to Revelation, right? This is the gospel that is given to these people, and he's spoken it to their family. And then it says, and he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized.
He and all his household. The reality is, his household has in fact believed the gospel with him. That's the plain reading of the text. Why? Because they were not going to give a different message to the rest of his family than he gave to the jailer.
Amen? Right, why would he change the preconditions to baptism for people in his household? He wouldn't. He and his household were baptized after the gospel had been preached to him, and then he brought that gospel to his home and his household, and then they responded in kind.
There's zero reason, zero reason to believe that his household or infants in that household were baptized because he was baptized. There's no reason to believe that. There's no example of that, and it defies the repeated pattern of the New Testament.
Repeat, repent, believe, be baptized. Which, by the way, is explored more than 20 times in the New Testament, all of which hold the same exact pattern, whether it's speaking about a theological reality, or as there is an example given, every single time, without exception, the pattern exists.
Repent, believe the gospel, be baptized. And so the baptism is for the household argument falls flat. Secondarily, baptism is for infants on the ground, specifically, not that they are the household, but because baptism is now the new circumcision.
The new circumcision, right? This is the argument that is given out to combat the idea that, you know, baptism is for those who believe only. And this is a stronger argument, in my opinion, than the household argument, but it still falls flat for a majority of different reasons.
Namely, that the argument is not an argument that the Bible makes. Hey, I love you enough to tell you the truth. Charles Spurgeon said, you know, if you love men and you want to see their souls saved, you will tell them a great deal of disagreeable truths.
I know that there are people in here who are going to disagree with this, but I want you to see it in the text, because my opinion, at the end of the day, means nothing. The question is, what does the Bible teach on the matter?
And so I'll state again, the Bible never links circumcision to baptism in a way that would cause anyone ever to think that it is a replacement of it, or it is in equality with it, or serves the same purpose.
But that's the argument, right? The argument is, we baptize our infants because, in the Old Testament, the covenant sign of circumcision was given to the males, but everybody was in the covenant, even the children.
First of all, I want to say that God gets to determine the nature and statutes of his covenants, not us, and so if he wants to do a covenant slightly differently, that's his prerogative, we are only to submit to it.
But more pointedly, the text that people use to argue this position doesn't say it at all. I'm thinking specifically of Colossians 2, chapter 2, verses 9 through 13. Colossians 2, verses 9 through 13.
This is the text that they pull from, and they say, well, look, here, slam-dunk argument, you don't know what you're talking about. Let's consider that. But let's go to the Word of God. It says, for in him all the fullness of deity dwells bodily.
Of course, that's speaking of Jesus. And in him, right, in Christ, you've been unified to him, you have been filled. Filled with what? His spirit, right? Who is the head over all rule and authority, right?
You've been baptized into Jesus, having been filled with the Spirit, and he is the head over absolutely everything, in whom you were also, and here's the word, circumcised. A circumcision made without hands.
A circumcision made without hands. In the removal of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.
And so you have these two words, back-to-back, circumcision and baptism. And so at cursory glance, you might think, sure, they're connected. But you can only come to that conclusion if you're not actually, if you're not paying attention to the argument, right?
Everything has a context. Everything matters. And actually, what's being told to us is not that there is a replacement of circumcision that is now something called baptism, but rather, circumcision has been fulfilled.
It's been fulfilled both in Christ and in his regenerating work as we come into union with him, right? In him, it says here, looking back at verse 9 at the end here, in whom you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands.
Now, if we slow down here, you see that Paul is making this very potent argument that circumcision is no longer, at least fleshly or anatomically, needed in the context of God's people or the local church.
That much is clear. But it says here that something fulfilled it, or you could use the word replace, though I don't love that word, and that thing is not baptism. Do you see that? It says you've been circumcised, all right, not with baptism, but with a circumcision made without hands and the removal of the body of the flesh in the circumcision of Christ.
So bodily circumcision, which was the sign of the Old Covenant, which was a sign that antagonists like to use to say that's what baptism is, is actually the circumcision of Christ, which in this context is circumcision made without hands, which in the Old Testament prophets, Ezekiel and so on, it's the circumcision of the heart.
It's regeneration. It's the changing of a heart. So if anything replaces circumcision, it's not baptism, it's regeneration. The circumcision of Christ is not baptism. It's a circumcision made without hands, and you could add, although I wouldn't do it like really, it's a circumcision made without water.
It's a circumcision that is the circumcision of Christ where he has united his people to himself and changed their very hearts. This is helpful because you see a shift here. Circumcision was a sign in the Old Covenant that focused on physical descent, whereas baptism, the sign of the New Covenant, is a covenant of grace based on spiritual rebirth.
Circumcision marked one as a physical descendant of the man that we all know to be Abraham, but baptism marks one as a spiritual descendant of his united by Christ. This is the argument of Romans chapter 9, for example.
You could say it this way. The Old Covenant was a covenant of shadows, but the New Covenant is one of substance, and that substance is found only in the covenant of grace in the New Testament in Christ and the work that he did for his people.
And so when he goes on here to say, in the circumcision of Christ, having been buried, this is why having a word-for-word translation, especially the Legacy Standard Bible, is perfect here, having been buried with him, right?
So if you have been circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, that is the circumcision of Christ, you have already been buried with him in baptism, right? The egg does not come before the chicken, the chicken comes before the egg, in which you also raised up with him through faith in the working of God who raised him from the dead.
There is a few more that I want to get to maybe at a later time, but I want to make one last final appeal as it pertains to silence. One objection that is quite common is baptism of infants, instead of just believing, professing, believing sinners should be assumed and it should be practiced because there is no command not to.
There is no command not to. I want to say at the outset that that objection is a really bad confessional objection. It's a bad biblical objection because we would not do theology like that any other place in the Bible, and our Presbyterian brothers and sisters would agree fully with what I just said.
If they just took a moment to pause, they would see how this particular issue is an inconsistency getting in the way of them applying our shared hermeneutic, that is a way of studying the Bible. What I mean by this, we should never do anything that we want to do or think we should do because the Bible doesn't speak to it.
We know this, right? We as a church, we as confessional people, hold to what is called the regulative principle of worship. That means if God didn't tell us to do it, we don't do it. And if he did tell us to do it, we do it all the time, every time, and twice on Sunday.
Amen? Amen. We can all agree with that. And so the question then becomes, should infants be baptized? Well, according to that objection, yes, because God didn't tell us not to and we should just understand the continuity of the covenants because God wouldn't create another covenant that's different from the other covenant.
And then all these other arguments that we've already kind of looked at. But in the Orthodox Catechism written by Hercules Collins, which predated somewhat the catechism that we now know as the 1689 Catechism or Keech's Catechism, gave a helpful answer.
And it's so helpful, in fact, I'm going to read it verbatim. He says, question 71 of the Orthodox Catechism, should infants, too, be baptized? The answer, no. Surprising, huh? A Baptist saying no. But the reason that he gives is so rock-solid that if you find fault with it, I gotta know why after the service, okay?
He says, for we have neither precept nor example in all of the New Testament for that practice in all, even the book of God. He then follows it up with another question, and question 72, which gets at the heart of the matter.
So the first thing is, should we baptize infants? He says, no. There's nothing in the Bible that either tells us we should do it or shows us that it has been done. And so the question, then his follow-up question is, okay, well then does the Word of God or the Scriptures forbid the baptism of infants?
That's a good question to ask, right? And that's something oftentimes is asked of me with a Bible or said to me in these types of conversations. Well, the Bible doesn't say we can't do that. It doesn't.
However, as Hercules Collins says, it is sufficient. It is sufficient that the divine oracles commands the baptizing of believers unless we will make ourselves wiser than what is written. Oh, that cuts like a knife, doesn't it?
He says, the fact that God said do this and left the other thing absent should be sufficient enough for us in our Christian life. We don't have to try to figure out, and we should not try to figure out, what else might be permissible that's dangerous, that's playing games.
And it is not something we should do. We should take God at his word and we should just do that word. We should hold, in other words, to the regulative principle of worship. As a matter of fact, Hercules Collins goes on to use Leviticus 10 3 as an example to this very thing, this very principle, which we all agree with, right?
You've heard me preach on Leviticus 10 3, I think, at least twice in this church. It's Nadab and Abihu, they offer up strange fire, and he says, Nadab and Abihu were not forbidden to offer strange fire, right?
That's true. We know that. They were not forbidden. There's no command in all of Scripture that says, do not offer strange fire. But they did not offer fire or take away fire the way that God told them to do it.
And they were what? Put to death by the wrath of Almighty God. So, we cannot just assume anything, and we must only do that which God commands, both by example and precept. And no, this doesn't fit underneath good and necessary consequence.
Although I do prefer the 1689's version of that a little bit better, but nonetheless, it is a shared hermeneutic and a shared thing here. But I want to put this out there, because at this juncture, Pado-Baptists often say that both sides are arguing from silence.
They might grant us a little ground, and they would say, okay, okay, there's nothing in the Bible that says that I should baptize my infants. But if you do all of these things, and you think about it this way, then, you know, it should be assumed.
But certainly, you Baptists, there's nothing in here that says I can't baptize my infants. Now, this is true, but these silences are not the same. One is deafening, and one is dangerous. You hear what I'm saying?
One is deafening, and one is dangerous. It is one thing to argue against believing a doctrine on the basis of silence, and it is quite another thing to argue in favor of believing a doctrine on the basis of silence.
You get what I'm after here? You don't build your theology in the space between the lines. You don't build your theology on what's not explicitly commanded. You do not build your theology on a maybe, or a could be, or a possibility.
You build your theology on the sure word of Almighty God that has been revealed in Scripture. And so, if, in fact, I would go around and say, sure, there's nowhere in the Bible that says I can't, but it gives me the New Testament priority for interpreting what baptism is, firstly, right?
Secondarily, it gives us the pattern for it over 20 times in the New Testament, and that pattern is repent, believe, and then be baptized, then my theology rests on sure and solid ground. And so, how are people to be baptized?
They're to be baptized, then, by the immersion into water. Sinners are to be baptized also Trinitarianly, right? Matthew 28 tells us when the apostles are given the Great Commission that they are, in fact, baptized in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
You baptize with water, as chapter 29, paragraph 4 says, by immersion, or the dipping of the person in water, and this is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance, because it is the symbol that it is putting forth, signaling to us the gospel, you know?
There's no magic in the water. It's a retelling of the gospel story as it pertains to the individual. You baptize in water, but not with water. And so, sure, like, you know, if you are in the desert so I need to get baptized, you've got, you know, a canteen full of water, you're not gonna be able to immerse, but you want to baptize.
Okay, like, you know, exceptions can be made. This is not a salvific thing, right? But what's more powerful, if you understand the reason that people are baptized, somebody being shoved, drenched, pushed in, immersed in water, and pulled out, water dripping off of them, showing from death to life, or, that's not very powerful.
You know, it's not very powerful. I mean, that's not like a good theological argument. Like, you're not gonna win a debate with that one, you know what I mean? But like, I mean, just think about the reality of what baptism is.
It exists to illustrate for the individual and for the congregation what God does by himself, for himself, through himself, and we are caught up in that reality, and we are in Christ, and we get to see that, celebrate it, love it, and we get to completely bask in the glory of it, and immersion is the most beautiful and most God-honoring way to do that.
But of course, since it's not salvific, we need to make sure that we understand that there are certainly exceptions that can apply. It is essential, though, for the act itself that pictures our death, burial, and resurrection with Christ to be that way so that the mode doesn't obscure the meaning of it, right?
We want it to be as clear as humanly possible. And so I know this is going way too long, but that's okay, right? But I have three things I just want to say in closing as far as considerations go. Firstly, don't count on your baptism to save you.
Don't count on your baptism to save you. If you understand what I'm saying here, you understand that water itself, the act, the rite, the ritual of baptism itself, is not what you need to get into heaven, right?
We know this for a myriad of different reasons. One, particularly, the thief on the cross gets saved on the cross while everybody else is mocking Jesus, and Jesus says, today you will be with me in paradise.
Now, he didn't step down, get baptized real quick, and put back up on the cross, right? So the fact is that it is not salvific. The waters of baptism hold no magical power. They will not save you. Or as John Bunyan has said, water will not drown the devil.
His hole is too deep for that, right? That's what we're getting at here, and so do not, if you are trusting in the fact that you said a prayer one time and that you got baptized, that you are automatically united to Christ.
That's not true. The baptism is a picture of that reality, right? It's like being a man that's in a sea, if you're trusting in your baptism to save you, but a lifeboat approaches, and somebody in the lifeboat gives you this rope, and instead of grabbing the rope, you grab your jacket, hoping that that will somehow save you.
No, no, no. Baptism is a picture of the rope, the salvation rope, as you will, Jesus Christ. It points to him, it points to the gospel and what it accomplishes. It is Christ who saves, and and you must cling to him like you would cling to the rope and not your jacket in that situation.
Secondly, don't neglect Jesus' command to be baptized if you haven't been baptized, right? We have a baptismal. We kind of have two. We even have one that if we ask far enough in advance, they'll turn the heater on for you, and you won't even feel cold, right?
But while baptism cannot save, we must not fall into the opposite error of neglecting Christ's command to be baptized. It's not a suggestion. Baptism is a command of the Lord Jesus himself, and so don't linger in disobedience.
If you've been beginning to feel, you know, this, you know, desire to be baptized, if you know that you have bowed your knee to King Jesus and you love him, then talk to a pastor, talk to a deacon, send us an email, but for sure, let's think about this command to be baptized.
It is not a minor issue. His people are marked by this very sign. It's like a, it would, not being baptized, but being a Christian is kind of like joining the army, but refusing to wear the uniform. It doesn't make any sense.
To refuse baptism is to say, I will serve Christ in secret, but I will not declare him before men, and I will not be identified with his people. It's a weighty matter, and so the waters, friends, of baptism awaits you, not as a means of salvation, but as a testimony or a witness to the salvation you have already received, and the last thing I'll say in this regard is stand in awe of what God has done when sinners are baptized.
Now, I think Heritage has gotten a little bit better at this as more baptism has happened, but I feel like every time we have a baptism, I'm overly joyed, I'm excited, I'm trying to get you all amped up, and, you know, you guys just act like a bunch of, you know, somber stoic individuals, you know, but the reality is when somebody is baptized and they have been united to Christ, that's a huge deal, right?
They're not just being baptized into this as if it's some sort of club. They're being baptized because they have already been baptized into the unifying death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Everything about them has been changed. Their heart has been transformed. They have been given new life where they stood in judgment before. They no longer stand in judgment now, and we must rejoice in that reality.
That is a picture of the gospel. That is the picture of what has been done to you, and there's nothing more beautiful, nothing more glorious, and that's why it's cheapened when you make baptism about anything else other than a beautiful illustration of an inward reality that Christ has purchased for you by the himself and putting you in his body.
Marvel at the miracle of regeneration when you see someone being baptized. Yes, it is a public declaration, but it is, like I said at the beginning, a holy drama enacted before our very eyes. Before, if you remember Ephesians, before men and angels that tells the story of a human being alienated and dead in their sin, and what's more beautiful than that?
And so, as we wrap up this section of Ephesians 4, particularly verse 5, we have seen that we are unified not only in the Spirit, but also in the Son. We are unified because he is the Lord of absolutely everything.
We are unified because the faith that speaks about him is true, it is clear, it is precise, and it is something that must be believed, taught, protected, and cherished. But we are also unified in the Son in that every single Christian that is in the church of Christ, that is in his covenant, is unified by the same baptism, with the same meaning, with the same background, and the same pointer finger, if you will.
Amen? Amen. Let's go ahead and pray that the Lord would bless the hearing and receiving of his Word. Father, we thank you, and we thank you that you have given us your Scriptures and that you have made it possible for us to ascertain what it is that you have for us.
We ask, even now, as we are considering both the truth of what baptism is and the implications of that truth, that you would help us not to be puffed up in pride, but that you would cause us, maybe, if we disagree, to search out the Scriptures and to be Bereans, right?
Because what we're after is to please you. And so, Lord, as I sat with this text this week and I was willing to be convinced wrong, I ask that you would help all of us to do that. But more than that, I just ask that you would help us to understand the beauty of what baptism is and, ultimately, the beauty of the gospel that you have made possible through the person and work of your Son, Jesus Christ, the Righteous.
And I ask that you would continue to grow us in Christlikeness and in unity with one another, and that you would help season conversations that might take place after this service with salt, and that you would help us to be people who love you, love your Christ, love your church, and are after the same thing, which is honoring your Christ.
We ask this in His name, by the power of your Spirit. Amen.