Water Baptism is Not for the Current Age

A vast majority of Christendom not only practices baptism (in several forms), but a clear majority deem it necessary for redemption. We have noted in other studies that the practice of baptism is not for believers in the current age. We have made reference to the practice as being part of the washing of the Levitical priesthood. Let's look again at the practice.

Before we get to the practice itself, we note two things about the practice that help us to rightly understand the meaning and purpose of the practice. And even as we note these, we point to Adam, Abel, Noah, and Abraham (all in uncircumcision) coming to faith without a ritual of washing either before or after their justification. We note that there is nothing in the instructions from God to Adam, Noah, Abraham, etc. regarding this ordinance. This is important as the primary goal of "rightly dividing the Word of Truth" (2 Tim 2:15) is understanding who is being addressed in context of the age in which they lived.

• The practice is related to the nation of Israel, the land, and the earthly plan of God
• There is more than one baptism in scripture

We note these as I hope it will become apparent that, specifically, water baptism is connected to certain truths as spiritual baptism is quite distinct. Looking at these in light of the practice of right division noted, we should start to pull out the ordinance as found in scripture then place it back in its context. 

Just for a starting thought, you will find no mention of a water ritual in the post-Acts epistles. The multiple baptisms (identification, water, spiritual) seen the Acts age are reduced to "one baptism" in Ephesians and that is not a baptism in water. 

There is one body and one Spirit, even as you were called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. 

-Ephesians 4:4-6

Colossians warns of the earthly ordinances. These ordinances are not inherently evil, but just as animal sacrifices for sin in the current age would be a denial of the greater truth of the sacrifice of Christ, so do the earthly ordinances connected to the earthly plan do damage to the current hope "in the heavenly places."  We do not observe Sabbath laws or other commandments given to the earthly chosen people. This includes those declared a "statute forever." 

Therefore let no one judge you regarding food, or drink, or in respect of a holy day or new moon or sabbath days. These are shadows of things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. 

-Colossians 2:16-17  

The statutes, the ordinances, the law, and the commandment, which He wrote for you, you shall observe to do forever. And you shall not fear other gods.

-2 Kings 17:37

 

 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ

-Ephesians 1:3
 

He raised us up and seated us together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus

-Ephesians 2:6

We must address the word itself as its common use in English has taken on a life of its own. The different English forms of the word come from different Greek forms of the word. The Greek is essentially transliterated into English. That is, the word is just spelled so an English reader can pronounce it, but it is just a restating the word from the original language. The concept of baptism comes from Israel and the word "baptism" comes into the English from the Greek translation of the original Hebrew.

When we hear someone speaking in Hebrew (a dead language brought back to life by Zionists), we must create words for things that did not exist when the language went dark. It is odd to hear an Israeli speaking in Hebrew and then a word like "telephone" jumps out. As ancient Israel had no telephones, a modern word is inserted. With the word "baptism" we have a similar phenomenon. 

The Old Testament (phrase used for convenience sake) practice of washings in baptisms (from the Greek) is carried over into New Testament Greek and eventually into English. Along the way, I would say that the meaning and origin have been lost and replaced by a more pagan/Roman understanding of the practice than it had from the original Hebrew/Biblical understanding.

We'll have to leave that there. Suffice to say when we read the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew texts) we find the word for washings transliterated into English word "baptism" (and related).

Note that baptízo is not "translated" but is transliterated in our English Bibles. To transliterate is simply to transcribe (a word in one alphabet) into corresponding letters of another alphabet. 

-Greek Word Studies from the Austin Precept text commentary of the Bible

The idea of "baptism" has taken on some degree of mysticism in modern Christendom, but if we hope to understand the word, we must get back to its basic usage. It is a picture and description and not a word that casts a spell. We see that one can be "immersed" in several ways. This is important when we come across the word in Paul's Post-Acts epistles.

 

The idea behind the ancient Greek word for baptized is “to immerse or overwhelm something.” The Bible uses this idea of being baptized into something in several different ways. When a person is baptized in water, they are immersed or covered over with water. When they are baptized with the Holy Spirit (Mt 3:11, Acts 1:5) they are “immersed” or “covered over” with the Holy Spirit. When they are baptized with suffering (Mk 10:39), they are “immersed” or “covered over” with suffering. Here, Paul refers to being baptized - “immersed” or “covered over” in Christ Jesus.

-Commentary, David Guzik, pastor of Calvary Chapel in Santa Barbara, California

 

Consider how W.E. Vine explains the word.

 

baptizo was necessarily transliterated into English, as there was no equivalent in our language. “To immerse” would be simply “to plunge into.” To baptize is to put into water and take out again. It involves immersion, submersion, and emergence—death, burial and resurrection. The word was used among the heathen Greeks of articles which underwent submersion and emergence, as in the case of the dyeing of a garment. 

- Collected writings of W. E. Vine. Nashville: Thomas Nelson

 In the idea of immersion, we have the idea of identification. If I immerse myself into Bible study or into any project, I become identified with those practices. One one "dips" something, it can be symbolic of an "immersion" or complete picture of a greater truth. We further note that the practice takes us back long before many teachers like to start the discussion. That is, it has origins and significance long before John the Baptist (who is from the priestly line of Levi).

There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah. His wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth... Now Elizabeth’s full time came for her to be delivered, and she brought forth a son. When her neighbors and relatives heard how the Lord had shown great mercy to her, they rejoiced with her. So it was, on the eighth day, that they came to circumcise the child; and they would have called him by the name of his father, Zacharias. His mother answered and said, “No; he shall be called John.” 

-Luke 1:5, 57-59

 

The word bapto is found nine times in the law of Moses, where it is used of dipping in blood, or in oil, or in water (Exod. 12:22; Lev. 4:6; 14:6; Num. 19:18 and Deut. 33:24). While the references in the New Testament to Pharisaic traditions do not take us back to any Old Testament passage, they do indicate that baptism is in no sense a New Testament rite or custom (Mark 7:8, Luke 11:38), and the inquiry by the Pharisees of John the Baptist was not to ask the meaning of baptism, but why he baptized if he were neither Christ, Elijah nor that prophet? (John 1:25), which again shows clearly that baptism was no new thing.

-Charles Welch "Baptism" (excerpt)

 Three New Testament verses with references to the Old Testament texts (from Acts Age epistles) further shed light on the grand theme of baptism.

1. The reference to the Ark and the Flood (1 Peter 3:21-22)

God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. Figuratively this is like baptism, which also saves us now. It is not washing off the dirt from the body, but a response to God from a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ

2. The crossing by Israel of the Red Sea (1 Cor 10:1-2)

I would not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea

3. The carnal ordinances of the tabernacle (Heb 9:9-10)

This is an illustration for the present time, showing that the gifts and sacrifices offered could not perfect the conscience of those who worshipped, since they are concerned only with foods and drinks, ceremonial cleansings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.

The eight saved through the judgment of the flood (physically rescued) were the ones kept dry. Peter, pointing to an uncircumcised Gentile in Noah (before Abraham), notes that "baptism" is an identification.  The washing is symbolic. Just as the priest stood offering bloody sacrifices "which can never take away sins" (Heb 10:11), so the priestly washings could never take away sins. 

Let us turn to Mark.

He that believes and is baptized shall be saved.

-Mark 16:16

Many who offer water baptism rituals would teach today that water baptism follows salvation (as it is commonly used: justification, redemption, the granting of Life). The Lord and Peter are clear that the salvation spoken of in that age followed faith and the ordinance. This might lead one to conclude that the sacramentalist then has it right: faith, then baptism, means resurrection life. The problem in reading it this way is that we must then ignore the rest of the Lord's words.

These signs will accompany those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

-Mark 16:17-18

 All of this is part of the Lord's calling to Israel and, specifically, to the calling of the Apostles sent to the Circumcision (and Paul as he ministered to Jews in the Acts Age). When Paul has the scales taken from his eyes in Acts 9:18, he is afterward baptized. (We do not address infant baptism here as it can nowhere fit any biblical account of baptism.) Was Paul still in his sin until the ritual? No, he already had the calling of God on his life. 

We note very clearly in Acts 10 that when Cornelius and his house have the Holy Spirit fall on them and they display the gifts the Jewish believers had been experiencing for years at that point (Cornelius was a believer before Peter entered his house) he was only then baptized. That is, Cornelius not only was a believer, he had the baptism and gifts of the Holy Spirit before he saw any water.

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all those who heard the word. All the believers of the circumcision who had come with Peter were astonished, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in other tongues and magnifying God. Then Peter continued, “Can anyone forbid water for baptizing these, who have [already] received the Holy Spirit as we have?” So he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days. 

-Acts 10:44-48

As an aside here, there is no record of anyone specifically being baptized "in the name of the father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt 28:19).

When Paul shares his testimony in Acts 22 we are given a few more details to note.

“Ananias, a devout man according to the law, who was well spoken of by all the Jews living there, came and stood by me, and said, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight.’ And at that moment I looked up at him. “Then he said, ‘The God of our fathers has appointed you to know His will and to see the Just One and to hear His voice, for you will be His witness to all men of what you have seen and heard. And now why do you wait? Rise, be baptized and wash away your sins, and call on the name of the Lord.’

-Acts 22:12-16

Would we today (or even the sacramentalist churches) describe someone called a "Christian" as "a devout man according to the law?"  Would the opinions of local Jews be of any concern for the believer of this current age? 

We've covered elsewhere the Apostles placing on Gentile believers the laws concerning Gentiles living among Israel as found in the Pentateuch. In both Acts 15 and Acts 21 the Apostles distinguish between Jewish and Gentile believers (as Paul does in his seven Acts Age epistles). We know from Acts 21 that Paul was still teaching circumcision for the Jewish believers as he was warning Gentile believers that circumcision meant a required obedience to the law.

Paul, as we know, was also very adamant that the law had nothing to do with justification (Rom 3:28, etc.) and neither did circumcision. Abraham was justified in uncircumcision (Rom 4:11-13, etc.). The law was wholly separate from the gift of resurrection life by grace through faith. The latter being true since Adam. 

It would be good here if the reader would compare Paul's statement in Romans 4:2 and the statement in James 2:21 which seemingly contradicts it in their contexts. We see there different aspects of justification in these passages. James writing a purely Jewish audience in light of the coming tribulation and establishment of the Kingdom in Israel. Paul addressing the gift of resurrection life, freedom from the Adamic curse of death and decay.

We will not divert into a study of the concept of "saved" here, but this idea must also be rightly divided. We quickly offer a few verses to consider. 

Examining Another "Claimed" Promise in Context (Psalm 5:12)

There are a number of YouTube channels that feature daily prayer. That's fine. Of course these range from the charismatic to the Catholic to the ultra Orthodox and everything in between and beyond! The prayer I want to address today is from an Evangelical channel. Clearly I would most likely be at odds with a Catholic or Orthodox prayer, but what of the Evangelical offering?

I wrestled with the idea of posting the video listing the channel, but I decided against both as this is not an attack on the man. I do not know him and I am not familiar with the full breadth of his beliefs. So, I will limit myself to a few points in today's prayer video.

The overall goal of this blog (and of my podcasts) is not to tell you what to believe. I encourage every individual believer to seek to "rightly divide the Word of Truth" (2 Tim 2:15). This is a lifelong process, but I fear most believers never seek to rightly divide God's words and find themselves claiming things for themselves or even confusing the hope of this current age with promises and plans for other people in other ages.

The YT prayer in question quotes a number of verses but builds its foundation on Psalm 5:12.

For You, Lord, will bless the righteous;
You surround him with favor like a shield.

-Psalm 5:12

So, what's the problem?

First, just so we understand, I am sure to emphasize that ALL the Word of God is profitable. I want to be sure to note that God does bless the righteous and God will surround the righteous with favor. That is part of God's character. "God is Love" is also relevant in all ages and is unchanging. But just because God's character doesn't change, doesn't mean his promises and plans and applications do not change. God's love and God's blessings manifest in different ways according to his different plans and purposes. 

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ...

-Ephesians 1:3

This comforting verse has a much different realization than a physical or financial blessing on earth.

This is the generic problem I see: believers in the current age will take the words of Psalm 5 and assume bless and favor mean today what they have always meant. This is a problem that we also encounter when we see believers ripping Jeremiah 29:11 or Ezekiel 36:26 from their contexts. There we are dealing with national promises to a group of people that many want to extract and apply to themselves or to individuals.

While recognizing the plan and purpose in view and differentiating the manifestation of blessings, we do not exclude the idea of blessing itself in all passages. If a specific blessing is part of a future prophecy for the nation of Israel in the land then, yes, we are excluded. Psalm 5:12 is different, however, in that it does have universal principles. We can recognize that while still rightly dividing how the blessing attached is manifested differently in different ages. All three verses in question must still be rightly divided in context.

We are dealing with a national "you" in Jeremiah 29 and Ezekiel 36, so we cannot insert ourselves in there or redefine the blessings as stated.

For I know the plans that I have for you, says the Lord, plans for peace and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.

-Jeremiah 29:11

Also, I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.

-Ezekiel 36:26

In Psalm 5, there are principles for individuals. What needs to be rightly divided there is are definitions of words like "bless" and "favor." 

Again, right division of the Word of Truth does not just involve dividing the promises and plans of God, it also involves righty dividing principles and outcomes. Whereas the "new heart" promised in Ezekiel is a future promise for Israel and it change will be known among the nations what God has done for Israel. Part of that promise there is that God "will cause you to dwell in the cities, and the waste places shall be built" (Ezekiel 36:33). As noted above, the pronoun "you" here is not universal. It is specific to Israel as is same pronoun in verse 26 of the chapter (often quoted in evangelistic meetings). These refer to God's plans for the earth.

The righteous in Israel addressed in Psalm 5 includes those of Israel faithful to the Law. Those who were "blameless" regarding its tenets (not sinless, but blameless in sight of the Law which included sacrifices for sin). We must rightly divide the subject (as we have above), but we must also rightly divide the application of descriptive words and definitions.  

The Book of Psalms opens with this sort of righteous living (according to the Law).

Blessed is the man
who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly,
nor stands in the path of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
but his delight is in the law of the Lord,
and in His law he meditates day and night. 

He will be like a tree planted by the rivers of water,
that brings forth its fruit in its season;
its leaf will not wither,
and whatever he does will prosper.

-Psalm 1:1-3

Is the promise here true for the believer of this age? Do we meditate on the Law of Moses and thus whatever we do prospers?  Obedience to the letter of the Law in the current age would be disobedience to the call upon Gentiles today. Even in that day, an uncircumcised Gentile could live peacefully among Israel, but he could NOT participate in the Passover. Not observing the Passover meal would not be disobedience for a Gentile. This was not a question of "salvation" (the gift of Life from the curse of death), but connected to blessings in the promised land.

How often did Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob or Joseph observe the Passover? Never. And Adam and Noah were never circumcised while Abraham was justified while still uncircumcised. The Law distinguished between Israel and the Nations, and it even distinguished among the circumcised and un uncircumcised among the nations.

Observe the month of Aviv and keep the Passover to the Lord your God, for in the month of Aviv the Lord your God brought you [Israel] out of Egypt by night. Therefore, you must sacrifice the Passover to the Lord your God, from the flock or the herd, in the place where the Lord shall choose to place His name.

-Deuteronomy 16:1-2

 

So the Lord said to Moses and Aaron: This is the ordinance of the Passover: No foreigner may eat of it. But every man’s servant bought with money, when you have circumcised him, may eat it. A foreigner or a hired servant shall not eat it. In one house shall it be eaten. You shall not carry any of the flesh outside of the house, nor shall you break a bone of it. All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. Now when a stranger sojourns with you and keeps the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it. And he shall be as one that is born in the land. However, no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. The same law shall apply to him that is a native and to the stranger who sojourns among you.

-Exodus 12:43-49

Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? We are saying that faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness. How then was it credited? When he was in circumcision? Or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.

-Romans 4:9-10

Abraham's faith was counted as righteousness while Abraham was in a state that would forbid him from obeying the command to observe the Passover (which he never did anyway as he was never a slave in Egypt).

Obedience depends on our definitions and our definitions depend on our calling. We might prosper in our hearts when we meditate on the teachings of Paul in Ephesians. There we are filled with thankfulness for what the Lord accomplished on our behalf on the cross and in his glorious resurrection. We would find none of this in the Law. We would know nothing of the heavenly calling. The focus in this age is not the Law for us gentiles and the hope is not earthly.

We, today, should also avoid the counsel of the ungodly as they were instructed, but we do not meditate upon the Law day and night.

When we expand our look at Psalm 5, we can see truths that clearly cannot be followed directly.

But as for me, in the abundance of Your mercy
I will enter Your house;
in fear of You I will worship
at Your holy temple.

-Psalm 5:7

What men do with verses like this is redefine "Your house" and "Your holy temple" as being some gentile local church today anywhere on earth.  They have no problem redefining certain clear references that need no redefining. They readily turn the very specific temple with its priesthood, separate courts, and holy of holies in either a nebulous concept or a big building in suburban USA as they hold steadfastly to limiting corporate promises like prospering and blessing to the physical.  

This is convenient, but it robs from the original intent and it robs from the prophecies concerning the future temple and Israel's blessings in an age to come when Ezekiel 36 and Jeremiah 29 come to pass for that nation. The New Covenant itself is specifically give to Israel, the same people that had the Old Covenant. Yet those clear words are dismissed (as well as the future scope of the passage in Jeremiah 31) so men today can spiritualize and claim parts of it for themselves.

A temple and a land, and a nation are immovable objects. When we encounter the idea of mercy, however, we understand that it may manifest today differently.  While "worship" will look differently today, God's "holy temple" is very specific. The temple is the dwelling place of God. Yes, our bodies may be a temple, but if we try to equate the two, the equality falls apart quickly when we read of the Jerusalem temple past and the temple future.

Some additional context in Psalm 5: 

 Declare them guilty, O God;
may they fall by their own counsels;
cast them out in the multitude of their transgressions,
for they have rebelled against You.
 But may all those who seek refuge in You rejoice;
may they ever shout for joy,
because You defend them;
may those who love Your name be joyful in You.

-Psalm 5:10-11 

Again we note the difference between a principle and a direct application. We can pray this principle in the current age. David is singing of his enemies. Those enemies were both of Israel and outside Israel. David could expect to God move physically on his behalf. There is a twofold reason for this. In that age, God intervened directly in the life of Israel on her behalf according to his promises if they obeyed as a nation. We have no conditions or assurances today. God also made individual promises to David. We can claim neither set of promises or conditions for ourselves.

Neither your descendent nor my descendent will sit on the throne of David.

He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest. And the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David, and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever. And of His kingdom there will be no end.

-Luke 1:32-33

 

Blessed is the kingdom of our father David That comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest! 

-Mark 11:10

David is the father of Christ and of the Kingdom in Israel. There is no way to insert some Gentile body into those promises and prophecies. Even when Gentiles were grafted into Israel in the Acts age for the state purpose of "making Israel jealous," the gospel of the Kingdom was still "to the Jew first."

As we pull the lens even farther back in scripture, we see that God's earthly blessings involve God's earthly plan and the earthly hope. Adam hoped for a restoration of Paradise on the earth. Israel hoped for all the land promised to Abraham on the earth. Israel looks forward to the new temple and reestablishment of the Kingdom under her Messiah on the earth. Even those who looked for something greater in the "city whose builder and maker is God" (the New Jerusalem) will see that city come down to earth. These speak of future things.

By faith he dwelt in the promised land, as in a foreign land, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs of the same promise, for he was looking for a city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

-Hebrews 11:9-10

Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth.” For the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no more sea. I, John, saw the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from heaven, saying, “Look! The tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them. They shall be His people, and God Himself will be with them and be their God.

-Revelation 21:1-3

Our hope is in the heavenly places. So the blessings we seek are spiritual and not earthly. If I pray from the Psalms, I should not expect "favor" or "blessings" to necessarily arrive in some tangible, physical, financial form as Israel would. 

I would not rob any believer of any part of God's word, but I would assert that if he wants to rightly pray with biblical expectations, he must rightly divide and interpret in context what he is reading and what he is praying.

If, as it seems, those commenting on the video are expecting financial gain and physical healing because of a promise in the Law, the Psalms, the Prophets or even in the earthly ministry of our Lord (which he said was for Israel alone, Matthew 15:24), they are wrongly dividing the Word of Truth.

That is a very different understanding than whether God can bless financially or heal physically or protect experientially. He very much can. It is not sinful to pray to that end. The distinction is in the expectation and the plan in sight. I would never say do not pray for healing or financial rescue. But don't expect that by "claiming" some promise to Israel or David or by thinking you meet the requirements for such blessings in the Law and the Psalms that God is obliged to bless or rescue. There is a very real difference there that must be understood.