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.