a glimpse of truth

baptism as postmodern apology

introduction 

A recent article in The West Australian discusses a book recently published by Nigel Leaves, a book which claims that

Belief in a traditional form of God is the major cause of modern Christianity’s decline [...] The word “God” does not refer to an objective person or thing but is a verbal symbol we use to denote our highest moral or spiritual values [...] Traditional beliefs about God cannot be sustained in light of the latest scientific and critical thinking.

I am used to hearing such nonsense. What makes this book surprising is that it’s author claims to be a committed Christian.

If one does not believe that God exists, then he must also not believe that Jesus is who he claimed to be or that he did what is written about him. How can one claim to believe in the God revealed by Jesus if he believes that Jesus is a fraud and God a fake?

The fact is that you cannot be a Christian with such beliefs. In fact, there are only two simple conditions for being a Christian:

If you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved (Rom. 10:9).

In other words, believe that Jesus’ physical resurrection is an historical fact, and be willing to publicly admit such belief (more likely when such confession is going to cost).

Now some people, however, would like to add to these conditions that a person must also be baptised. Believing that being baptised is effective for salvation to any degree is akin to believing in magic; in other words, attempting to circumvent the conditions described by the apostle Paul. Thus, to argue that baptism is necessary for salvation is just not good theology.

While baptism may not be necessary, is it appropriate and worthwhile? The answer to this question is most definitely, “Yes!” To be baptised is to make a postmodern declaration of faith. As such, it fulfils the conditions of our salvation.

To explain this further, let us take a few moments to investigate Jesus’ own baptism.

Luke 3:15-17, 21-22

¹⁵As the people were filled with expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Messiah, ¹⁶John answered all of them by saying, “I baptize you with water; but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. ¹⁷His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”

²¹Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heaven was opened, ²²and the Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, “You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased.”

There is no doubt that Jesus was baptised by John the Baptist: It is recorded in all the gospels (cf. Matthew 3:13-17, Mark 1:9-11, and John 1:29-34). We also know that Luke was particularly careful in investigation and recording of the events of Jesus’ life; Luke chose the words of his gospel carefully. So, why does he start his account with “the people were filled with expectation” (:15)?

The expectation to which Luke is referring is that of the promised Messiah (otherwise identified as “the Christ” when translated from the original Greek, rather than the Hebrew). To understand this expectation for a Messiah, we need to understand just a little ancient history.

According to the Tyndale Bible Dictionary,

Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sam. 7:16). [The nation of] Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sam. 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).

The reign of King David was glorious, perpetually remembered by Jewish culture. Unfortunately, David’s dynasty collapsed as the nation of Israel disintegrated into moral failure (Isa. 42:18; Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). God intervened to discipline his chosen people, and the tribes of Israel were sent into exile by the invading armies of Assyria and Babylon in the 6^th century bc.

During this time, many prophets arose to both warn the people of the impending judgment of God and to reassure them of God’s continued favour towards them. The image of the Messiah figures predominantly in the writings of Isaiah, for instance. During the time of the exile, the Messiah comes to represent the future restoration of the nation of Israel to a favoured position in world history.

Under the leadership of Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel (Ezra 1:8-2:70), as well as Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 8:1-14), the ancient Israelite captives in Babylon were permitted to return to their homeland. Although the walls of Jerusalem were restored and a second temple built, the fortunes of Israel did not increase substantially.

The four hundred years of history not covered by the books of the Bible was a time of political upheaval. Alexander the Great of Greece conquered the Persian empire, but his empire was eventually replaced by that of the Romans. Israel remained but a pawn in the games of such mighty armies and governments. Nevertheless, the family of the high priest Mattathias began a civil war and captured Jerusalem in 164 bc, thus establishing the Hasmonean dynasty. They ruled the Israelite people until 37 bc, when Rome forcibly replaced them with the Herodian family as a new puppet government in Palestine.

By the time of the ministry of John the Baptist, two ideological strains become apparent: 1) the people longed for a military and political revival; and, 2) the people longed for a spiritual revival. In both cases, theologies of the Messiah come to bear.

It is in the midst of such expectation that the ritual of baptism emerges. Considering the practise of circumcision, the Jewish sacrament of initiation, it is possible that 1^st century Judaism practised baptism of converts. Also, we know that the community at Qumran practised a daily ritual of washing with water as a symbol of spiritual cleansing. John’s baptism similarly signified repentance in anticipation of the coming Messiah (Acts 19:4). Baptism then, in all its forms, developed as an expression of the spiritual longing and prayer for revival.

We know, due to our reading from the gospel of Luke, that Jesus was baptised. Why would Jesus choose to be baptised when, as the Messiah of God, he did not need spiritual renewal?

It is interesting to note the differences between Luke’s account of Jesus’ baptism and those found in the other gospels. According to Gerard Sloyan,

The differences from Matthew are that, after Jesus was baptized, he “was praying” (Luke 3:21), a characteristic Lukan touch; when the heaven was opened the Holy Spirit descended, not that Jesus saw “the Spirit of God descending and alighting on him”, as in Matthew (3:16; cf. Luke 3:22); the latter verse in Luke speaks of the dove uniquely “in bodily form”; and lastly, the voice that came from heaven addresses Jesus, “You are my beloved Son” (as in Mark 1:11) rather than Matthew’s, “This is my beloved Son” (3:17). These seem to be stylistic rather than substantive changes.

These stylistic differences are relatively minor, but they do reveal that Luke’s intention for telling the story of Jesus’ baptism was different to that of the other gospel writers. Roger Van Harn tells us that

On the one hand [Luke] wanted to demonstrate the continuity of Jesus with the traditions and piety of Israel. This Jesus was no rebellious upstart intent on destroying the Roman “peace” by undermining the ancestral customs of the Jewish race, who were allowed to practice those customs as part of a Roman strategy to preserve that “peace”. On the other hand, Luke wanted to show that Jesus was the culmination of those traditions and that piety, their logical conclusion and fulfilment [...] Jesus emerges on the scene of history, then, not in isolation from its contingencies and his people’s urgent longings, but in their midst.

Jesus appeared in history at just the right time; he chose to be baptised to reveal something very important about his nature and his ministry.

Luke’s words and images are meticulously chosen so as to communicate a specific understanding of Jesus’ baptism. John baptises with water. This is an outward symbol for the inner reality of Jesus’ baptism with the Spirit. Fire, of course, relates to purification, but also to judgment; these are two parts of a unified process.

These words about the coming one not only contrast [Jesus] with John; they continue John’s ministry of warning. The hope of the people would have been for [the] Messiah to deliver them from their enemies. But the focus of John’s prophecy is on a fiery purification which would reach to the heart of their own community.

Some expected the Messiah to overthrow the oppressive Roman government; Luke and John teach that the Messiah would overthrow all sin. Thus, Jesus confronts expectations, but fulfils them in a way perhaps unexpected.

Notice also that Luke’s account of Jesus’ baptism is surprising in its ordinariness:

In the quiet scene of Luke 3:21, Jesus also is baptized after “all the people”. The strange ordinariness of it is highlighted by Luke’s mention of it almost in passing, in the middle of a sentence. Here is Jesus, undergoing the ritual along with the expectant ones, by no means announcing himself as the expected one [...] The characteristically Lukan [sic.] glimpse into Jesus’ intimacy with God (his praying, v. 21) underlines this picture of a simple, humble piety which filled the outward baptism with meaning.

Jesus’ baptism had all the elements of a glorious event: water, voices from heaven, the Spirit descending. Yet, it is Luke’s subdued report which heightens the majesty of the revelation of Jesus’ identity and ministry, and instigates the importance that baptism would hold for the Church. According to James F. White,

The church could never forget that Jesus himself submitted to John’s baptism as a part of conforming “in this way with all that God requires” (Matt. 3:15). Thus the weight of Jesus’ own action in receiving baptism and in allowing his disciples to baptise (Jn. 4:2), gave paramount authority to baptism. Furthermore, Jesus identified his baptism with his own passion and death (Mk. 10:38; Lk. 12:50). Thus baptism became an image of Christ’s sacrificial death. Both birth and death are represented in baptism.

Jesus did not need to be baptised. In fact, he himself did not baptise anyone (Jn. 4:1-2). Yet, he allowed his disciples to baptise and even encouraged this as part of his great commission (Mt. 28:19-20; cf. Mk. 16:15-16). Nevertheless, it is the significance of Jesus’ own baptism, in revealing himself and confirming his identity as the Messiah of God, which heightens its significance for identifying us as his followers.

The basic formula for salvation, recorded in Romans 10:9, requires confession and belief. One does not authentically choose such a public ritual —and I believe that baptism is meant to be thoroughly public, as John’s baptism was, and not confined to one’s faith community or family— unless someone truly believes. Thus, baptism is an outward symbol of an inner reality. The Spirit is already present; baptism is the ultimate public confession, although not the only possible method of confession that would satisfy the conditions of salvation.

While baptism may not be necessary for our salvation, I can think of few equally appropriate and worthwhile rituals which communicate faith so powerfully. Perhaps this was Jesus’ intention for commending this ritual to his disciples and the reason for it quickly becoming an intrinsic element of the Church’s discipleship and worship.

By being public, however, our baptism is not an opportunity to boast or to judge others. Luke’s account of Jesus’ baptism highlights that

It may well be the silent picture of the anonymous man praying by the water, not the fiery imagery of the threshing floor, which compels a contemporary person to take note of this Messiah and draws her into the fire.

The boastful baptism belies hypocrisy; the genuine and respectful baptism draws others to the waters of God’s forgiveness and grace. When one is afforded a glimpse of the historically accurate picture of Jesus’ life, ministry, and resurrection, then he or she will be attracted to the God whose love for us knows no bounds. Nigel Leaves and others can critique and challenge the legitimate faith in Jesus’ resurrection and the God that he reveals, but they cannot belittle the sincere faith of a person who has encountered the living God and publicly confesses her faith and commitment to living wholly for God, regardless of the cost.

Let us pray:

God, your voice moves over the waters.
Immerse us in your grace,
mark us with your image,
and raise us to live our baptismal vows
empowered by the Holy Spirit
and the example of Christ our Lord,
in whose name we pray. Amen.

sermon delivered by Ian Forest-Jones
at Hurstville Church of Christ
on Sunday, 7 January 2007 at 10am
[email]

< back