The Background of Christian Baptism

Any thorough study of baptism must begin centuries before John the Baptizer came baptizing in the wilderness of Judea. Christianity sprang from the soil of Moses and the Prophets">

The Background of Christian Baptism   Any thorough study of baptism must begin centuries before John the Baptizer came baptizing in the wilderness of Judea. Christianity sprang from the soil of Moses and the Prophets, and the religion of the Mosaic Covenant had long been acquainted with immersion. In the New Testament the word baptize means to immerse. The practice of self-immersion had its beginning in the purification rites outlined in the Law of Moses. In the book of Leviticus, where much is said about ceremonial cleanness and uncleanness, certain people were required to immerse themselves in order to be considered clean. Part of the cleansing of a leper involved the "washing" of his flesh (Lev. 14:9). Likewise, the High Priest was required to "bathe" his body in water before officiating at the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:4). Similarly, Elisha commanded the Syrian leper Naaman to "wash in the Jordan seven times" to be made clean (2 Kings 5:10). In all three of the above-mentioned texts, the word used for wash or bathe is the Hebrew word raqats. But we know that Naaman understood raqats to mean immerse, because in 2 Kings 5:14 it says that he dipped himself in the Jordan seven times and was cleansed. Here the word is tabal which means to dip or to immerse. The dimensions of the molten sea and the layers that were constructed for use in Solomon’s temple make it doubly certain that the priests practiced self-immersion. I Kings 7:23 informs us that the molton sea was ten cubits in diameter and five cubits deep. A dubit is six handbreadths, or between 20-24 inches. Therefore, the molten sea was some 15 to 20 feet in diameter and some seven to ten feet deep. It held two thousand baths of water, several thousand gallons according to the measurements given in the Jewish Mishnah. Such a structure was certainly used for more than sprinkling or pouring. It was used for immersing the priest before he ministered in the holy place. The writings of the Jews outside of the Bible reflect the fact that self-immersion was common among the Jews. The Mishnah, which is the compilation of the traditions of the Jewish Rabbis from 200 B.C. to A.D. 200, devotes an entire section to the discussion of "Immersion Pools". In order for a person to be considered clean to go and worship at the temple, he had to be totally immersed. Mikwaoth 2:1 says that if a man immersed himself and was in doubt whether or not every part of his body was submerged, that he was considered unclean. Some of the Rabbis required that not so much as a strip of cloth cover the hair of a woman lest it not come in contact with the water, while others maintained that as long as the water could penetrate the garment, the immersion was valid and the candidate considered clean (Mikwaoth 9:1). No immersion pool could be used for self-immersion that did not contain at the very least 40 seahs or approximately 160 gallons of water, sufficient quantity to completely immerse an individual. Even before the time of John the Baptist, Jews had begun practicing immersion as an initiatory rite. The Talmud, written after the time of Jesus, reveals that all Jewish proselytes were required to immerse themselves before being considered Israelites. The Mishnah requires that the proselyte immerse himself before being allowed to eat the Passover meal (Peshaim 8:8). It is most likely that this practice was common in the time of Jesus. The Dead Sea Scrolls provide us with even more striking evidence that immersion was used as an initiatory rite by Jewish sects prior to the time of John. In 1947 a bedouin shepherd boy was playing near some caves on the northwestern shore of the Dead Sea. He threw a rock into one of the caves, and upon hearing a shattering sound, went inside to discover a cache of ancient scrolls preserved in earthen jars. These proved to be the ancient writings of a Jewish community that lived in the ravine of Qumran from about 125 B.C. to A.D. 68 when they were forced to leave by the Roman legions. According to the Manual of Discipline, one of these documents, initiates to the Qumran community were required to immerse themselves before they were accepted into the community. They were first required to truly repent and submit their wills to the law of God. Speaking of a person who did not truly repent of his sins, the Manual states: "Such a man cannot be reckoned as among the essentially blameless. He cannot Be cleared by mere ceremonies of atonement, nor cleansed by any waters of ablution, Nor sanctified by immersion in lakes or rivers, nor purified in any bath . . . Only by The submission of the soul to all of the ordinances of God can his flesh be made clean . . . only thus can it really be sanctified by waters of purification. (Manual of Discipline 2-3)." Again in chapter 5 of the Manual of Discipline: "No one is to go into water in order to attain the purity of holy men. For men cannot be purified except they repent their evil." These texts reveal that these ceremonial baths, or self-baptisms practiced by the men of Qumran, were not only seen as ceremonial purifications, but were connected with the purification of the soul from sin. They, like John the Baptist, taught that immersion without true repentance was worthless (Matt. 3:6-8). Baptism in the New Testament   All of this proves that immersion was no stranger to the Jews of Jesus’ day, and that the way was ripe when John the Baptist came preaching the baptism of repentance in the wilderness of Judaea. In the same wilderness of Judaea where the men of Qumran had practiced repentance and self-immersion to purify themselves for the time of God’s deliverance, John the Baptizer came preaching repentance and the nearness of the kingdom of God (Matt. 3:1-2). John came to prepare the way of the Lord by turning the hearts of men back to God. John preached the baptism of repentance unto the remission of sins (Mark 1:4). He administered this baptism to others in the Jordan River. The people came confessing their sins as they entered the Jordan for baptism. John was purifying a people for the Kingdom of God (Mark 1:5). Those who would not repent of sin, the baptizer refused to baptize, warning them of impending judgment (Matt. 3:7-12). He warned that the Messiah was coming to separate the wheat from the chaff, the penitent from the impenitent, to baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. His baptism was very widespread (Acts 19:1-6). Jesus himself came to the baptism of John. Jesus, like the other people, held John to be a prophet of God (Matt. 21:26; 11:9-14). As his question to the chief priests and elders reflects (Matt. 21:25), he considered John’s baptism to be "from Heaven", commanded by God. Jesus submitted to John’s baptism to fulfill all righteousness, to obey the command of God (Matt. 3:15). Jesus himself preached the kingdom of God and the baptism of repentance making and baptizing more disciples than did John the Baptist (John 4:1-2). Having done the will of God by going to the cross, and having been raised from the dead, Jesus commanded his disciples to go and make disciples, by baptizing them and teaching them to observe all of his commands (Matt. 28:19-20). He said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned." The book of Acts, our only history of the early church, reveals that this "administered immersion" for the remission of sins was the doorway into fellowship with the people of God according to the teaching of the apostles. Peter commanded the three thousand on Pentecost to "repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38). We might wonder how the disciples went about effecting these three thousand baptisms that day. Because self-baptism for purification had long been practiced among the Jews, there was no problem. The Mishnah speaks of troughs hewn in the rock, like the Trough of Jehu in Jerusalem, which were used for baptisms (Mikwaoth 4:5). Such primitive baptisteries, or baptismal troughs, have also been discovered hewn in the rock at Qumran, the community we spoke of that lived near the Dead Sea in the century before Christ. Such baptismal troughs along with local pools would have provided ample space to carry out the three thousand immersions on Pentecost in Acts 2. A consideration of evidence in the Acts of the Apostles reveals yet more about baptism. The Samaritans were baptized, both men and women (Acts 8:12). Saul of Tarsus was baptized and became a Christian (Acts 9:18; 22:16). The house of Cornelius was baptized in water in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 10:47-48). Lydia was baptized at Philippi, as was the Jailer who was immersed in the middle of the night (Acts 16). The ancient history book is clear that the baptism of the penitent believer was the point at which he/she became a disciple, free from the stain of sin. The early disciples’ conversions were viewed as imitations of the death, burial, and resurrection of their Master and King. They died with him to sin, denying themselves. They were buried in the water as he was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Aramithea. They were raised from the water a new creature, to walk by the spirit in a new life just as Jesus was raised from the tomb the third day (Rom. 6:3-4;Colossians 2:12-13). Both the baptism of John and the baptism commanded by the risen Jesus were immersions and both for the remission of sins. The difference between them was what the disciple who came to the baptism believed. John’s baptism produced disciples penitent of their sins and eagerly awaiting "the coming one" or the promised Messiah. The baptism of the Great commission made disciples who were penitent believers with the conviction that Jesus of Nazareth had in fact already been appointed as Messiah by God, had raised from the grave, and would return to bring judgment on the wicked and salvation to the righteous. Whereas John’s baptism was based on a hope, the baptism preached by the apostles was predicated on a real person, the deliverer, Jesus of Nazareth, and upon the real events of his death and resurrection. The earliest Christians were baptized "in the name of" Jesus (Acts 2:38). This was not a verbal formula prescribed by the apostles to be spoken at a baptism, but was the basis for the baptism. The phrase "in the name of" or "in his name" or something akin to these is used many times in the New Testament. Repentance and remission of sins were to be preached "in his name" among all the nations. (Luke 24:47) Speaking of the lame man who was healed in Acts 3:6, the council asked Peter and John, "By what power or in what name have you done this" (Acts 4:7). Peter replied: "Be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel, that in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even In him doth this man stand before you whole (Acts 4:10)." In Acts 10:43 Peter told the house of Cornelius, "through his name everyone that believeth shall receive the remission of sins." These examples should be sufficient to show that the phrase "in his name" simply means because of him, or by his power, or on his command. Therefore, if a person is baptized with the conviction that Jesus is the Messiah, our Savior and that he is coming again to deliver us, he is baptized "in the name of Jesus Christ" whether those words are pronounced over him or not. Baptism in the name of Jesus is a fact, not a liturgical formula. The same may be said of the phrase in Matt. 28:19 "in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." This is not a formula that must be said, but a statement that this baptism is proclaimed and ordained by the very Godhead itself until the end of time. So literally did people in later centuries take this phrase that they began to immerse people three times, once in the name of the Father, once in the name of the Son, and once in the name of the Holy Spirit (Tertullian, On the Crown 3; Hippolytus, Apostolic Traditions xxi.). Baptism is not a magical rite with certain "magic words" but an act of obedience based on firm conviction on the part of the one being baptized. Along with our discussion of baptismal formulae, we should say a word about the baptismal confession. Confession is mentioned several times in the New Testament but rarely in the context of baptism. Matthew 10:32 has nothing to do with baptism, speaking of disciples acknowledging Jesus in the course of carrying out their mission. I John 4:15 tells us that the one who confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God. I Timothy 6:12 speaks of the "good confession" which was witnessed by Jesus before Pontius Pilate. What was it that Pilate said? John 18:37 reveals that Pilate’s interest was on whether or not Jesus was a King. When one studies the term, "Son of God", one also finds that this was the term the Jews used to describe God’s chosen king. It was so used of David (Psalm 2:6-7; 89:26) and was so used by disciples in reference to Jesus (John 1:49). Romans 10:9 says that in order to be saved one must confess with the mouth KURIOS CHRISTOS or "Lord Jesus". All of these confessions have one essential point. The one who confessed acknowledged the Lordship, the Kingship, the Sovereignty of Jesus over his life. No longer would he serve his own lusts but he would serve Jesus his Lord and King. It may be pointed out that none of the passages heretofore cited have any direct reference to a baptismal setting. All of early church history does seem to attest that there was a baptismal confession. Because there is no one exclusive wording for the confession according to the witness of the New Testament, we should not be overly dogmatic on this point. A confession that acknowledges the Lordship, the Kingship of Jesus is a scriptural confession. Because baptism is such an important act, it is natural that a multitude of traditions should grow up around it. The raising of the baptizer’s hand to heaven, the pronouncement "I now baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit for the remission of your sins", the singing of a song prior to or following the baptism, and the position of the baptizer and the candidate, are all things that are strictly traditional and matters of choice. What is necessary is that a truly penitent believer who acknowledges Jesus as ruler of his life is baptized into Jesus Christ trusting that he is then saved by the grace of God. The New Testament does not specify who is to be the baptizer. Thomas and Alexander Campbell baptized each other after learning the truth through their own study. The command is to the one being baptized, not to the baptizer. The task of those already baptized is not to baptize but to preach the gospel of Christ (I Cor. 1:17). The idea that one must be baptized by a minister, or for that matter by one who is already a Christian, is not true to the inferences of the New Testament. The emphasis in the New Testament is always on the one responding and never on the liturgical authority of the administrator of baptism. Baptism in the Post-Apostolic Period   Not long after the completion of the New Testament and the death of the apostles, men began to pervert God’s teaching on baptism and add to God’s teaching many traditions. One such perversion began with the practice of clinical baptism, the baptism of the sick and the bedfast. Cyprian, a church leader of the late 3rd Century A.D. was asked whether "those who obtain God’s grace in sickness and weakness . . . are to be accounted legitimate Christians, because they are not washed with the water of salvation but have it poured on them." He replied in the affirmative that God would accept such a practice. Eusebius tells how Novatian received the grace of God by having water poured on him while lying in a bed, (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History VI. xliii. 14, 17). In both passages it appears that some were questioning the validity of such a practice, realizing that it was not the practice taught by the apostles. From that time men reasoned that if the sick could receive the grace of God through sprinkling or pouring that anyone could, and thus the modern practice of many denominations. The Didache, written shortly after New Testament times, states: "Concerning baptism, baptize in this way. After you have spoken all these Things, "baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" in running water. If you do not have running water, baptize in other Water. If you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you do not have either, Pour out water on the head three times, "in the name of the Father, and of The Son, and of the Holy Spirit." And before the baptism, let the baptizer And him who is to be baptized fast, and any others who are able. And thou Shall bid him who is to be baptized to fast one or two days before. (Didache 7:1-4)" It isn’t difficult to see how the New Testament teaching had been unjustly elaborated. The command that the baptismal candidate fast for two days before baptism is in direct opposition to the New Testament (Acts 22:16; 16:33-34). These preferences for running water, cold water, etc. sprang from the traditions of the Jewish Rabbis and were incorporated by some Christian groups still hanging on to the traditions of the Scribes. Such judaizing groups also sometimes held to the rabbinical edict that no clothing could intervene between the body and the water, and as a result they practiced baptism in the nude (Hippolytus, Aps. Trad. xxi.). The fact that not all the Jews held to this tenant makes it obvious that this was probably not the manner in which many Christians were baptized. The New Testament indicates no such practice. Another perversion of the apostolic teaching on baptism was the practice of baptizing infants. The New Testament is clear that infants are sinless creatures, without need of remission of sins. The person who repents, says Jesus, is like a little child (Matt. 18:3-4). Little children are like those who make up the kingdom of heaven (Mk. 10:14). Infants have done neither good nor evil (Rom. 9:11). It was the practice of the apostles and preachers at the inception of Christianity to baptize adult believers (Acts 8:12). An infant can neither believe nor repent of sins, both of which are prerequisites to scriptural baptism. But men instituted the practice of infant baptism in spite of all this. Because so much importance was placed on the act of baptism as the point of forgiveness and reception of the grace of God, men began to want to baptize their infants for fear that they would die without God’s grace. Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, and Cyprian all speak of infant baptism. Their discussions reveal that there was considerable questioning about why infants should be baptized because of their innocence. By the time of Cyprian, the doctrine of original sin had arisen to answer those who sincerely questioned infant baptism. We who would do the commands of God can see the plain truth about baptism. Jesus and the apostles commanded that penitent believers be immersed in water for the forgiveness of sins. Centuries of historical evidence make it absolutely certain that this original baptism, the one baptism of the apostolic church, was immersion. Equally certain is the indisputable connection between this immersion in water and man’s cleansing from sin. In this symbolic reliving of the death, the burial, and the resurrection of the Messiah, the early disciples put away their old man, their former manner of life, and became new creatures in Christ to live every day subject to his will. If we would please God in the 20th century, we must do the same.