Baptism -- what's it all about?

How important is water baptism?

Since the 5th Century when Augustine described sacraments as ‘an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace’ baptism has been seen in the church as a sacrament. For some churches it is a critical part of becoming a Christian or 'saved', with Baptists arguing for Believers Baptism and other churches practising infant baptism where the child obviously cannot 'make the profession of faith'. Other churches and Christians put the emphasis on faith. Is baptism a symbol or something deeper than that?

There are a number of times that baptism is mentioned in the Scriptures, many with a similar emphasis starting at what is called the Great Commission:

‬And he said to them, 'Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.' (Mark‬ ‭16:15‭-‬16‬ ‭ESV)

And Jesus came and said to them, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.' (Matthew 28:18-20 ESV) 

Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 3:21 ESV)

And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name. (Acts 22:16 ESV)

Having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. (Colossians 2:12 ESV)

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3-4 ESV)

Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 3:21 ESV)

Reading those passages it could be interpreted that baptism is far more important than just a symbol that we do following Jesus commandment. 

Three things to note:

1. The third version of the Great Commission in Luke doesn't include baptism at all but a proclamation of the gospel: [Jesus] said to them, 'Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead,  and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. And behold, I am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.' (Luke 24:46-49 ESV)
2. There is no record in the Scriptures of Jesus baptising anyone, yet he commanded others to do so, implying (if he didn’t baptise anyone) that we are following his example in doing so in obedience rather than actually following a method taught by him. In Scripture, we see only the method demonstrated by John in which Jesus was a participant.  Contrast this with the model prayer which we call the Lord's prayer and the meal we call the Last Supper.
3. There is no record in the Scriptures of the 12 disciples being baptised. Because it would be incoherent for them to baptise unless they themselves were baptised one needs to realise that some things are probably implicit rather than explicit. However, if they were baptised, who baptised them?

In Acts 2:38 Peter's words merge Luke's version of Jesus' words and Mark's version of Jesus' words including baptism:

And Peter said to them, 'Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.'

Following on from in verse 41 we see that those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

It was an immediate response to Peter where three thousand were baptised, with no discipleship course and no other preparation. Was this because there was some urgency to do it immediately? 

In a discussion with a friend from Nicosia he summarised it as:

There are certain things in the scriptures above that we cannot deny. 

• Jesus commanded that everyone be baptized
• Jesus said that the one who believes and is baptized will be saved.
• Peter said that we must repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of our sins.
• People were baptized immediately upon believing. There was no delay, even to the point where they had to baptize 3000 people in one day.
• There is language in the Bible that shows that baptism is somehow linked to our death and resurrection in Christ.
• There are scriptures that show that baptism is somehow linked to forgiveness.

This doesn't address the issues of how the baptism takes place -- should it be still or moving water, sea or fresh water and full immersion or sprinkling. Nor does it address the question of whether it includes the infant family members of believing parents or not. 

Because there is no record of Jesus baptising people we don't have a direct model to follow, though of course Jesus himself was baptised in the river Jordan, hence why some people argue that baptism must take place in fresh water that is moving (like a river). 

And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family. (Acts 16:33 ESV)

There are at least three references in Scripture to whole families being baptised. Though it is argued by those who follow only adult Believers Baptism and that didn't include the children and infants of the family, this is argued from cultural assumptions rather than Scriptural text.

What does God really care about?

I should get back to more writing and there are two blog posts I started but didn't finish. However, this subject touched me and made me think, study and pray. It started when a friend of mine posted this grid:

I immediately felt two things, firstly that didn't reflect my identity nor did it reflect my perception of God. 

It seems to me that in some ways our perception of our identity and our perception of God are symbiotic. How we see God will reflect how we see ourselves and how we see ourselves will reflect how we see God. 

Looking at it the whole original grid is coloured by the perception of a Legalist identity -- look at the second column of Judge, Boss, Therapist and then Father. All very subservient positions except maybe father depending on how one sees one's father! Jesus said 'I no longer call you servants but friends'. Though not direct peers we are definitely not slaves!

It didn't match with a God of love if God is a judgemental boss who wants to fix his wayward children. It is, however, how many people see God. Indeed it was how I grew up seeing God. I used to call it the 'theology of splat'. You must do what God wants or He'll splat you!

And happiness is a very North American concept from 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'. We see this more as 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of harmony'. Our Father is bringing the universe back (at the end of time) into harmony rather than the Islamic idea (at the end of time) of happiness in excess.

As I've grown older I have realised that was a totally erroneous perception of God. The grid below now demonstrates my perception of self and perception of God. Immediately I can feel people saying 'so you ignore sin!' Not at all, but I now see it in context. When presented with a woman caught in a sin that according to the law a judge would sentence to stoning to death, Jesus, first of all, pointed out that we are all sinners and then did not sentence to death but commended her to 'Go and sin no more.' 

So to my grid:

When I completed my grid and I realised just how different my identity is and thus how I see God very differently. The next book I'm working on (with a whole group of people) is called 'Settlers and Nomads'. Legalists tend to be more settlers not liking things that upset their settled life. Nomads see themselves more as sojourners traveling through this life.

In the first row if our identity is more of a Settler then God is our heavenly anchor and he is concerned about the storms of life that would dash us on the rock. And both are simultaneously true but as individuals, we will see God differently. 

As a legalist seeing God as judge? Though Scripture does talk about God as judge there are frequently two concepts alongside this: Firstly that God will save his people and that we are not to judge others. Though in Paul's letter to the Corinthians he says we should judge cases. But our emphasis should be on being guided away from sin ('Go and sin no more') rather than judgment about sin.

Of course that raises a pertinent topic of what is sin? It's rare to find anyone today who would see slavery as anything other than sin. But let's go back to 1102 and the Council of London held by Archbishop of Canterbury Anselm. A number of religious laws (canons) were drawn up, one of which was to forbid 'to sell men like cattle'. This is probably the first time slavery as such was outlawed. 

In light of the debate about homosexuality, and whether it is sin or not, it's interesting to note that at the Council of London there was a move 'that homosexual behaviour was a sin, and they recommended that offending laymen be imprisoned and clergymen be anathematized'. However, Anselm prohibited the declaration of that decree 'advising the Council that homosexuality was widespread and few men were embarrassed by it or had even been aware it was a serious matter'. It was only later that it was it became the battleground it is today with people taking opposing views based on differing interpretations of Scripture! 

Looking at my grid I also thought it fitted more with a trinitarian perception of a Creative God. As well as seeing God as related to us as Father I see the Holy Spirit as our guide and Jesus as our brother and friend. We are on this Messianic Pilgrimage through life and though obedience is part, we see from the dialogue between God and Abraham that it's not just 'do this or I'll splat you' but open to negotiation in some way like a friend. And Abraham was called God's friend.  Thus the second row takes us to an intimate relationship with God as Father rather than the more distant in the fourth row of the original.

The third rows are almost diametric opposites: Consumer or creator? Happiness or fulfillment? Whereas it's true many see their identity as consumers and indeed some have taken God's blessing to 'subdue the earth' as the old English puts it. 'Fill the earth and govern it' is seen by some as 'use all the earth's resources to your own ends'. This dangerously misses the stewardship we are commended to.  Jesus expressed it clearly in the parable of the three servants. Two of whom expressed diligence and creativity and one who did nothing.

Finally, I see seriously missing in the original grid anything relating to being a follower of the Messiah. The final row 'Christian' has so many different meanings it has lost almost all of them, though I admit that in some ways the final row in the original grid is similar to the second row in my grid. Christ is not explicitly identified in the original and that for me is important.

Of Myths and Parables…

Are we fighting dragons, slaying them like Saint George? Do we dismiss the ancient Greek or Mesopotamian myths as the fiction of peoples not as enlightened as we are today? If we do then where do we stop in rejecting past myths as pre-modern fables?

I am reading an excellent book by Andy Angel entitled Playing with Dragons: Living with Suffering and God. Starting with the Enūma Eliš - the Mesopotamian myth of creation - and comparing it to the similarities in the Biblical account in Genesis, Andy argues that the rich and sometimes bizarre text in myths offers insight into our spiritual lives in a way that modernist writings sometimes cannot. I highly encourage people to read his book.

What he seems to omit however is the relationship between myths and parables. Myths are generally fictional narratives attempting to make sense in a spiritual world of physical historical events. Parables are fictional narratives attempting to bring spiritual truths to influence a physical world in the future. They are, as such, mirror images of each other. Whereas many Christians in the 21st century are comfortable embracing parables they simultaneously reject myths. In doing so they lose something of the richness of mythological language.

So to start with let me offer this as a modern myth, trying to make spiritual sense of a recent past that created suffering and indeed for some people still does: 

The story of Lehoia

The goddess Hegoadlea was very beautiful, taking the form of a fish swimming in the deep ocean or the rivers. She had big fins allowing her leap into the air and skim over the waters like a bird. One day she was swimming in the big river and Iparraldea, the bull god, standing on the muddy bank of the great river drinking, saw her. She was indeed very beautiful and so, being a powerful god, he took her for his wife saying ‘Oh Hegoadlea, you who are the most beautiful of all the gods, come with me who is the most powerful of the gods and we shall procreate a family of gods to rule and bring peace in our lands’.

Indeed they had many children, Fidagarria was like a hunting dog, loyal and true, Harrokia was like a goose, or a rock sitting there not doing anything looking down on those who passed, Errukitsua like a rodent, though appearing dirty showed empathy and compassion above many and one, Lehoia, we know as the great sea serpent, and he above all showed independence enjoying the waters in which he swam. 

Unlike his mother Hegoadlea, Lehoia had no wings and could not fly but he controlled the sea with his power. He was passionate about gold and collected it wherever he could, storing it in the sea cave where he lived. Over the years the gold pile grew and he would sometimes bury himself in it enjoying the touch of the metal against his body.

As he lay there in his cave looking out he became jealous of the eagle, seeing it soaring above. He could not even skim the waters like his mother. So he hatched a plan. He would cut off her wings and sew them to his body then he too would fly. Then he would not be limited to the water. 

Now gold is a valuable but very soft metal, so he spent many years folding and hammering a sword to make it hard and sharp. All the while he was still laughing and talking with his mother, so she would not suspect his plan.

One day, while she was sleeping, Lehoia cut off Hegoadlea’s wings and as he slithered back to his lair carrying the wings in his jaws he left a trail of blood over the land. He stored her wings in his sea cave thinking he too would then be powerful like the eagle, when later he sewed them to his own body.

Iparraldea seeing his wife bleeding and crying licked her wounds and gently cared for her. Her wounds soon healed and over time new wings grew in their place allowing her to skim the waves again. Lehoia, angry at this, sent floods, hoping to drown Iparraldea, but he found a high mountain above the floods. 

Seeing how Lehoia had rebelled against them, when the waters subsided, Iparraldea assembled all the gods and they banished Lehoia to be imprisoned in his sea cave and so not hurt them again.

Meanwhile the dragon god Ekialdea was jealous of Iparraldea for his beautiful wife Hegoadlea. He had been flying over and watching all that was going on, biding his time. Seeing that Iparraldea was injured he thought ‘Now is my time, I will cause destruction and Iparraldea will be weakened and I can take Hegoadlea for my wife’. So he breathed fire over the land causing a great famine. 

Lehoia got very hungry in his isolated cave, so he ate his mother’s wings, spitting out the bones; so now he would never fly or skim the waves. Instead, Lehoia lay, half buried in gold… plotting. 

In comparing and contrasting Biblical accounts with ancient myths Andy Angel brings in some interesting insights. Biblical accounts include Leviathan, a sea creature considered total fiction in today's world, and in doing so demonstrates the writers knew and understood the ancient myths and their meaning. However in creation, for example, whereas the Mesopotamian myth sees human beings created as playthings for the gods, the Biblical account shows humans created in the image of God for a relationship with Him. 

He uses references to the Psalms to show how the same myth could be seen in a different light when viewed not in a world of chaos but in a world fashioned out of chaos by the one true God. So let us look at the myth above as if a psalm:

The Psalm of  Lehoia

The LORD is a great God
He is mighty in all his deeds
All the people of the earth worship you
They come together as one

Oh LORD, why then have you deserted me?
Why have you left me crushed and defeated?
My enemies have conquered me
They have taken away my freedom

They removed all truth from their mouths
They only told lies; lies upon lies
Our enemies plotted against us
So the people would not know the truth

They showed us the eagle
And told us we too could fly
Like Hegoadlea the winged fish
Who could skim over the waves

Then people believed those lies
They trusted Lehoia the serpent
He gave control to the people
While taking all power for himself

We called on them to return to you
But they would not listen
We called on them but they could not hear
Because they were deaf to your voice

But you are the one great God
Who chastises his people
With famine and flood
To bring his people back to him

So now we are rich
But we cannot eat gold
We are sick and dying
But precious stones will not heal us

Come LORD and rescue us
Save us from ourselves
Bring us back into community
The family of those who love you

One of the problems we have in today's world is Fake News which I dealt with in a past blog post, where I suggested we need to become truth-tellers. Myths and parables are not fake news, not antithetical with promulgating truth. They are different ways of communicating truth. Brandon Sanderson put it this way, 'The purpose of a storyteller is not to tell you how to think, but to give you questions to think upon'. As truth-tellers, we bring myths and parables to give you spiritual questions to think upon.