However, the
general view was that baptism was vital because in it
Christ connected water, word and spirit.
For
instance:
Tertullian (155-220) The Necessity
of Baptism for Salvation
Basil the Great (329 - 379) on
Baptism
Erasmus' emphasis upon a rational
interpretation of Luther's "faith only" led Zwingli in 1525 to
conclude also from Calvin that "if salvation was by
grace,
if even faith
was a direct work of God by the Holy Spirit,
then there
can be no place for schemes of religious life or thought which allow for
the ex opere operato efficacy of
baptism."
Basil
defines the universal understanding of the connection
between Word, Spirit and Water until the time of John Calvin.
Therefore,
1500 years of belief and practice about Biblical
Baptism was altered by a Latter Day Prophet who
grasped that Calvinism could not tolerate the total
history of scholarship
So-called
believer's baptism demands the same real, literal presence
of Christ just like the Eucharist. It is similar to
pagan baptism in that the individual is totally passive
and CANNOT even believe without a direct
movement of God's Spirit to point out or identify one as
predestinated.
Those who believed in predestination,
like the Jews
and later Calvinists
such as the Puritans,
"were obsessed
with a terror that they would not be saved.
Conversion became a central
preoccupation,
a violent, tortured
drama in which the
sinner and his spiritual
director wrestled for
his soul.
Frequently the penitent had to
undergo severe humiliation or experience real
despair of God's grace
until he appreciated his utter dependence upon God."
(Karen Armstrong, A History of God, p. 283).
Therefore, it is
impossible to believe in the Baptist form of baptism
without at the same time believing in Calvinistic
predestination. And this discounts the finished work of
Christ.
This was based on humanistic
rationalism: that religon must be based on "logical
conclusions" rather than simple faith in the clear
statement of the Bible that "baptism saves" because
that is the time and place Christ assigned to save us.
It was not, in the future, to rely on
the teachings of the Bible because, whatever one is
taught, if God has predestinated you then you will be
informed directly by the Holy Spirit.
This means that to base faith and
practice on the Bible is not only useless but is
hostile toward God Who has already made up His "mind."
This does not
prevent Calvinists teaching "faith only" to shift the
blame and claim that it is being RATIONALISTIC to try to
understand the Bible. In reality, the High Church view
of a direct revelation depend on their rational minds
which they confuse with the Mind of The Spirit. If so
then the Spirit contradicts the teachings of Christ and
the apostles and bible toters are considered dangerous.
"The difference between Luther
and Zwingli's
methods shifted the debate from a discussion about real
presence,
in the Eucharist
along with other dogma. At Marburg Luther argued
against his opponents' use of
logic more than against
their theological stance on the presence of Christ
(Kittleson 207).
For Luther feared
that their use of
reason
would then be applied to other issues, like baptism,
and begin to unravel Evangelical theology.
He feared that this would place some authority in the human ability to reason,
instead of authority being found in God's Word alone.
On this key argument, it can be
said that his objection was not specifically to
Zwingli's view of the Eucharist.
"It was at least in part the influence
of Erasmus
who emphasized a rational
interpretation of the
Scriptures that would
characterize Zwingli's
preaching in Glarus, Einsiedeln, and as priest of
Great Minster, Zurich. Zwingli believed that
the Word would give light and life to those who read it,
but not
to everyone who
read it.
"It does so only where a true response is kindled. In other words, it calls for a decision of
faith." This work
could only take place, in Zwingli's estimation, as a result of the illumination of the Holy Spirit.
Because of the error that the death of
Christ had not relieved the guilt of Adam's sin, it
was believed that chidren inherited this ORIGINAL SIN.
Baptism or sprinkling "a bit of dust to bury the body"
was the teaching of baptismal regeneration.
It was against this that Zwingli
argued. Many false teachings such as the trinity had
no Biblical foundation but was invented in attempting
to silence Arius. Therefore, Zwingli was opposing Rome
and not the Bible.
"The second
key doctrine for Zwingli,
and another foundational belief within Protestantism,
was justification by
grace through faith.
With this belief, Zwingli repudiated Rome's teaching
that external
baptism could of itself
cleanse from sin.
Zwingli's interpretation of the Scriptures led him to
believe that "if salvation was by grace,
if even faith was a direct work of God
by the Holy Spirit,
then there can be no place for schemes of religious life or thought which allow either for the merit of
human works or for the ex opere operato efficacy of sacramental observances."
"Justification
became the sovereign
and creative declaration
of God by which
those who are elected to faith in Jesus Christ are accepted as righteous on the merits of Christ."
This was a monumental shift for anyone to make in opposition to
the Catholic Church's traditional view of
soteriology, and thereby earned Zwingli a position alongside Luther and
Calvin as a Reformer in his own right.
"Zwingli even made the proper
distinction between rational,
intellectual assent, and the necessity for a movement of the whole nature by
the direct action of the Holy Spirit.
Zwingli's insistence on justification by grace did not mean
the negation of the Law.
The Law
was still seen as a part of God's will for man as a guide to the believer and a warning to the unregenerate.
However,
it is easy to misquote Zwingli who thought that
baptism was not a church duty but that of the family.
"To Zwingli, the child was born with
an "inherited frailty"
which inevitably would give
rise to a sin nature
in each person.
"To Zwingli, baptism was more a pledge of what we ought to do rather than a testimony to what God
has already done for us."
Although Zwingli was apparently weak
in developing a theology of baptism, especially in
relation to its sacramental effectiveness, certainly
he helped to lay the groundwork that would be built
upon by later Reformed theologians. Quoted
from. Rev. Christopher C. Arch, M.A
Max Lucado
whose Baptists friends have confiscated a church of
Christ insists that 1 Peter 3:21 means that we are saved
even by calling God "father" and we PLEDGE to be good
boys. However, baptism is an ANSWER only in the CALL AND
RESPONSE: God calls us all through the Gospel and we
ANSWER by requesting A holy spirit or A clear
conscience:
Webster:
Pledge: 1. The condition of being given or held
as security for a contract, payment, etc
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us
(not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but
the answer
of a good conscience
toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1
Peter 3:21KJV
PLEDGE???
The NIV is Calvinistic and Faith Only
and therefore often goes to trouble to translate words
with no textual authority.
Therefore, the definition of words
and other versions prove that it is at the time
and place of water baptism that we ASK for God to
give us a clean conscience which is the gift of A
holy spirit.
And corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--
not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good
conscience-- through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21NAS
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 clear
conscience, through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21RSV
(That, by the way, is what baptism
pictures for us: In baptism we show that we have been
saved from death and doom by the resurrection of
Christ;[c] not because our bodies are washed clean by
the water but because in
being baptized we are turning to God and asking
him to cleanse our hearts from sin.)
1 Peter 3:21LIV
This view led predominately Baptist
slave owners to stake their fortune on their racist
views and depending on saviours like Robert E. Lee to
prove that BAPTISTS were uniquely the ONLY TRUE KINGDOM
OF GOD. As uniquely American Religions which are not
really part of historic Christianity, Mormonism claims
the West and Baptists the South and South West as a
replacement of the Catholic church.
We might be
cursed if we rejected the skill and courage of men like
Luther and Zwingli. However, many of their beliefs are reactionary
against Catholicism. Zwingli believed in two forms of
relationship. The first was that with God through His
invisible church - a mystical union by faith. The second
was with the community through the visible church.
Baptism was an absolute necessity for membership and
privileges.
To accept
Zwingli's baptism is NOT to accept any previous
teaching about baptism. Indeed, we will see that
because Zwingli was urgent to INCLUDE the pagans who
had not been baptized, that his baptism is quite
identical to PAGAN BAPTISM.
LUTHER never rejected the meaning
of baptism clearly taught in the Bible
"In these words you must note, in
the first place, that here stand God's commandment and institution, lest we doubt that Baptism is
divine, not devised nor invented by men. For as
truly as I can say, No man has spun the Ten
Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer out
of his head, but they are revealed and given by God Himself,
so also I can boast that Baptism
is no human trifle, but instituted by God Himself,
moreover, that it is most solemnly
and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we cannot be saved, lest any one regard it as a
trifling matter, like putting on a new red coat.
For it is of the greatest
importance that we esteem Baptism excellent, glorious, and
exalted, for which we contend and fight chiefly,
because the world is now so full of sects clamoring that
Baptism is an external thing, and that external things are
of no benefit.
Luther also pointed out the same
idea Jesus expressed about REJECTING THE COUNSEL OF
GOD. To the elite, baptism was a show of contempt
for life and the world and they were not going to do
something which they understood from secular baptism
as humiliating and subservient. See Luther on FAITH ONLY and
BAPTISM prior to Zwingli's change to try to
make Calvinism fit where it clearly would not
fit the Bible.
"Why? Because the person is nobler
and better. Here, then, we must not estimate the
person according to the works, but the works
according to the person, from whom they must derive
their nobility.
But insane reason will not regard
this, and
because Baptism does not shine
like the works which we do, it is to be esteemed
as nothing.
Zwingli's FAITH ONLY with salvation
prior to baptism was to SAVE the pagans. However, as
Jesus tells us, it was a reluctance to accept the
words of Jesus when HUMAN RATIONALISM wanted to
believe something else.
LUTHER would say that the ROOT of the
dogma of FAITH ONLY is human pride which cannot accept
that the humiliation of water baptism can save the
likes of them. Why? Why, by accepting Calvinism they
were saved WITHOUT BAPTISM, this proved that God had
predestinated them and therefore to submit to baptism
questioned their own RATIONAL CONCLUSIONS.
BELIEVER'S BAPTISM today means that
one is SAVED and that baptism is just an outward
sign. However, the original intention was another
RATIONALISTIC attempt to be like God and include
infants where Catholics had excluded them without
sprinkling (which isn't baptism):
"Eschatology.
Here again Zwingli departed
further from Augustine
and the mediaeval theology
than any other Reformer, and anticipated modern opinions.
He believed (with the Anabaptists) in the salvation of
infants
dying in infancy,
whether baptized or not.
He believed also in the salvation of
those heathen who loved
truth and
righteousness in this life, and were, so to say, unconscious Christians, or pre-Christian Christians.
This is closely connected with his humanistic liberalism and
enthusiasm for the ancient classics.
He admired the wisdom and the
virtue of the Greeks and Romans, and expected to meet in heaven, not only the saints of the Old
Testament from Adam down to John the Baptist, but
also such men as Socrates, Plato, Pindar,
Aristides, Numa, Cato, Scipio, Seneca; yea, even
such mythical characters as Hercules and Theseus. There is, he says, no good and
holy man, no faithful soul, from the beginning to
the end of the world, that shall not see God in
his glory.
"This liberal
extension
of Christ's kingdom and Christ's salvation beyond the limits of the visible
Church,
although directly opposed to the
traditional belief of the necessity of water
baptism for salvation, was not altogether new.
"Justin Martyr, Origen, and other
Greek fathers saw in the scattered
truths of the heathen
poets and
philosophers the traces of the pre-Christian revelation of the Logos, and in the philosophy of the Greeks a schoolmaster to lead them to
Christ.
See how Rubel Shelly says that
while John was remembering old
fragments of the gospel and using theology
and his personal agenda, composed or narrated his
gospel account only on the demand of the Ephesian
Elders and for his own personal agenda.
Shelly sees John as getting the LOGOS idea from the Greek Hermes,
Mercury or other "gods" seen as the carrier of
information. Along with this goes the equally
pagan view of baptism. All of this PERVERTS the
Scriptures as delivered to us.
The humanists
of the school of Erasmus
recognized a secondary
inspiration
in the classical writings, and felt tempted to pray: "Sancte Socrates,
ora pro nobis, Zwingli
was a humanist,
but he had no sympathy with Pelagianism.
On the contrary, as we have shown
previously, he traced salvation to God's sovereign grace, which is independent of ordinary
means, and he first made a clear distinction between
the visible and the invisible Church.
He did not intend,
as he has been often misunderstood, to assert the possibility of salvation
without
Christ.
"Let no one think," he wrote to Urbanus Rhegius (a
preacher at Augsburg), "that I lower Christ; for
whoever comes to God comes to him through Christ ....
The word,
"He who believeth not will be
condemned,"
applies only to those who can hear the gospel, but not to children and heathen .... I openly confess that all
infants are saved by Christ, since grace extends as
far as sin.
Whoever is born is saved by Christ from the curse of original sin.
> If he comes to the knowledge of the law and does the works of the law (Rom. 2:14, 26),
> he gives evidence of his
election." (Schaff)
This has come to mean that one is born
under LAW and must do the works of the law. Once
convinced that he is utterly helpless, he turns to
Christ. This legalistic wrestling with Law instills the
belief that baptism as Christ's MEANS of bestowing grace
is just another work of the Law. Again we note that:
Those who believed in predestination,
like the Jews
and later Calvinists
such as the Puritans,
"were obsessed
with a terror that they would not be saved.
Conversion became a central
preoccupation,
a violent, tortured
drama in which the
sinner and his spiritual
director wrestled for
his soul.
Frequently the penitent had to
undergo severe humiliation or experience real
despair of God's grace
until he appreciated his utter dependence upon God."
(Karen Armstrong, A History of God, p. 283).
The Bible and 1500 years of scholarship
agreed with Jesus that salvation was placed, by Him, in
connection with water baptism were we ACCEPT THE COUNSEL
of God for our lives. Zwingli's baptism, on the other
hand, was truly a legalistic work which denied the
ORIGINAL sacrifice of Christ as having any value to them
before they had PERSONALLY abandoned all hope after
being cycled through the Law of Moses:
While
followers of Zwingli and Smyth had good intentions,
their theology would not work without
reinterpreting the teachings about baptism .
Not only
must the horrified sinner get cleared of ORIGINAL SIN
and do the WORKS OF THE LAW, they must have...
the crucifixion
fulfilled in them through a direct operation of the Holy
Spirit because,
among many, God had predestinated
it so.
"Since there was no other minister
to administer baptism, Smyth
baptized himself and then proceeded to baptize his
flock. An interesting note at this point that should
be brought to bear is that the mode of baptism used was that of pouring, for immersion would not become the
standard for another
generation."
Before his death, as seems
characteristic of Smyth, he abandoned his "Baptist" views and began trying to bring
his flock into the Mennonite church. Although he died before
this happened, most of his congregation did join
themselves with the Mennonite church after his death.
Zwingli
or modern Baptist dogma of FAITH ONLY has absolutely
no meaning outside of the Calvinistic ELECTION or
PREDESTINATION. Baptism is then just a token or
visible confirmation for the benefit of the organized
church that we ARE one of the selected few. Early
Baptists did not just see this as "joining the church"
but believers who had not been baptized were not
allowed to participate in the Eucharist. Therefore,
they were saved in promised but not allowed to partake
of the means of bestowing grace.
"Luther, on the one hand, insisted in
the eucharistic controversy on the most literal interpretation of the
words of institution
against all arguments of grammar and reason; and yet, on the other hand, he
exercised the boldest subjective criticism on several books of the
Old and New Testaments,
especially the Epistle of James and the Epistle to the Hebrews,
because he could not harmonize them with his understanding
of Paul's doctrine of justification."
"As a reaction
against the mysteries
within Catholicism, and not as well-thought-out
theology, men like Zwingli formulated a new doctrine in the world.
This doctrine was later adopted by John Smyth
and other separatists
as a fundamental tenet of a new
creed.
Since the early 1600s groups developed which grew into
a modern system of mysteries
or sacramental
religion.
This translates as GNOSTICISM and
not CHRISTIANITY.
John Smyth, claimed by
Baptists, in a Short Confession of Faith, noted that:
(11) That faith,
destitute of good works, is vain;
but true and living faith is distinguished by good
works.
(12) That the church of Christ
is a company of the faithful; baptised
after confession of sin
and of faith,
endowed with the power of
Christ. [ 1993a ] [ 1993b ]
(13) That the church of Christ
has power delegated to themselves of announcing the
word, administering the sacraments,
appointing ministers, disclaiming them, and also
excommunicating; but the last appeal is to the
brethren of body of the church.
(14) That baptism is the external
sign of the remission of sins,
of dying
and of being made alive,
and therefore does not
belong to infants.
[ 1993 ]
He did not
share the common Baptist view of baptism, but in order to exclude
infants noted that baptism is the outward sign of the
inward work of faith "which works." Of course, it is
obvious that God purges our inward heart of sin as our
bodies are washed with pure water. Water does not wash
the soul clean but without it God does not act. This is
His predestinated plan.
1729 Goat Yard Declaration of Faith A
Declaration of the Faith and Practice of the Church of Christ
at Horsely-down, under the Pastoral Care of Mr. John
Gill, &c.
XI. We believe that Baptism
and the Lord's Supper
are ordinances of
Christ, to be continued
until his second coming; and that the former is absolutely requisite to
the latter;
that is to say, that those only are to
be admitted into the communion of the
church, and to participate of all ordinances
in it, who upon profession
of their faith, have been
baptized by immersion,
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost.
An ordinance means "directon or command of an
authoritative nature.. A decree of Deity." (Webster)
Because these ancient scholars
understood that God's grace is mininistered only to
those who are in the church or the body of Christ,
to make baptism necessary for church membership
meant that it was an absolute
command of Christ. Therefore, baptism and the Lord's
Supper were not sacraments but ordinances. A sacrament
is "a mystery, Gr. musterion, or a secret."
Any
restoration of BELIEVER'S BAPTISM which is POST 1500 and
rejection of Christian Baptism is the urge, like
Zwingli, to play God and INCLUDE Baptists and other
Calvinists as "just as good as I am." However, this
ecumenical urge to JOIN THE BAPTISTS will never be met
with friendship. Ecumenical has always meant, "You agree
with me and we can fellowship." Since you are probably
considered a CULT, your baptism has no value because it
is traced to Christ and not to an unbroken line of
Baptist clergy.
For instance,
Baptists claim to be the only "one true church" because it
believes that it can trace its existance through an
unbroken chain back to John the Baptist:
BUT: "Only Scriptural Baptist
churches can make a legitimate claim
to an unbroken succession
back to the time of Christ and the apostles. Christ
only built one kind
of church and that church is described in detail in
the New Testament.
The only churches meeting the
requirements of that description today are true Baptist churches.
Baptist churches have existed in every age since
their founding by Christ, though they have not
always been known by that name. We do not deny that
there are those in other so-called "churches" that
have been born again by the grace of God. We do
deny, however, that these man-made organizations are
true churches of our Lord Jesus Christ.
We might say that churches of Christ
have an unbroken connection with Christ and they were
ALWAYS known by that name. John Smyth called his group
the church of Christ
and while claimed by Catholics the church Fathers considered
themselves churches of Christ.
The churches of Christ rejected all
relationship to the law of Moses such as tithing and
music.
The churches of Christ always
practiced baptism IN ORDER TO the forgiveness of sins
even before it adopted infant baptism
We noted above that what is claimed as
Baptist called themselves the church of Christ
in order to honor the husband of the bride or the Head
of the body. Therefore, the Baptists like all modern
churches must endorse a reformation or restoration in
order to even be close to the New Testament Church:
BUT:
"If one thing could be said of the Church in the 1500's
it would be that it had strayed
far from the Biblical
standard and was very corrupt.
However, men like Martin Luther, Ulrich
Zwingli, and John Calvin
stood up and reclaimed the Biblical, historical
doctrines of the early Church. This call for reform
reclaimed the following: the absolute authority of Scripture;
the unconditional sovereignty of God over every aspect
of life; salvation by grace through faith alone;
the purpose of man being to glorify
God;
and man's right and responsibility to read and study the Bible for
himself in light of history, rather than depending solely on
the Church to do it for him."
Of course, in the Luther link above,
we note that his Sola Fide was identical to that of
Thomas Campbell: faith must have an object and
without baptism it is not faith.
Believer's Baptism--Back Under
Legalism
A
fundamental part of the doctrine of John Smyth and
Zwingli is the term: "Believer's Baptism."
This new (called radical at the time that it departed
from 15 centuries of history)
idea of baptism is not based upon reading the Bible for
oneself. Rather, it depends upon theologians
uderstanding all of the Baptism passages in ways which
no translator has ever seen fit to give to the world.
Zwingli would say that "baptism does not save" but go on
to say "without faith." This form of believer's baptism
intended to deny that infants needed to be baptized.
Believer's Baptism Britannica:
One of the most dramatic
differences between the reformers was the radicals'
practice of believers' baptism. The radical
Reformers, especially the Anabaptists (whose name
means “rebaptizers”), preferred adult baptism
because adults could exercise free will and accept
baptism. Infant baptism, from their viewpoint,
cheapened the standard of church membership and was
not designated or foreseen in the New Testament
documents that chartered the church. Michael Sattler
(c. 1500–27), Menno Simons (1496–1561), and
Balthasar Hubmaier (1485–1528) led the opposition to
infant baptism. They were determined to follow the
example of Jesus, who underwent baptism as an adult.
They also aspired to be “buried” (in water) with
him, as St. Paul had said baptized people would be.
“New birth” would come from this act, and the reborn
believers would restore the church.
We
repeat the statement to show that BELIEVER'S BAPTISM is
an intense, works oriented form of almost
self-redemption from the Law of Moses. However, a third
member of the "god family" or Holy Spirit had been
defined as doing what the human mind could not do: not
even believe.
as the crucifixion fulfilled in them through a direct operation of the Holy Spirit
because, among many, God had predestinated it so.
"Since there was no other minister to
administer baptism, Smyth
baptized himself
and then proceeded to baptize his flock. An
interesting note at this point that should be brought
to bear is that the mode
of baptism used was that of pouring,
for immersion would not become the standard for
another generation.
Before his death, as seems
characteristic of Smyth, he abandoned his "Baptist" views and began trying to bring
his flock into the Mennonite church. Although he died before
this happened, most of his congregation did join themselves with the Mennonite
church after his death.
The Britannica on "Believer's Baptism" in
Protestantanism notes that:
"When taken out of the historical context
of St. Paul's teachings in the letters to the Romans
or the Galatians and transferred
to their own
times, the Reformers' teaching of justification relied
heavily on the work of the
Holy Spirit. The Holy
Spirit, in effect,
made Christ's action
contemporaneous with the sinner's quest.
"God was working
now on behalf of those
in need. Through preaching, humanity learned of Jesus
Christ's sacrifice and death.
If the individual believed this historical narrative and,
more importantly,
if by the power of the Holy
Spirit he believed that
it was told and enacted for him, he
stood before God in a new light.
"Grace was not infused
into him to the point that he became acceptable and
pleasing to God. Instead, while the individual was still a sinner,
God accepted him favourably and justified
him.
"Christ's death on the cross was then
the only "transaction"
that mattered between God and man.
The sacraments reinforced the
relation and brought
new grace.
That is, rather than accepting the ONCE
FOR ALL sacrifice of Christ, a believer's baptism
actually BESTOWED grace. This makes "believer's baptism
into a WORKS by which he ACQUIRES more grace.
"The teaching of the
Reformers becomes most intelligible
when seen against
the Western Catholic
doctrines (e.g., sin,
grace, atonement), as they saw them.
"Sometimes the phrase total depravity
was used to describe the human condition, though it
must be said that the term had connotations in the
16th century that were different
from those that it has today.
It was used not so much to provide lurid connotations
for descriptions of the depth of sin but rather to
describe its extent;
man as a total being was in
trouble.
Even good
works, piety, religiousness, and efforts, apart
from justification by grace through faith, fell under God's curse.
On the other hand, the justified
sinner could be described in the most lavish terms,
as one who could be "as Christ"
or even sometimes "a Christ."
Note: This is a form of trans
or con-substantation:
the bread becomes the literal flesh of Christ or it
has no value. That is, Christ did not have the power
to infuse life into baptism as the reinaction
of His death, burial and resurrection. His body must
be destroyed and brought into life at the hands of the priest to have value.
Baptists claim that it must be at the hands of a
Baptist traceable in an unbroken line back to
Christ
In the same way, "believer's
baptism" holds that the person must literally be a
form of or even must be Christ Himself for His
sacrificial blood to have any effect.
This means, of course, that the
believer must pay
for their own sins by becomming
Christ.
However, originally the statement
simply meant that you don't
baptize infants but believers.
It is left for a more modern and radical interpretation
to say that one is saved at belief and therefore
baptism is not effective as a means but a sign.
However, then and now, one is not allowed to be a
member of the body of Christ until after baptism.
The fatal flaw is that one is SAVED
and is yet a SINNER. Otherwise we would LIMIT the
grace of God.
"Those who have heard this Protestant
teaching outlined through the centuries have regularly
seen the difficulties it raises
insofar as the portrait of
God's character
is concerned. Protestants never
came up with logically satisfying answers to the resultant
questions, though they were convinced that they were
faithful witnesses to biblical teachings concerning
the mystery
of God's nature. The central question:
"if everything depended upon God's
initiative
"and yet the majority of people are not saved,
"does this not mean that God is responsible for creating humans only to have them suffer;
"is he not guilty of the worst kind
of cruelty by being the
sole agent of their damnation?
John Calvin said that he "gagged on
Calvinism." Those who reject the counsel of God for
their lives will gag God and He will spit them out of
His mouth.
The dogma of faith only
must not be understood as simply a one-step plan of
salvation. Rather, we are looking at a Protestant
version of the repudiated Catholic mysteries. This
mystical faith is not a produce of reading or hearing
about Christ. Calvin admits that this was the ordinary
meaning but as a reaction against Catholicism God has
redefined faith.
Not behind the mysteries one jot or
tittle, John Calvin wrote in such a way that
preachers preaching BELIEVER'S BAPTISM should get
off the payroll and let God do His own picking.
"But they do not consider,
that when the apostle makes hearing the source of faith,
he only describes the ordinary
economy and dispensation of the Lord, which he generally
observes in the calling of his people; but does not
prescribe a perpetual
rule for him, precluding
his employment of any other method; which he has
certainly employed in the calling of many,
to whom he has given the true
knowledge of himself in an internal manner, by the illumination of his Spirit,
Bruner speaks for most of those who
reject Baptism following faith acquired, according to
Paul, by hearing the Words of Christ (Romans 10).
Rather, salvation is a result of God "bursting through"
and giving you faith. And to believe Paul is, according
to the mysteries,
insanity:
"God can never be found
along any way of
thought; for indeed
this idea of God bursts
through and
destroys all the fundamental categories of
thought; the absolutely antithetical character of
the basic logical principles of contradiction and
identity.
To want to
think this God for oneself would mean
insanity." (Brunner, Emil, Revelation and
Reason, pp 46f.)
Remember that we noted that
an ordinance is an absolute command. However, A
sacrament is "a mystery, Gr.
musterion, or a secret."
Therefore, to the mystery religions
reformed out of the master mystery religion,
baptism is not an ordinance to be obeyed by
everyone. Christ did not accomplish His work at one
time and place in history.
Rather, baptism is a mystery enjoyed
only by those who have been chosen out of the
masses, given God's high
sign, has been accepted
by the circle and then has, by their permission,
been baptized to enjoy "all of the rights and
privileges" of that mystery group. A web site
laments that about half of Southern Baptists are not
baptized for this purpose. It also laments that
people are being baptized upon their confession
without undergoing the mysteries of initiation. In other words, they see baptism as an ordinance to be obeyed rather
than a sacrement or
sacred mystery.
To the Sacramentarians, the once for
all sacrifice of Jesus has no value unless it, like
the bread and juice of the euchrist, is turned into a reality just for
the one who believes and when he believes. And even he can
understand this mystery only by a direct operation
of the Holy Spirit.
"The Catholic
system of
Christianity, both Greek and Roman, is sacramental and sacerdotal. The saving grace of Christ is
conveyed to men through the channel of seven
sacraments, or "mysteries," administered by ordained priests
who receive members into
the church by baptism,
accompany them through the various stages of
life, and dismiss them by extreme unction into
the other world.
A literal priesthood requires a literal sacrifice, and this is the repetition of Christ's one sacrifice on the cross
offered by the priest in the mass from day to day.
The power of the mass
extends not only to the living, but even to
departed spirits in purgatory, abridging their
sufferings, and hastening their release and
transfer to heaven. See the Mormon need for a
priesthood and baptism for the dead.
"Zwingli and Calvin reduced the sacraments to signs and seals of grace which is inwardly
communicated by the Holy Spirit. They asserted the
sovereign causality of God, and the independence of the Spirit who "bloweth where it willeth"
(John 3:8). God can communicate his gifts freely
as he chooses. We are, however, bound to his
prescribed means.
The Swiss Reformers
also emphasized the necessity of faith, not only for a profitable use
of the sacrament (which is conceded by the
Lutherans), but for the reception of the sacrament
itself. Unworthy communicants receive
only the visible sign, not the thing signified,
and they receive
the sign to their own injury. Schaff
This is so
certain a mystery that the believer actually
becomes CHRIST and so sure of their standing
with God that further dialog is wasted.
This leads to arrogance and
door knocking trying to find others so
absolutely confident in their personal
experience, or to others whom they can
impute lostness.
The Greek word APPEAL means that
at the time and place our bodies are washed with
water we REQUEST from God a cleansed conscience
or an unobstructed consciousness. This has the
same meaning as A holy spirit as a gift.
The RSV
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
clear conscience, through the resurrection of
Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21RSV
The NIV is a modern
commentary and not a translation:
and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not
the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge [response] of a good
conscience toward God. It saves you by the
resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21
The Bible, on the other hand, treats
the shed blood of Christ as a point in history event looking backward and forward.
Therefore, while people for 1600 years had looked
back to the cross, people now demanded that the
cross be brought to them.
While believers cannot save
themselves, they must repent before they are
baptized:
"Jesus
died once and for all (Heb. 7:27; 9:25-28; 10:10-14).
In contrast, the mystery gods were vegetation deities whose repeated deaths and resuscitations depict the annual cycle of nature.
"Unlike the initiation rites of the mystery cults, Christian
baptism looks
back to what a
real, historical person -- Jesus Christ -- did in history.
Advocates of the mystery cults
believed their "sacraments" had the power to
give the individual the benefits of
immortality in a mechanical or magical way,
without his or her
undergoing any moral or spiritual
transformation. (Ronald Nash, Was the NT influenced by
pagan religions)
The mysteries penetrated the Medieval mind and
led to the belief that "God imputes righteousness to
a sinner." Not so. Salvation depends upon our being perfectly righteous. However,
we are not personally righteous. Not even God's
Spirit could make us righteous because He does not
live within sinners. Therefore, the only way God can
accept us is to translate
us into Christ Who is perfectly righteous. This cannot
happen until our old man "dies" and is buried in
connection with His own death in which He cancelled
all sin for those who would become part of His body.
He said it: He meant it.
He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth
not shall be damned. Mark 16:16
However, the mysteries insist upon
a personal experience or personal drama of Christ
coming to us personally to instill faith.
Once this mystery has been experienced and proven by faith, the initiate
was still not in the ancient fellowship. Rather,
he must undergo a period of probation and then
tell his experience to the insiders. They, in turn
decide whether to initiate him.
You must understand that a new
definition of faith has been explained. The most
important faith is that Christ did it just for you because you were predestinated and the Holy
Spirit (Who is Christ) proved it to you by being
called to descend to you.
Contrary to all of this reinterpretation of Jesus, Peter and Paul, when
the Eunuch wanted to be baptized Philip just said:
"If you believe you may." This was belief in the
finished work of Christ and not faith
that Christ was going to die again just for him.
This simple transaction once for
all washed away the old washings of spirit and
fire in which the candidate became the Sacrifice to, as little gods, pay for their own sins.
In much of Christ's teaching there
is a repudiation of
pagan practices.
Therefore, with this background, let us look as a
typical pagan form of baptism which, along with
its rituals, has found its way into some
Protestatentism. Many of the worst distortions of
baptism and the Lord's Supper were developed after
the time of Christ and did not influence
Christianity.
Both before and after Christianity
there were many forms of baptism and it is clear
that "baptismal
regeneration" was a product of adopting pagan mysteries. When Zwingli and then John Smyth
threw away all of the historical meaning of
baptism, we noted above that John Smyth still practiced pouring. Therefore, it is clear that the
mystery baptism within Catholicism was not
corrected because the Reformers reacted rather
than return to the Bible.
We will look at one of the forms
of baptism which undoubtedly influenced both
Catholicism and the Reformers:
Baptism in the
Mystery Religions
We have shown that many
early reformers saw baptism as an ordinance or a
command of Christ to be obeyed for the remission of sins. Zwingli
rejected baptism of infants but taught that
baptism was just a sign
or sacrament. Furthermore, we showed that to
call an act a sacrament is to defend the Catholic
system of mystery religion more like Babylon than
Jerusalem. The baptism-rejecting reformers clearly
identified baptism as a part of a mystery system of religion where the
priest (preacher) administers the sacraments.
Therefore, it is not far fetched
to look at baptism in some of the pagan
religions which clearly fed Rome and some of the
Reformation.
Mithraic: "A period of preparation preceded the initiation in
each of the mysteries. In the Isis religion, for example,
a period of 11 days of
fasting, including abstinence from meat,
wine, and sexual activity, was required
before the ceremony.
The candidates were
segregated from the common folk in special
apartments in the holy precinct of the
community centre; they were called "the
chastely living ones" (hagneuontes).
"In all the mystery religions the candidates swore an oath
of secrecy; the oath of the Isis Mysteries is
preserved on papyrus.
Before initiation, a confession of sins was expected. The candidate sometimes
told at length the story of the faults
of his life up to the point of his
baptism, which was commonly a part of
the initiation ceremony, and the community of devotees
listened to the confession.
It was believed that the
rite of baptism would wash away all the
candidate's sins, and, from that point on,
his life would be changed for the better,
because he had enrolled himself in the
service of the saviour god.
"In
the Mithraic ceremonies, there were
seven
degrees of initiations: Corax
(Raven), Nymphus (Bridegroom), Miles
(Soldier), Leo (Lion), Perses (Persian),
Heliodromus (Courier of the Sun), and Pater (Father). Those in the lowest
ranks, certainly the Corax, were the servants
of the community during the sacred meal of
bread and water that formed part of the rite.
"The initiation ceremonies
usually mimed death and resurrection. This was done in the most
extravagant manner. In some ceremonies,
candidates were buried or shut up in a
sarcophagus; they were even symbolically
deprived of their entrails and mummified (an
animal's belly with entrails was prepared for
the ceremony). Alternatively, the candidates
were symbolically
drowned or decapitated. In imitation
of the Orphic
myth of Dionysus Zagreus, a rite was held in
which the heart of a victim, supposedly a
human child, was roasted and distributed among
the participants to be eaten.
"The baptism could be either by
water or by fire, and the rites often included
actions that had an exotic flavour. Sulfur torches were used
during the baptism ceremony; they were dipped
into water and then--contrary to the
expectations of the observers--burned when drawn
out of the water. In a dark room a script would
suddenly become visible on a wall that had been
prepared accordingly. Instructions still exist
for producing a nimbus effect--the appearance of
light around the head of a priest. The priest's
head was shaved and prepared with a protective
ointment; then a circular metal receptacle for
alcohol was fixed on his head; it was set aflame in a dark room and would shine
for some seconds. In the Dionysus and Isis
mysteries, the initiation was sometimes
accomplished by a "sacred marriage," a sacral
copulation. Two cases are known in which a
priest speaking from the statue of the god
ordered a credulous woman to come to the temple
and be the god's concubine, the part of the god
being enacted by the priest.
Note: While Jesus and Paul
followed a system of teaching the Words of
Christ, at times in the form of songs or
cantillation (modern singing or harmony was
not practiced),
the misunderstanding of
Baptism among Catholics went along with
instrumental music. This music was a sacrament and had to be performed by
ordained clergy upon instruments which had
been purged of their sins by sprinkling of
water or baptism.
Thereafter, music was
believed to be a mystery tool to force the demons to flee
from church or funeral. The Parting Bells were rung to give the dead
person a head start on the devils.
Therefore, just as in the mysteries of
paganism, music was a magical way to control
the gods or demons.
"The initiation ceremonies were usually accompanied by music and dance and often included a large cast of actors. In the Dionysiac societies,
especially elaborate provisions were made for
mimic representations. The names of
the sacred roles varied from place to place;
among the roles were: Dionysus and Ariadne (a
vegetation goddess and wife of Dionysus),
Palaemon (a marine deity), Aphrodite (the
goddess of love and beauty), Proteurhythmos
(the inventor of elegant rhythm), the
"foster-father of Dionysus," Kore, Demeter,
Asclepius (the god of medicine), Pan (the god
of flocks and shepherds), Curetes (long-haired youths), nymphs (minor nature
goddesses), shepherds, sileni and satyrs
(creatures of the wild, part man and part
beast), maenads (female attendants who shared
in the nocturnal orgiastic rites of Dionysus),
the "guardian of the grotto," and centaurs (a
race of beings half man and half horse)
|
|
The pantomimus, dressed like a tragic
actor in a cloak and long
tunic, usually performed solo,
accompanied by an orchestra that included cymbals and other rhythm
instruments, flutes, pipes, and trumpets. The libretto of the piece was sung
or recited by a chorus and was usually adapted
from a well-known tragedy. Both the music and the
librettos of the pantomimes were
considered to be of little artistic
value. The talent and skill
of the pantomimus himself were of
supreme importance, and the greatest performers enjoyed the favour of
wealthy patricians and even emperors,
such as Nero and Domitian. |
"The ceremonies always
contained a prayer for the welfare of the
emperor and for the good fortune of the whole
Roman Empire. In fact, the amalgamation of religion and politics
was sometimes so close that the
designation "imperial mysteries" is used. The
pattern of imperial mystery ceremonies could
vary widely. This was especially true of the
Dionysiac rites.
"In the clubs of the upper middle class and wealthy, for example, the festivals were chiefly social events. But the members of these
communities were grateful for the security and peace and for the opportunity to make
a good living that the emperor guaranteed to
them. They felt loyalty toward the Roman Empire
and expressed this by ceremonies of the imperial
mysteries.
"Dionysus was the patron god
of the important international society of actors, and their reunions were celebrated in the mode
of Dionysiac
Mysteries.
When an emperor travelled in
the empire, responsibility for dignified
receptions of him was handed over to the society of actors. Because his route was
known beforehand,
a voyage of the emperor was
turned into a series of pompous festivals that were organized in a
manner closely resembling mystery ceremonies.
"The meetings of the mystery
clubs were often named after the common meal. The Dionysiac meetings were
called stibas ("straw") because the
participants ate their dinner sitting on
straw.
The meals of the followers of
Sarapis and Attis were called kline ("couch"), because the diners lay on
couches. (See Amos 5; 6 for a description of
the Marzeach).