THOUGHTS ON BAPTISM by J. M. Waggoner

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 18, 1878

THOUGHTS ON BAPTISM.

By J. M. Waggoner

BY ELD. J. M. WAGGONER.

(Continued.)

THE ORDER OF BAPTISM.—CONCLUDED.

We think we hazard nothing in the assertion that that is not Christian baptism wherein the conditions of the gospel are not met. We would speak with modesty, leaving it to each one’s conscience as to how wide a divergence from the divine plan there must be to justify an imitation of the course pursued by Paul and the believers, recorded in Acts 19:1–5. But we would speak decidedly in favor of having both candidate and administrator look well to the teachings of the gospel on this subject. It is no light thing to trifle with divine ordinances. He who administers them improperly does so at his peril. Paul praised his brethren inasmuch as they kept the ordinances as they were delivered to them, and very deeply blamed them when they perverted one, for not preserving it pure according to its intention. 1 Cor. 11. The importance of the ordinance of baptism, as presented by the Saviour in Mark 16:16, and by the apostle Paul in Rom. 6 and 7, cannot be overestimated; and the necessity of carefulness in its observance is according to its importance.

Paul to the Colossians speaks in terms equally direct and decisive on this subject: “Buried with him in baptism, wherein ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” Col. 2:12. This adds new lustre to the ordinance. Dead to sin; buried with Christ by baptism into death; and risen with him in the same ordinance. It cannot be possible that they who speak disparagingly of baptism, as some unfortunately do, have ever examined with care this impressive passage. Here it is shown that “the likeness of his resurrection” is not altogether reserved to a future life. “Risen with him.” As he died to sin and lives to God, so we must die to sin, be buried with him, and rise with him to a new life—to a life of obedience to the Heavenly Father’s will.

“If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.” Col. 3:1. This brings to view the entire Christian life,—a life of consecration to God in imitation of the love and zeal of our Saviour. In the present argument it is not necessary to pursue this further, having fully met our design,—to show the important place which baptism occupies in the divine plan for the remission of sin and union with Christ.

We do not present these views in a captious spirit, or with any desire to find fault, but with a deep sense of responsibility for the honor of the cause of Christ, which is so often shamed by the lives of those who consider themselves Christians because they have been baptized and accepted as members of a church. We deprecate the practice of baptizing people on too slight evidence of purpose of heart,—with a conversion altogether too superficial, or no conversion at all. We have reason to believe, and it pains us to record it, that there are ministers not a few in this land of gospel privileges who think far more of the numbers they are able to call in and baptize in a given time, than of the Christian walk, of the stability and integrity of their converts after they are baptized. Gathering a mass of unstable souls, who are deceived into the belief that they are Christians because they have assented to certain truths and been baptized, and who show that their convictions of sin were not deep, and that their hearts were never touched by the enlightening and converting power of the Holy Spirit, is not the way to find acceptance with God as a laborer, or to honor the Christian cause and the Christian ministry. Such workmen would do well to remember that their work is yet to be tried, and if it does not abide they will suffer loss. Gold, silver, and precious stones are the only material which will be accepted and bring a reward to the builder in the temple of our Master. The “foundation” is exceedingly precious and valuable, and the counsel is worthy of being held in constant remembrance,—“Let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.” 1 Cor. 3:9–18. Often have we seen the record set forth that so many scores were baptized during a certain meeting, while in a year from that time the strength of the church under whose auspices the labor was performed, was not a whit increased by the effort. Wood, hay, and stubble are not accepted for the building and bring no reward to the builders.

It is true that the Scriptures give no warrant to put off the baptism of the penitent. But we should have some evidence of sincerity and purpose of heart; evidence that the claims of God’s holy law, and the requirements of the Scriptures for a holy life, are somewhat appreciated. As the “present truth” for any age should receive our most earnest attention, even so the prevailing errors of any age should be specially guarded against. If there is danger of erring, it is better to even err on the side of carefulness where a want of caution, because of prevailing false teachings, is likely to cause the professing believer to settle down into a state of false confidence and self-deception.

In thus speaking, it is not our purpose to abate one jot of the necessity and importance that the penitent should be baptized. It is because the duty is important—the institution is too sacred to be trifled with— that we so earnestly plead for maintaining it in its purity, and administering it only according to the revealed will and intention of the divine Institutor.

The unity of truth is well illustrated in this subject. To mar it in one part is to injure the whole. No error stands alone; when once it enters, it multiplies, and taints the whole system. Very few in the present day apprehend how far the truth on the subject of baptism has been obscured by a change of the ordinance. Being accustomed to view it only in the light of tradition or of popular opinion, the thoughts of the majority seldom rise above these to the full intent of the simple but grand truths of divine revelation. It seems fitting that we close our remarks on the relations of baptism, with a few quotations which have in view the same things which we have tried to set forth.

In Conybeare and Howson’s “Life and Epistles of Paul,” vol. 1, p. 439, are the following remarks:—

“It is needless to add, that baptism was (unless in exceptional cases) administered by immersion, the convert being plunged beneath the water to represent his death to the life of sin, and then raised from this momentary burial to represent his resurrection to the life of righteousness. It must be a subject of regret, that the general discontinuance of this form of baptism (though perhaps necessary in our northern climates) has rendered obscure to popular apprehension some very important passages of Scripture.”

These authors, of the Church of England, show the powerful influence of popular error by themselves excusing the wrong they deplore, the evil tendency of which they seem to understand. We leave it to the reverent reader that an error is neither slight nor excusable which “obscures to popular apprehension some very important passages of Scripture.”

Chancellor Est., of the University of Douay, (Catholic) on Rom. 6:3, says:—

“For immersion represents to us Christ’s burial; and so also his death. For the tomb is a symbol of death, since none but the dead are buried. Moreover, the emersion, which follows the immersion, has a resemblance to a resurrection. We are, therefore, in baptism, conformed not only to the death of Christ, as he has just said, but also to his burial and resurrection.”

Dr. Conant, in his work entitled “Baptizein,” published by the American Bible Union, says:—

“The word ‘baptize’ is an anglicized form of the Greek baptizein. On this account it has seemed to some that it must necessarily express the same meaning. It has been said, that no other word can so perfectly convey the thought of the Holy Spirit as the one chosen by himself to express it in the original Scriptures; and that we are, therefore, at least right and safe in retaining it in the English version. A comparison of the meaning of baptizein, as exhibited in sections 1–3 of this treatise, with the definitions of ‘baptize’ as given in all dictionaries of the English language, and with its recognized use in English literature and in current colloquial phraseology, will show that this is far from being the case. The word ‘baptize’ is a strictly ecclesiastical term; broadly distinguished by that characteristic from the class of common secular words to which baptizein belonged. It is a metaphysical term, indicating a mystical relation entered into with the church, by virtue of the sacramental application of water. In both these respects it misrepresents the Saviour’s manner and intent. Concealing the form of the Christian rite under a vague term, which means anything the reader may please, it obscures the idea thereby symbolized, and the pertinency of the inspired appeals and admonitions founded on them. The essence of the Christian rite is thus made to consist in this mystical church-relation, into which it brings the recipient. With this view associates itself, naturally and almost necessarily, the idea of a certain mysterious efficacy in the rite itself; and, accordingly, we find the belief prevailing in the majority of Christian communions that, through baptism, the recipient is, not externally alone, but mystically united to the body of Christ. Thus the rite ceases to be the symbol of certain great truths of Christianity, and becomes an efficacious sacrament. The tenacity with which this fatal error is adhered to, even in communions not connected with the State, is largely due to the substitution, in our English Bibles, of this vague foreign term of indefinite meaning, for the plain,

intelligible English signification of the Greek word.”

We have taken the liberty to italicize one sentence in the above. And to these we must add, that it is much to be regretted that many who see the necessity of restoring the ordinance, as to the form, yet lose sight of the “great truths of Christianity” which are symbolized by it. Ignoring the truth that “sin is the transgression of the law,” and that repentance has respect to the law of God as faith has to the Son of God, Acts 20:21, they shut out the idea that death must precede burial, and introduce the very error so clearly pointed out by Dr. Conant. And thus we think we have fully justified our statement that the form, without regard to the order or relation, does not constitute it the baptism of the gospel. A person may be immersed, and yet so hold the rite in his faith and in his life as to destroy it, so far as it is a symbol of the death and resurrection of the Lord and of our death to sin and rising to walk in a new life of righteousness or obedience.

(To be Continued.)