Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

of inward life, called "repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ," it surely represents the candidate as entering for the first time upon a life of prayer for pardon and peace. (c) The third passage is more difficult; yet we believe it is in perfect accord with the two already considered. But we are satisfied with neither the Common nor the Revised Version of the text. It may, however, be translated as follows: Which also now saveth you in its antitype—baptism, (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the earnest request of a good conscience unto God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. We give to the word (énepwτnua variously translated answer, inquiry, seeking, earnest seeking, requirement), the meaning request, or earnest request, because the verb (épwráw) signifies to ask a question, or to ask a favor―i. e., to question, or to request, and because the compound verb appears also to have both these senses, though slightly modified in use. Hence, the noun (èñеρwτημa), which sometimes means a question asked, or a demand made, may naturally signify a request made. Grimm proposes to add another definition, namely, strong desire; because a feeling of desire is implied in the motions of interrogating or of demanding. But the form of the noun points rather to a request made than to the feeling which might lead to making it. Now we have seen that "calling on his name," or prayer, is associated by Ananias with baptism, while "forgiveness of sins" is represented by Peter as a result of the beginning of spiritual life, signified by baptism. But in this passage, baptism itself is spoken of as an embodied request or prayer unto God. And what can be truer than this, if it is a symbol of repentance, that is to say, of a change of mind and heart, if it is a sign and figure of entering into a new life? Is not the first motion of faith a beginning of actual trust in God, through Christ, for the forgiveness of sins? And is not this trust an implicit and earnest request for that forgiveness? Baptism, therefore, saves, because it stands for and means genuine reliance, for the first time, upon the mercy of God in Christ, and, indeed, an earnest request for pardon: it expresses the act of the soul in turning to God, committing itself to God, and seeking his grace.

If now we continue our study by looking at the other class of passages cited above, to-wit, those in which Baptism is not expressly named, we shall see that one of them (a) Eph. 5: 26, repeats the idea of “cleansing”—(i. e., from sins) which, as has been shown, is sometimes a figurative expression for forgiveness of sins. The passage is rendered as follows in the Revised Version: Even as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing (margin, laver,) of water with the word. Let the reader observe (1.) That "cleansing" seems to be distinguished by the apostle from "sanctifying." This accords with the view that it refers to the forgiveness of sins upon repentance, rather than to the implanting of a holy principle of life and sanctification in the soul. The two acts are doubtless co-incident in time, but are distinguishable in fact and thought. (2.) That here, as in the passages already examined, baptism-in case that is meant by "the laver of water,"-is used as a sign or symbol of conversion, and is spoken of as securing that which is secured by conversion-that is, by the turning of the soul to God for pardon and peace. In other words, the sign is here put for the thing signified; the ritual act of confession is put for the spiritual act which it represents. (3.) That an expression is added, with the word, or, in the word, which directs attention to the dispensation or element in which this cleansing or forgiveness is accomplished. That dispensation or element is the gospel-the word of divine grace in which sinners find light and peace. It is surely needless to justify this meaning of the expression, but we will refer to a few passages where it is illustrated—e. g., Rom. 10: 8, 17; Eph. 6: 17; Heb. 6: 5; 1 Peter 1: 23. It is probably never used to denote the formula of baptism. (4) That the "cleansing by the laver of water" may be a simple figure of speech, founded on the bridal lustrations practiced in the East-the whole church of Christ being thought of as his bride. We do not accept this as the interpretation most likely on the whole to be correct, but it is certainly intelligible and in harmony with the context. At all events, there is nothing in this passage to show that Paul conceived of baptism as the medium in and through which divine life is conveyed by the Holy Spirit to the soul.

There remain two passages in which alone baptism seems to be connected with the work

of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, viz.: Titus 3: 5, and John 3: 5. (b) The passage in Titus is thus translated by the Revisers: But according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing (or, laver) of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost. As we understand the passage it might be literally translated, through a laver of regeneration and a renewing of the Holy Ghost:-"a laver of regeneration" referring to the inception of the new life by the work of the Spirit, and "a renewing of the Holy Ghost" referring to the preservation and development of the life, already implanted, by the same Spirit. But whether "a laver of regeneration," means a laver which belongs to regeneration, as its prescribed emblem and expression, or whether regeneration itself is figuratively called a laver of regeneration because in and by it the soul is cleansed, is not perfectly clear. If this passage could be interpreted by itself, without regard to other statements, we should be ready to adopt the latter view as correct, and say that there is here no reference to baptism. But bearing in mind the other passages, we accept the former view as probably correct, and believe that Paul had in mind baptism as representing and confessing the divine change called regeneration. Hence he teaches that men are saved by an outworking, obedient life, given and preserved by the Holy Spirit. (c) The other passage, John 3: 5, has been examined in the Commentary; but we may properly add a few remarks in this place. (1) There can be no reference in this passage to Christian baptism in distinction from John's baptism. For neither this Gospel nor any other gives us reason to think that Christ had yet administered the rite by the hands of his disciples, or had imparted to it any spiritual efficacy which it had not when administered by John. If then he meant to speak in language intelligible to Nicodemus, he must have referred either to John's baptism, or to a well-understood figurative sense of the term water He could not have referred to a rite that would begin to be used after two or three years. (2) As an expression, being "born of water and of Spirit" is clearly not synonymous with being "born of the Spirit" by means of water. For by the former the relation of these two sources of the new life to each other is not pointed out, while by the latter it is definitely stated. Taking the two sources separately, we may say that being "born of water" (baptized), must signify being cleansed from sins or forgiven; while being "born of Spirit" cannot signify less than being ingenerated, if we may use the word, with a new and holy principle of life by the Spirit of God. It is not, therefore, surprising that Jesus alludes to baptism in the briefest manner, while he dwells with special emphasis upon the work of the Spirit. (3) We do not hesitate to say that it is irrational to think of "water" as holding the same relation to the new birth, as that held by the Holy Spirit. A material substance cannot be supposed to effect a moral change. It may naturally enough signify a moral or spiritual change, but that is all. Dead matter cannot be a spring of moral power to the soul. And it is almost equally difficult to conceive of it as a physicial medium of the Spirit.

Having shown that the principal texts on which men have founded the doctrine that the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration is mediated by the water of baptism, need not be supposed to teach that doctrine, we will now look at certain representations of Scripture which are manifestly inconsistent with that doctrine. And we shall assume, for the sake of brevity, that repentance towards God, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, are just as truly fruits of the Spirit, beginning with regeneration, as is genuine love to God or one's neighbor. (Compare 1 John 5:1 with 1 John 4: 7.) The representations of Scripture to which we refer, are such as these: (a) John the Baptist not only considered repentance, and, indeed, "fruits worthy of repentance," if not also faith in the coming Messiah, to be possible before baptism, but to be suitable prerequisites to it. (See Matt. 3: 6–8; Mark 1: 4, 5; Luke 3: 3, 8, 13, 14, 18; Acts 19:4; and compare John 4: 1.) (b) The apostles, after receiving the gifts of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, taught the same thing as to repentance and faith in Christ going before baptism. (Acts 2: 38, 41; 8: 12, 35-38; 9: 15-18; 16: 14, 15, 31–34.) (c) Peter looked upon the extraordinary gift of the Spirit to Cornelius, his kinsman, and near friends, as conclusive evidence that they might properly be baptized. (Acts 10: 24, 4448.) (d) Paul represented the word of the cross, or the preaching of Christ crucified, in distinction from the administering of baptism, as the power of God unto salvation. (1 Cor.

1: 17, 18, 21-24.) (e) Paul affirmed that in Christ Jesus he had begotten the Corinthian Christians, through the gospel, (1 Cor. 4: 15), after saying a little before that he had baptized only a very few of them. (1 Cor. 1:14-16.) These passages make it certain that, according to the teaching of John, of Christ, and of his apostles, the function of baptism is not to originate the new life of faith, but to represent the origin of it; to portray and confess the entrance of a human soul, through repentance and faith, produced by the Spirit of God, in the light of divine truth, upon a life of consecration and obedience. It is an ordinance that takes the mind of a believer back to the moment of conversion, that he may confess before men the change which then took place, by the grace of God, in his spiritual state. It is the specific, the prescribed, the significant rite, by which he signifies that he has ceased to live in unbelief, and has begun to live in faith and obedience. If any one thinks it unimportant, because it is concerned in the manifestation rather than in the origination of the new life, let him ponder the language of Paul: "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth, Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." (Rom. 10: 9, Rev. Ver.); or the words of James: "Show me thy faith apart from thy works, and I by my works will show thee my faith," and "as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even so faith apart from works is dead." (James 2: 18, 26, Rev. Ver.); or the saying of Christ himself: “Every one therefore who shall confess me before men, him will I also confess before my Father which is in heaven." (Matt. 10: 32, Rev. Ver.) If it can be said with Tertullian, that "a sound or vigorous faith is sure of salvation" (fides integra secura est de salute), it can also be affirmed, that "vigorous faith" works by love, and leads to obedience. If there can be no doubt as to the salvation of the penitent robber, without baptism, there can be as little doubt of his willingness to obey Christ in every practicable manner. Baptism, then, is a very definite and important act of obedience to Christ, and withal a very clear confession of divine truth; but it is prerequisite to salvation only as obedience to the known will of Christ is prerequisite.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »