Baptism in Acts by Todd Peck

LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

THE ROLE OF BAPTISM IN THE BOOK OF ACTS

A PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. A.B. TUCKER IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE NBST 522

LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

BY TODD PECK

LOVINGSTON, VIRGINIA THURSDAY, MAY 1, 2008

CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. BRIEF PANORAMA OF BAPTISM IN ACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. SEMANTIC RANGE AND MEANING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. CONTEXTUAL COMPARISON AND ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 5. ROLE AND FUNCTION OF BAPTISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 6. CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

INTRODUCTION The meaning and function of baptism has been and continues to be an issue of debate. At the crux of the issue is the specific role that baptism plays in salvation. The question of whether or not baptism is necessary for salvation is a crucial one. Although baptism is mentioned in the Gospels, the full force of the debate becomes clear as the issue is delineated in the book of Acts and takes shape and meaning in the context of the early formation of the church. Baptism in the Gospels carries a pre-resurrection meaning that is further developed and amplified in Acts. A mere surface reading of the text tends to fuel the debate; however careful contextual analysis provides clarity on the matter and removes all ambiguity. The usage of the term baptism within the context of the book of Acts carries two possible meanings: water baptism as a profession or sign of faith in Christ, and Spirit baptism which involves the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and marks the beginning of the regeneration of the believer. Thus the necessity of baptism as it relates to salvation is inextricably connected to and determined by which meaning is being utilized in each contextual setting. The issue of whether or not water baptism is essential for salvation is at the heart of the debate and so greater focus will be given to this issue.

BRIEF PANORAMA OF BAPTISM WITHIN ACTS In Acts 1:5, Jesus recounts John the Baptist’s prediction regarding the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2 marks the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost and Peter proclaiming to the people present, the need to, “…repent and be baptized…in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”, and promising that the gift of the Holy Spirit would follow.1 The result of Peter’s plea in Acts 2:38 finds fruition a few verses later in Acts 2:41 where Peter’s words are received and about three thousand were baptized. Later, Acts 8:12-13 records Philip preaching in Samaria, the good news of the kingdom and the name of Jesus resulting in men and women being baptized. In Acts 8:14-17, Peter and John journey to Samaria over hearing that some had received the word. The text indicates that there were a group of believers who had been baptized in Jesus’ name (vs.16) but had not received the Holy Spirit. Peter and John then laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. In Acts 8:36-38 Philip was led by the Spirit to connect with a eunuch travelling back to Ethiopia after worshipping in Jerusalem. Philip explains that a passage the eunuch was reading from Isaiah refers to Jesus and he began to preach the good news. The eunuch’s response was a desire to be baptized, and Philip accommodated. Paul was baptized following his blinding encounter with Christ on the road to Damascus. He was baptized by Ananias in Damascus after regaining his sight. In Acts 10 Peter was led to preach the good news to a centurion named Cornelius who had gathered several relatives and friends for the occasion. Upon hearing the gospel, they received the gift of the Holy Spirit (vs. 44-45) and they were baptized with water in the name of Jesus (vs. 47-48). Peter recounts this event in Acts 11 and equates it with the baptism of the Holy Spirit as predicted by John (vs. 16) and which followed belief in the Lord Jesus (vs. 17). In Acts 13, Paul and Barnabas travel to Antioch and began to teach in the synagogue. In verse 24 they describe 1

The Holy Bible English Standard Version (Wheaton: Crossway, 2002), 911.

John’s baptism as one of repentance. Later Paul, Silas, and Timothy travelled to Philippi, where they encounter a woman from Thyatira who was a worshipper of God (16:11-14a). Upon giving a careful hearing of what Paul had shared with her, she was baptized along with her household (vs. 14b-15). Later Paul and Silas were imprisoned and were able to share the gospel with the jailer. They preached that salvation resulted in believing in the Lord Jesus. The jailer was baptized along with his family. In Acts 18 Paul preached the gospel in the synagogue at Corinth, resulting in Crispus (the ruler of the synagogue) believing in the Lord along with his entire household and many other Corinthians and they were baptized. Paul travelled to Ephesus and encountered some disciples of John the Baptist. Paul taught them that John’s baptism of repentance pointed to Jesus. After hearing this they were baptized in Jesus’ name and received the Holy Spirit after John laid hands on them. Finally in Acts 22 Paul after being arrested in Jerusalem at the Temple is given the opportunity to share his testimony. In doing so, he recounts Ananias telling him to “rise and wash away your sins, calling on His name”.2

The Holy Bible English Standard Version (Wheaton: Crossway, 2002), 932.

SEMANTIC RANGE AND MEANING In beginning the process of determining meaning, it is necessary to begin with the term itself. baptizw is the word utilized in all of the passages in Acts in one form or another. The semantic range of “baptize” includes: to dip, immerse; to cleanse or purify by washing; various ideas associated with an act of dedication, marked designation, devotion or trial.3 As noted, the meaning of baptize carries the primary idea of immersion with various nuances each determined by context. There is another related term baptw which means according to Strong means “to dip”4 and according to Perschbacher means “to dye”.5 John 13:36 would be an example of the usage of baptw and describes Jesus “dipping” His bread into the dish. Both terms carry a general meaning; however the issue that causes debate among conservatives with specific regard to the semantic range is the mode of water baptism, meaning whether or not a person should be immersed, dipped, poured, or sprinkled. Jay Adams notes the broad spectrum of the term’s meaning when he writes: “…the word is a rather fluid one…comprising such divergent concepts as “to plunge, to pour, to tinge, to sprinkle, to dye,” and many others”. 6 Although an examination into the meaning of the word is useful, it is far from conclusive. The broad usage of the term in antiquity as well as in the New Testament finds not only religious connections but pagan as well and so on its own the meaning can not be determinative.7 What is thus vital to understanding baptism as it is used in Acts, is the hermeneutical principle of context

Wesley J. Perschbacher, ed. The New Analytical Greek Lexicon (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1990), 66. James Strong, The Strongest Strong’s (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 925. 5 Perschbacher, ed. The New Analytical Greek Lexicon, 66. 6 Jay E. Adams, The Meaning and Mode of Baptism (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1975), 2. 7 G.R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 26. 4

through an analysis both within the book itself as well as a comparison to similar uses throughout the New Testament. CONTEXTUAL COMPARISON AND ANALYSIS The first reference to baptism is found in Acts 1:5. It is here in the opening verses that the distinction between water baptism and Spirit baptism is made by Jesus. The reference to water baptism in this verse specifically refers to the baptism of John as does other portions of Acts (1:22; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25; 19:3-5). The meaning and significance of John’s baptism can be determined by examining the Gospel narratives. There are distinct characteristics of John’s baptism addressed in the Gospels. A comparison of Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:4, Luke 3:16 and John 1:26 reveals that this particular act was one that involved water and was for “repentance” and the “forgiveness of sins”. As the context demonstrates, the idea of baptism did not originate with the birth of the early church as delineated in Acts. It was in fact a practice of the Jews that indicated the transition of Gentiles who converted to Judaism.8 This practice was symbolic of the proselyte washing off the defilements of the heathen life.9 There is a distinction between this particular practice as proselyte ritual and that of John’s. The difference is noted, in that the practice of baptism from John’s perspective was not exclusive of the Jew who was a “son” or “daughter” of the law. Although the practice of baptism was not unique to John, the specifics that apply to his practice are. The symbolism of being washed and “born anew”10 attached to the ceremonial ritual for the proselyte converting to Judaism, carries over to John’s practice, however there are differences. First, John’s baptism required that the Jew as well as the Gentile “repent” or turn 8

Alfred P. Gibbs, Christian Baptism (Kansas City: Waterlick , 1966), 17. B. Frank Smith, Christian Baptism (New Orleans: Bible Institute Memorial, 1944), 6. 10 Gibbs, Christian Baptism, 17-18. 9

from their sin and be symbolically “washed” for the forgiveness of sin. This implied the universal scope of the effects of the fall and sinful depravity. Second, this practice was a prelude to something far greater. Three of the Gospel accounts (Matthew, Luke, and John), reveal a temporary aspect to the function of John’s baptism. Each of the accounts records John as being the one who contrasts water baptism with the baptism of Jesus which will baptism of “fire and the Spirit”. Within the context and setting of Acts, this distinction is not simply predictive, it becomes reality (Acts 2:38). It is this component of John’s statement that is the point of Jesus’ reminder in verse 5. In verse 8, Jesus explains that the predicted coming of the Holy Spirit would empower believers to be His “witnesses” throughout the world. Later in the chapter John’s baptism is mentioned again, but it is in the context of a pre-requisite in determining who would be qualified to replace Judas Iscariot.11 Contextually speaking, Acts 2:38 becomes the focal point from which all discussion and debate takes place regarding baptism. The context in chapter 2 is the fulfilled promise of the Holy Spirit which occurred as the disciples were gathered together on the day of Pentecost (vs. 1-2). Tongues of fire appeared to and rested on them and they became filled with the Holy Spirit, and to speak in various languages (vs. 3-4). Devout men from every nation were present and heard the disciples communicate in each of their respective native tongues, which caused bewilderment (vs. 5-13). Peter stood and explained by preaching the gospel (vs. 14-36). The response was conviction and inquiry as to what should be done (vs. 37). Peter responded by stating: “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” (vs. 38).12 11 12

The qualified candidate had to have been present with the disciples from the time of John’s baptism. The Holy Bible English Standard Version (Wheaton: Crossway, 2002), 911.

This verse denotes a shift in how the practice of baptism was understood and carried out. It echoes the both the universal invitation as well as the personal responsibility advocated by John the Baptist and Jesus (Matt. 3:9-10).13 The main differences between the two is that Peter at this point in time was calling for baptism to be done in Jesus’ name and also that it would result in the gift of the Holy Spirit. In context there is clear relationship between repentance, baptism, forgiveness of sins, and the gift of the Holy Spirit. But how are they related? To what degree is each individual component dependent on the others? It is believed that “forgiveness of sins” in this verse, should not be linked solely to baptism suggesting that water baptism is what brings this remission.14 Grammatically speaking, the dilemma in Acts 2:38 is not easily solved either. Luther B. McIntyre Jr. and Ashby L. Camp represent two views on the matter. McIntyre argues against baptism as essential for salvation based on the Rule of Concord which generally proposes that a personal pronoun must agree with its antecedent in gender, number, and person and thus his argument is based on a lack of agreement between “baptized” and “forgiveness of sin”.15 Camp however sees a problem with the argument and argues that such a position fails to provide a logical connection between the two and negates the possible syntactical agreement between “forgiveness of sins” and both “repent” and “baptize”. 16 In his challenge to the Rule of Concord however, camp does not explicitly advocate baptism as essential to salvation, only to demonstrate grammatical relationship. There appears to be no real consensus on the matter and 13

Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 9 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 283. Homer A. Kent Jr., Jerusalem to Rome: Studies in Acts (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988), 33. 15 Luther B. McIntyre Jr, “Baptism and Forgiveness in Acts 2:38”. Biblio sacra, Ja-Mr 1996. Available from ATLA Religion Database, Item 20070815. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx? direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001008238&site=ehost-live. Accessed May 1, 2008. 16 Ashby L. Camp. “Reexamining the Rule of Concord”. Restoration Quarterly, 39 no 1, 1997. Available from ATLA Religion Database, Item 20071015. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx? direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001029229&site=ehost-live. Accessed May 1, 2008. 14

thus forces the question: Does this lack of consensus do this passage justice? It does provide an atmosphere of accountability and integrity in grammatical and syntactical analysis as well as proper exegesis. Exegesis is not just limited to the grammar and syntax but is also rather dependent on context. Thus context shall guide further investigation of the issue. The overarching theme of Holy Spirit baptism is the key to understanding and guiding the hermeneutical process. Jesus establishes this in Acts 1:5 and it is confirmed by fulfillment in Acts 2 and woven throughout the remainder of the book. Thus it is conceivable that all references to baptism within the pages of Acts, is either understood in relation to baptism as understood and practiced by John, or as described and understood at Pentecost. As already noted, there is a kindred similarity between John’s baptism and that described in Acts 2:38. This is most clearly seen in the relationship between repentance and baptism. Metanoew is the word translated “repent” and constitutes a change of mind and feeling, and can also represent a change of practice.17 Beasley-Murray takes it a step further by seeing repentance as conversion, and thus portrays John’s baptism as a call for an individual to turn from sin and to God in order to live in obedience to Him.18 There is a dilemma within the relationship between repentance and baptism that deals with the issue of causality. Acts 2:38 cannot be interpreted in isolation from the rest of Acts, and so it can be seen that the message of repentance continues throughout the book (Acts 3:19; 8:22; 17:30; 26:20), as well as the practice of baptism.19 But can repentance take place apart from baptism? The answer according to Acts 3:19, is in the affirmative. In this portion of the text, Peter establishes repentance and faith as the only essential elements for appropriating “forgiveness of sin”. The argument for essential connection between

Perschbacher, ed. The New Analytical Greek Lexicon, 273. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 34. 19 See: “Brief Panorama of Baptism in Acts” above, p. 4. 18

repentance and baptism is dismantled not by grammatical syntactical analysis but by contextual analysis. Armed with this information, one can find that McIntyre’s proposition is merited for he establishes grammatical agreement between “repent” and “forgiveness of sin”.20 What can be determined from the above analysis? First it can be determined that baptism was performed using water (Acts 8:36-38). It should be noted that although several of the references do not mention water, it can be assumed on the basis of context. If the overarching theme of baptism is the baptism of the Holy Spirit as established in chapter 1, then baptism which is listed separate from the gift of the Holy Spirit must be water baptism (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:47-48; 19:3-5). Second, water baptism for the believer was performed in Jesus’ name as a common practice (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:47-48; 19:5). Although John’s baptism pointed to Jesus, it was not performed in His name and so water baptism in Acts is a transition for the post resurrection believer. Third, there is a baptism of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5; 11:16). This baptism of the Holy Spirit in certain passages is synonymous with the “gift” of the Spirit (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:47-48). Fourth, the order of water baptism and the gift of the Holy Spirit varies, however both are preceded and initiated by an act of repentance and faith (Acts 2:41; 8:12-13; 8:36-38; 10:47-48; 16:14, 30-33; 19:4-5). Although the Greek word for repent means to “change one’s mind”, the Jewish understanding from the Old Testament means to “turn from sins” or “turn to God” both encompassing the idea of repentance and faith.21 In other words, there can be no genuine repentance without genuine faith and there can be no genuine faith without genuine repentance. Fifth, within the context of Acts, baptism is important for all of the references point

20 Luther B. McIntyre Jr, “Baptism and Forgiveness in Acts 2:38”. Biblio sacra, Ja-Mr 1996. Available from ATLA Religion Database, Item 20070815. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx? direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001008238&site=ehost-live. Accessed May 1, 2008. 21 Barclay M. Newman, Eugene A. Nida, A Translator’s Handbook On the Acts of the Apostles (London: United Bible Societies, 1972), 59.

to its relationship to conversion. This relationship however is not a dependent one, for repentance can occur without the act of baptism. Although water baptism and its relationship to salvation has taken primary focus up to this point, it is necessary to briefly address the issue of Spirit baptism due to its thematic and theological significance in Acts. Particular consideration is given to the issue regarding the timing of Spirit Baptism in relation to the conversion experience. It is thus beneficial to address what is normative for the believer and what is exceptional as detailed in the Acts narrative. Acts 8:16 becomes a key passage in the debate, due to the delay of the baptism of the Holy Spirit on some Samaritan believers who had placed their faith in Christ. A similar passage in Acts 19:3-5 records the account of Ephesian disciples who had not received the Holy Spirit until Paul laid hands on them. With regard to the first account, it is argued by some that this indicates a second work of grace apart from salvation.22 There is no question as to the genuineness of their conversion for Philip clearly preached the gospel and baptized them and Peter and John do not question their faith upon arriving from Jerusalem.23 It is proposed that this situation was unique in light of the relationship between Jews and Samaritans as well as Philipâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s persecution due to his Hellenistic background.24 There are no similar scenarios to a delayed Spirit baptism other than Acts 19:3-5 which is additionally a unique situation. Thus it can be determined that this situation was not normative but exceptional. A careful examination of Acts 19:3-5 reveals that Paul had established that the Ephesian disciples were followers of John the Baptist and had not genuinely converted to Christ. Thus in the one sense, this is normative for repentance and faith in Christ was and is a pre-requisite to Spirit baptism. The context of the passage also aids in establishing 22

Kent . Jerusalem to Rome: Studies in Acts, 79. Ibid,. 24 Gaebelein, The Expositorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Bible Commentary, Vol.9, 359. 23

the norm for Spirit baptism for Paulâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s inquiry in verse 2-3 strongly implies that genuine conversion and the gift of the Holy Spirit go hand in hand.

ROLE AND FUNCTION OF BAPTISM Luke deals with the issue of baptism from a historical perspective, documenting people, events, and places that were relevant to the new and growing movement of Christianity. Although Acts is a historical genre, the theological messages remain intact and unhindered and so Luke provides essential documentation in formulating a theology of baptism. Water baptism and Spirit baptism are clearly delineated and distinguished from one in the Gospels and Acts. This does not necessarily define the role and function of each within Acts. So as a launching point, they must be reviewed in other passages that illuminate both pre-Pentecost understanding as well as Jewish understanding. Of primary consideration is the role that baptism plays in salvation. As noted in the comparative analysis, John’s words in the Gospels, and Jesus’ words in Acts 1:5 set forth the baptism of the Holy Spirit as the initial and foundational event sparking the early church movement and sustaining it to this day. In context, the baptism of the Holy Spirit appears to supersede water baptism but not negate it.25 Thus water baptism is not a necessity for the gift of the Holy Spirit. As covered earlier, the Jewish understanding of water baptism as proclaimed by John is that it is a symbol. Two issues should be addressed regarding this. First, the significance of what the symbol conveys should not be minimized, for the imagery of being cleansed and washed anew implies a committed life. The Gentile converting to Judaism in essence was leaving the old life behind and for a new one and this meaning carries over for the one converting to Christianity.26 Second, there is no solid biblical evidence that supports a different understanding of water baptism in Acts as opposed to that in the Gospels. Although water baptism in Acts is performed in Jesus’ name as a matter of identification, its meaning is the 25 26

Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 9, 283. Smith, Christian Baptism , 6.

same. Thus it is accurate to view water baptism as an outward sign of an inward relational reality. To make it essential to salvation however, is to distort its meaning as understood in a Jewish context. Although baptism underwent an identity change in Acts, its purpose and function remained unchanged in the sense that it was a means of public profession and acknowledgement of a life committed to Christ. Contextually speaking, there is virtually no evidence in Acts to support the belief that baptism was and is essential to salvation.

CONCLUSION Peter in Acts 3:19 issued the essential requirements for salvation: repentance and faith. This does not preclude baptism from having meaning as it relates to salvation. The notion that a ritual is a pre-requisite to conversion stands against what the context of Acts reveals as well as standing against what the rest of the New Testament states (e.g. Rom. 10:9, 13; Eph. 2:8-9). One could easily argue that both repentance and faith are works as well. This however does not square with the biblical text that that treats faith as a gift from God (Eph. 2:8). To interpret Acts 2:38 in an isolated way that ignores other passages on the subject of baptism ultimately condemns many potential followers of Jesus, who for whatever reason, have not followed through with the ritual of outward expression of their heart’s commitment. This would certainly exclude the converted thief on the cross (Luke 23:43). In the broad meta-narrative of scripture, God often reveals his utmost concern is what is in the heart of people (I Sam. 16:7). Individuals can abuse the latter statement and dismiss baptism altogether as unimportant. This however cannot be supported within the contextual framework of Acts. Baptism was an important sign to others of one’s willingness to renounce the old life and put on the new life in Christ as Paul describes in Colossians 3. Luke as a historian under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit penned the words and events of importance. Consistent with the growth of the early church in Acts was the call to be baptized as an expression and demonstration of a genuine faith in Christ. That practice and understanding continues today as one of two ordinances practiced as “signs” in the church today, the other being the Lord’s Supper.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams, Jay E., The Meaning and Mode of Baptism. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1975. Anderson,Stanley Edward. Our Baptism is Important. Texarkana, AR: Bogard Press,1960. Armstrong, Hohn H. ed. and Paul E. Engle, ed. Understanding Four Views on Baptism. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007. Barclay, Newman and Eugene A. Nida. A Translator's Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. London: United Bible Societies,1972. Bass, Ralph E., What About Baptism. Naples, FL: Nicene Press, 1999. Beasley-Murray, G.R., Baptism in the New Testament. Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1962. Camp, Ashby L.. “Reexamining the Rule of Concord”. Restoration Quarterly, 39 no 1, 1997. Available from ATLA Religion Database, Item 20071015. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx? direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001029229&site=ehost-live. Accessed May 1, 2008. Gaebelein, Frank E. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 6. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986. Gibbs, Alfred P., Christian Baptism. Kansas City, KS: Waterlick Publishers, 1966. Kent, Homer A. Jr., Jerusalem to Rome: Studies in Acts. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988. Ludeman, Gerd. Early Christianity According to the Traditions in Acts. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1987. McIntyre, Luther B. Jr, “Baptism and Forgiveness in Acts 2:38”. Biblio sacra, Ja-Mr 1996. Available from ATLA Religion Database, Item 20070815. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx? direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001008238&site=ehost-live. Accessed May 1, 2008. Montague, George T., The Holy Spirit: Growth of A Biblical Tradition. New York: Paulist Press, 1976. Perschbacher,Wesley J. ed. The New Analytical Greek Lexicon. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1990. Smith, Frank B., Christian Baptism. New Orleans, LA: Bible Institute Memorial Press, 1944. Strong, James. The Strongest Strong’s. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001.

The Holy Bible English Standard Version. Wheaton: Crossway, 2002.