To lead a life based on biblical
faith is not easy. One of the main reasons is Bible has divisions like Old
Testament, Gospels and Epistles. Gospels and Epistles are the two parts of New
Testament. When we read these three
parts, there is a chance to feel, some times, that these three are
contradicting one another; so we gradually come to confusion. Unfortunately,
some people deliberately capitalize on this situation and mislead others for their
personal gains or for fulfillment of their vested interests making many groups
based on different points.
If we take everything from Old
Testament literally, then we will have to take sword and will have to fight for
a nation for believers. So is the case of Epistles, we will have to deviate from
Gospels if we read and observe only Epistles. In nut shell, those who want to
follow Jesus should move along Old Testament and Epistles centering and fixing
well their lives in Gospels, means it is like drawing a circle with Gospels
-Jesus- as center and other books as radius. If we often deviate from the
center, then what we try to draw will not be a circle but something else. So,
if we do not center in Gospels while we trying to imbibe truth from other books
of Bible, we will not be leading a life of disciples of Jesus but something
else.
Recently some people put
forward an argument that baptizing should be in the name of Jesus only, not in
the name of trinity. They got this idea from Epistles. In Epistles apostles,
especially Peter on Pentecost day after his preaching, tell those who believed
to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. So the argument is this, in first century no
apostles has baptized anyone in the name of trinity but only in the name of
Jesus and baptizing in trinity is not right. These people draw an indefinite figure;
it has no center, other wise it is not Jesus-centered. To know more we have to
make a detail study about the fact.
First let us examine the verses they use to justify their arguments. Mark 16:16 (ESV2011) whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Here Mark does not say to baptize specifically in ‘father, son and spirit’ (neither in ‘Jesus Christ’ that is another funny thing to that, in Acts 8, I am coming after explaining something that has priority).
Acts2:38 (ESV2011):
And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of
Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of
the Holy Spirit”. In these verses also there is no mentioning of trinity. Like
this when we go through Epistles we can see that no apostles have suggested or
mentioned to get baptized in ‘father, son and Holy Spirit’.
So the
assumption is that in the first century there was no practice of baptizing in
trinity. If we take this conclusion in to account we will face another dilemma.
What is that? Look Acts chapter 8: 12” But when they believed Philip as he
preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they
were baptized, both men and women”. Then come to Verse 38 to see mentioning
of eunuch’s baptism. “38 And he commanded the chariot to
stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he
baptized him”. What we have to understand here? Here in these two above
mentioned baptisms neither the trinity nor the Christ have been mentioned, so
don’t we need to baptize any one in the name of Jesus or in the name of
trinity? Or should we understand that
according to the baptism given by Philip we have an option to form another Christian
group? What is the fact?
OK, let us consider the baptism
from its beginning. Which is the first known baptism? It is John the Baptist’s. He is the first one
who put the baptism in to practice. The baptism he administered was the baptism
of repentance. Jesus also had gone through that baptism and in the time of
Jesus this baptism was very popular. Look John 3:26 (ESV2011) ‘And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, he who was
with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness—look, he is baptizing, and
all are going to him.” But after Jesus’
ascension the baptism is not the baptism of repentance. It has a quite
different meaning and purpose. So to make clear, Jesus had to redefine the
baptism and its administration to apostles. He did that according to Matthew 28:19 (ESV2011)”Go therefore and make disciples of all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the
Holy Spirit”. From that moment onwards the administration of baptism is in the name of
Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Whether we mention it simply ‘baptism’ as in the
verses Acts 8:12 & 38 or ‘baptism in Christ’ as in the verse Acts 2:38, it doesn’t
matter, administration is in trinity.
Now about the
baptism apostles mentioned, it is the same Jesus mentioned. Why? As I mentioned
above, in those days baptism was very popular, the baptism of repentance. So in
first Church meeting on the Pentecost day Peter had to mention the baptism to
be taken for salvation, and the same time he had to mention that was not the
popularly known baptism but a baptism commanded by Jesus Christ. So he said in
short “You should repent and be baptized in Jesus Christ”. If there had not
been another well known baptism in those days, Peter would have needed only to say “repent
and be baptized” because the only baptism that existed would have been the one
Jesus advised. When time passed away
this Jesus-commanded baptism became popular, so at the time of Philip’s
preaching in Samaria he needed only to mention as baptism, not as ‘baptism in
Jesus’. Now we also say, simply ‘baptism’ not in Christ or in ‘father, son and
holy spirit’. But it is the baptism that Jesus commanded to perform. Any way,
whether it is known as simply ‘baptism’ or ‘baptism in Jesus’ it doesn’t mater
the administration of baptism is in the name of trinity as Jesus Christ
directed. Moreover, the method of baptism apostles performed has been explained
no where in the epistles to conclude that they performed a baptism which was
not in the name of ‘father, son and holy spirit’.
Now, why
should the baptism which apostles suggested be the same as that of the Jesus
commanded as long as the trinity has not been mentioned by apostles in their
epistles? To answer this question a best method is to ask another question. What
is the meaning of apostles in Bible? Sure, messengers of Jesus Christ. If these
apostles are messengers of Christ, which baptism they have to preach and practice?
The one Jesus commanded them to perform, if they preach and perform another
baptism they are not apostles of Jesus Christ and those who want to follow
Jesus needn’t obey them.
In nut shell
when we go through, when we read, apostles and prophets we have to stand firm
in Jesus –in Gospels. Other wise any one will easily be mislead and exploited
by the wolves in sheep-skins. So make sure we have a good stead in Gospels. Don’t
be a ‘loin cloth on line’ because wind may blow ‘from’ different directions and
‘to’ different directions.
