MENU

Where the world comes to study the Bible

Paul's Letters to a Troubled Church: I and II Corinthians

Related Media

Study Guide Commentary Series, New Testament, Vol. 6. See attached PDF (358 pages)

Paul's Fourth Missionary Journey: I Timothy, Titus, and II Timothy

Related Media

Study Guide Commentary Series, New Testament, Vol. 9. See attached PDF (172 pages)

The Superiority of the New Covenant: Hebrews

Related Media

 Study Guide Commentary Series, New Testament, Vol. 10. See attached PDF (157 pages)

Paul Bound, The Gospel Unbound: Letters from Prison (Colossians, Ephesians and Philemon, then later, Philippians)

Related Media

Study Guide Commentary Series, New Testament, Vol. 8. See attached PDF (243 pages)

Paul's First Letters: Galatians and I & II Thessalonians

Related Media

 Study Guide Commentary Series, New Testament, Vol. 7. See attached PDF (194 pages)

A Hope Which Exchanges Fear for Faith (Psalm 23)

Psalm 23

The LORD is my shepherd, I shall not want.
He makes me lie down in green pastures;
He leads me beside quiet waters.
He restores my soul;
He guides me in the paths of righteousness For His name's sake.

Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I fear no evil; for Thou art with me;
Thy rod and Thy staff, they comfort me.
Thou dost prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies;
Thou hast anointed my head with oil;
My cup overflows.

Surely goodness and lovingkindness will follow me all the days of my life,
And I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever.

For all of us gathered here today, the kindness and goodness of Mrs. Smith is the source of both our present grief, for we shall now be deprived of the benefit of her life. The goodness and kindness of Mrs. Smith is the source of the warm memories which we have sought to recall and refresh in her eulogy a few moments ago. All of us can both rejoice and grieve, due to the goodness of this wife, mother, and friend.

The Christian can do even more than this. Those who have personally trusted in Jesus Christ can also give thanks for the failures and the faults of those who have touched their lives, and have passed on. While we do no focus on one's failures at the time of their death, we must all admit that there are failures. The Christian can be thankful for the failures of those whose lives have touched their own because of the assurance that "God causes all things to work together for good, to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose" (Romans 8:28). Because of this, Joseph could not only forgive his brothers for selling him into slavery, he could recognize the good hand of God in this cruel act, providing him with the opportunity to return good for evil, and to spare the lives of his own family, even though they had not spared his (see Genesis 37-45; 50:20).

It is my privilege to share with you in the grief and the joy of fondly recalling the good things which God brought into our lives through Mrs. Smith. But as a preacher of the gospel, it is also my obligation to remind you that our eternal destiny is not determined by the ratio of our good deeds to our faults and failures, which the Bible more frankly calls sin.

At the beginning of the service, a very familiar passage was read--Psalm 23. This psalm is a favorite, especially when one brought fact to face with the grim reality of death. It describes, in poetic terms, the peace and confidence which David has, in the face of adversity and opposition from his enemies, and even death. There is another passage, not nearly as familiar, which informs us that David's sense of peace and security is not natural, but supernatural. Consider these words, from the pen of the unknown author of the New Testament Book of Hebrews:

Since then the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil; and might deliver those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives (Hebrews 2:14-15).

This passage puts Psalm 23 into perspective. It tells us that death normally produces fear, and not faith. It tells us that the fear of death hinders and haunts men all of their lives. It tells us that David's faith, as expressed in Psalm 23 is not natural, but supernatural.

As we come to honor the life and memory of Mary Smith, we come also to face the reality of death. We come, knowing that we, too, shall experience death. If we are honest with ourselves, some must admit that facing death today is a fearful experience, just as Hebrews informs us. Others can truly identify with David, and the peace and security which he knew and cherished. In his epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul described these two contrasting responses to death in these words:

But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve, as do the rest who have no hope (1 Thessalonians 4:13).

Paul expects Christians to view death differently than the rest. Christians, he tells us, will grieve, but they will grieve in hope. The rest have no hope. What is that hope? What is it that makes the difference?

My privilege on this occasion, is to share with you how you can grieve with hope. My joy and delight is to share with you how you can exchange the fear of death for the faith of David. In the next few moments, I want to offer to you the hope which David experienced, and which he expressed in Psalm 23. The source of this hope is to be found in the texts of both passages which you have heard today. Let me make a few comments about the hope which God offers to all those who face death, a hope which exchanges fear for faith.

David did not fear. He did not fear what his enemies would do to him. He did not fear death. His fear was replaced by faith. The basis of David's faith is expressed in Psalm 23.

  • First, David's faith rested in God.
  • Second, David's faith rested in the fact that God was His shepherd.
  • Third, David's faith replaced his fear of his enemies, and even of death.
  • Fourth, David's fear of death was gone because he was assured of God's presence.
  • Fifth, David's faith rested in the fact that God was present with him, in life, in death, and throughout all eternity.

The text which I have just read from the Book of Hebrews expands on David's words in Psalm 23, explaining how David's faith in God can free him from the fear of death. The writer to the Hebrews gives us two vitally important truths, which explain the faith of David in Psalm 23.

(1) The Shepherd became a sheep

In Psalm 23, David describes himself as a sheep, and the Lord as his Shepherd. In the Old Testament, the sins of Israel were temporarily atoned for by the sacrifice of a lamb. Isaiah the prophet spoke of the coming Savior as a Lamb, who would suffer for the sins of men:

He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth (Isaiah 53:7).

John the Baptist was a prophet, the prophet whose privilege it was to introduce Jesus of Nazareth as God's Messiah. When John saw Jesus, he cried out,

"Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29).

David could rejoice because the Lord, his Shepherd, was with Him. We can now see that the Good Shepherd became a sheep (like David).

(2) The Lamb of God died for us, and triumphed over death by His resurrection

Not only did Jesus Christ come as the Lamb of God, to die for those who would be His sheep. Jesus rose from the dead, triumphant over death. And thus, those who trust in Him need no longer fear death. Death was defeated by the Lamb who was slain, and who rose again.

Let me illustrate from the life of Abraham, how the fear of death imprisons us as slaves, and how faith in Jesus Christ frees us. Abraham is perhaps one of the most well-known Old Testament patriarchs. The Jews boasted that they were his descendants. But Abraham, like all men, feared death, and this fear enslaved him.

God had called Abraham from his homeland and brought him to the land of Israel, which He promised to give to him and his descendants. God promised to bless Abraham through his offspring. But Abraham and Sarah were unable to bear children. They were old, and over a period of time child-bearing became a human impossibility.

When a famine came to the land of Canaan, Abraham took Sarah, his wife, to Egypt. Knowing that his wife was beautiful, and fearing that the Egyptians would kill him, in order to marry his wife, Abraham instructed Sarah to lie, and to represent herself as his sister, not his wife. This made her eligible for marriage, and it seemed to put the promise of God at risk, because the promised "seed" was to come through the union of Abraham and Sarah. Now, there was the danger that Sarah would become the wife of an Egyptian, and bear him children.

God protected Sarah, and spoke to Pharaoh, who was about to make her his wife. When Pharaoh rebuked Abraham, and asked why he would deceive him about his wife, Abraham admitted that he feared death. One might hope that this painful experience in Egypt would have cured Abraham from his deception, but it did not. On at least one more occasion, Abraham and Sarah lied again. God once again spared them.

God solved the problem of Abraham's lying by dealing with his fear of death. He gave Abraham and Sarah as son, when they were "as good as dead" so far as child-bearing was concerned. Their son, Isaac, was born to them in their old age. He was truly a miracle child. After a number of years, God put Abraham's faith to its greatest test. He instructed him to sacrifice his son, Isaac, to put him to death. It was only a test, but Abraham did not know it. From the New Testament, we know why Abraham was willing to obey God, and to put his son to death. He had come to trust in God as the One who was able to raise the dead. God had given them a son, when they were as good as dead. Now, if he must put this son to death, God would raise him. This was Abraham's faith, and thus it overcome his fear of death.

This is the faith of which David is writing, in Psalm 23. This is the good news of the gospel, of which the writer to the Hebrews is speaking. Man's fear of death is well-rounded. Death is the penalty for sin, and we are all sinners, worthy of death. But the Good Shepherd became a sheep, so to speak. He took on human flesh and lived among men. The Lord Jesus Christ then died for our sins, and suffered the penalty, our penalty, of death. God raised Him from the dead. All those who trust in Him lose their fear of death and find the faith, peace, and hope of which David writes.

Exchanging the fear of death for faith in Jesus Christ is a personal decision. David does not speak of the Lord as "our Shepherd," but as "my Shepherd." Have you come to grips with the reality of death as God's penalty for sin? Have you personally received Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God and as your Good Shepherd? If so, you will no longer be enslaved by the fear of death. The words of David in Psalm 23 no longer are his expression of faith, but yours as well.

It is with this faith that we can grieve today, but we will grieve with hope, if the Lord is our Shepherd, because He became the Lamb of God in our place. May this hope be yours in this hour of grief.

Related Topics: Funerals, Faith

Believer’s Baptism

Related Media

There are few subjects more controversial, more divisive or more abused in Christendom today than the doctrine of baptism.

By many Christians baptism is relegated to a place of virtual insignificance. By others it is totally ignored as a nonessential.

By still others it is regarded as the entrance into church membership. Some esteem it to be an indispensable condition for one’s salvation.

But what do the scriptures teach?

The first thing which can be assuredly asserted from the Word of God is that it is a command of the Lord. This is

The Basis For Baptism

To His small band of faithful followers the resurrected Christ, just prior to His ascension, said:

All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go, Therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.

Matt. 28:18-20

Here is a solemn responsibility for the apostles, and, after them, the Bible teachers and elders of the church. It is their responsibility to baptize those who have become followers of Jesus Christ. The “Great Commission” is not to evangelize. It is to “make disciples.” How is this done? The process begins with evangelism which leads to conversion. Those converted are to be baptized and indoctrinated. The commission requires the teaching of baptism to the new converts and suggests that discipling is not complete without baptism. The practice of baptizing others, then, is based directly on the command of our Lord.

Here is an ordinance for the Christian church. If an ordinance is simply a ritual or a rite prescribed by our Lord, practiced in the early church, and expounded by the apostles in the epistles of the New Testament, then baptism is certainly an ordinance. It was given by our Lord (Matt. 28:18-20) It was widely practiced in the early church (Acts 2:41; 8:36-39; 9:18; 10:47; 16:33; 18:8; 19:5). It was expounded by the apostles in the epistles (Rom. 6:1-6; 1 Pet. 3:18; Heb. 6:1). The ordinance of baptism, then, is based directly on this command of the Lord.

Here is an obligation for everyone who becomes a disciple of Jesus Christ. It is very difficult to avoid the importance of baptism in the New Testament. If you are concerned about obeying the Lord, if you are concerned about following the New Testament, if you are concerned with living in fellowship with the Lord and pleasing Him, you will be concerned about baptism. It is a command of the Lord.

Who would disagree with F. B. Meyer who once said that the Word of God is not given to be admired for its beauty or studied for its detail; it is given to be obeyed? There is no blessing in hearing and knowing it, apart from doing it. It was our Lord Himself who said,

“If you love Me, you will keep my commandments.”

John 14:15

The apostle boldly states

The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His Word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him.

1 John 2:4-5

But why? Many reasons for baptism have been suggested and exist today. Let us turn to the single and final authority, the Word of God, to discover

The Purpose Of Baptism

Is It The Door To Church Membership?

The answer of the New Testament seems to be “No.” According to Acts 2:47 it is personal salvation which places one in the church.

“And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved.”

Membership in the universal church is the immediate possession of every individual upon conversion. This is the only aspect of church membership that is ever entertained in the New Testament. That is, one is a member of the local church by virtue of his membership in the universal church. Was the Ethiopian Eunuch joining a church when he was baptized? Surely not. He was by the side of the desert road south of Jerusalem on his way home to Ethiopia (Acts 8). Was the Philippian jailer joining a church when he was baptized? Hardly. He was at his home and it was shortly after midnight (Acts 16). In the New Testament, baptism is always associated with salvation and never with church membership. It was no door into the local church.

Is It The Washing Away Of Sins?

There are two verses which seem to suggest this. Recounting the words of Ananias at the time of his conversion, the apostle Paul says:

And now why do you delay? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.

Acts 22:16

Whatever else this verse teaches, it says that the washing away of one’s sins is by calling on the name of the Lord - not by baptism. In the Greek text, “arise” is a participle and “be baptized” is an imperative. There is no “and” between “arise” and “be baptized. “Literally it is “arising - be baptized.” Then comes the second imperative, “wash away your sins” followed by the participle “calling.” The pattern in the original text then is participle (“arising”), imperative (“be baptized”), imperative (“wash away”) and a participle (“calling”). This pattern clearly associates the first imperative with the first participle (“Arising, be baptized”) and the second imperative with the second participle (“wash away your sins” by means of “calling on His name”). There is no indication in this text that baptism washes away sin. Cleansing from sin is associated with calling on the Lord’s name. Nor would one who reads the entire New Testament expect baptism to be associated with the washing away of sin. The uniform testimony of scripture is that only the blood of Christ can wash away sin.

“The blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.”

1 John 1:7b

Another verse often used to teach that baptism does wash away our sins and saves us, actually teaches just the opposite.

And corresponding to that (Noah and his family saved through the flood in the ark), 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 Pet. 3:21

Whatever else this verse teaches, it clearly says baptism is “not the removal of dirt from the flesh.” It does not wash away sins.

The word which introduces this verse, translated “and corresponding to that,” indicates that what Peter is now going to say in verse 21 is somehow parallel to what he has said in verse 20. In that verse he gave an illustration of salvation. In this verse he gives a second illustration of salvation. Here are two figures of salvation.

Peter makes a typical comparison between Noah’s ark in the flood and water baptism. As the waters of divine judgment fell upon the ark, so all the waves and billows of God’s wrath against sin fell upon Christ on the Cross. Those in the ark were delivered through the judgment and to a new world and life. Those who are “in Christ” through a personal faith in Him are also delivered from judgment and raised to a new life. The incident of Genesis 6-9 is a graphic illustration of our salvation. Peter says Christian baptism is also an illustration of our salvation. It is a figure of death and resurrection (c.f. Rom. 6:1-6). Through union with Christ by personal faith a believer has been raised up to a new life. This is illustrated in baptism as it was in the flood. There is no indication in this scripture or any other that baptism washes away sin.

Is It A Condition For Salvation?

On the radio just last week a “Bible teacher” said, “Baptism gains salvation, endurance gains heaven.” Is this true to scripture?

There are certainly several verses which seem to suggest that one must be baptized in order to be saved. The formula becomes:

Believe in Jesus Christ + Be Baptized = Salvation.

The key proof text for such a formula comes from the closing verses of Mark’s gospel.

And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.”

Mark 16:15-16

But two things should be kept in mind here.

The authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 is questionable. Some of the oldest and best Greek manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) omit these verses. One who recognizes this will be cautious in using any verse in this section as a proof text.

However, it is even more important to observe that the only pronouncement of condemnation at the end of the verse is upon those who do not believe. What about the one who does believe and is not baptized? Is he condemned? Apparently not. It is often argued that one would not be baptized if he had not believed so the Lord considers only the first condition “believe” in his condemnation clause. He assumes that if one did not believe, he naturally would not be baptized. This, however, is to miss the point. If baptism is equally essential for salvation He must also say, “Even he who has believed but has not been baptized shall be also condemned.” He does not say this! He says only that the person who doesn’t believe is condemned. This is in harmony with the many texts of the New Testament which place faith as the sole human requirement for salvation. For example:

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

John 3:36

When our Lord said, “He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved” He was not including baptism as a condition. The last clause makes this clear. Rather He was indicating that baptism was the normal outward confession that was expected to accompany true faith in Christ.

Another favorite text for those who contend that baptism is essential for salvation comes from the address of Peter on the day of Pentecost.

And Peter said to them,

Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 2:38

But is Peter saying baptism is a prerequisite? Listen to the same Peter on another occasion. This time he is speaking to Cornelius about Jesus Christ and says:

Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him has received forgiveness of sins.

Acts 10:43

Here he mentions only believing. There is no reference to baptism. As a matter of fact, please observe that Cornelius and those with him believed, received the Holy Spirit (v. 45), and spoke in tongues (v. 46), before they were baptized (v. 48).

It is clear from Peter’s statement in Acts 10:43 and the subsequent experience of those Gentiles that believing is the condition for salvation. Believing is the key thing in Acts 2:38. In the matter of salvation baptism is a non-essential although it is expected to accompany it. Dr. S. L. Johnson says it is like getting your hat to get into your car to go downtown. Getting your hat is a non-essential to going downtown. You may always get your hat when you are going downtown but the essential thing is getting into your car! The essential for salvation is faith. Baptism is often associated with believing in the New Testament - not as an essential for salvation but as the normal confession of it. The New Testament does not entertain the idea of an unbaptized believer.

There remains one further verse to be answered if, indeed, baptism is not a condition for salvation. To Nicodemus Jesus answered,

Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

John 3:5

Whatever else the “water” here may suggest, it does not and cannot speak of Christian baptism. It was not until after the resurrection of our Lord that Christian baptism was instituted. That event was still three years in the future! If Christian baptism was meant by our Lord it would have been meaningless to Nicodemus who, by the way, became a believer before Christian baptism was ever instituted (John 19:39).

Again, if Christian baptism were meant by our Lord here as a condition for salvation, it is very strange that this is the only time in all John’s gospel where it is so stated as a requirement. This is truly remarkable in view of the repeated emphasis on believing as the single condition for salvation (1:12, 3:36, 5:24, etc.). Further, it would be surprising to see baptism in this verse when there is a complete detachment in John’s gospel from the ordinance of Christian baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Neither is even mentioned in this fourth gospel.

Probably our Lord is referring to John’s baptism, which was a baptism of repentance. If so, He is simply telling Nicodemus that the new birth, the spiritual birth into the kingdom of God, is the work of God the Holy Spirit in those who repent.

Recently I was having dinner in a restaurant with a couple who believed baptism was essential for salvation. Curious. I posed a question. “What if someone believed in Jesus Christ personally as their Savior here in this restaurant but was killed in an automobile accident driving to work or even to their church to be baptized? Would he be saved?” To my surprise and delight they both agreed he would be saved because he had had no opportunity to be baptized. When the point was pressed it became clear to them. Baptism is not essential for salvation.

The scriptures declare:

For by GRACE you have been saved through FAITH; and that not of yourselves, it is the GIFT of God; NOT as a result of WORKS, that no one should boast.

Eph. 2:8-9

Again:

Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved, you and your household.

Acts 16:30-31

One of the most decisive texts on this question comes from the pen of Paul who said.

“For Christ did not send me to baptize. but to preach the gospel.”

1 Cor. 1:17a

Here the apostle clearly distinguishes between baptism and the gospel! If baptism were essential for salvation no such distinction could ever be made. Although Paul did occasionally baptize persons (v. 14), he generally left this to others while he proclaimed the message of the gospel.

What is the purpose of baptism then? If it is not an entrance to church membership, if it is not a means of washing away sins, if it is not essential for salvation, what is it?

It Is A Confession Of Identification With Christ

Identification is the secondary meaning of the Greek verb which was transliterated into English “baptize.” This is clear from 1 Corinthians 10:2 where we read that “all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and the sea.” The events of the Exodus separated the children of Israel from Pharaoh and Egypt unto Moses. They were identified with him, under his leadership.

Identification is the primary meaning of all other forms of baptism in New Testament times. When a proselyte was baptized he was identifying himself with Judaism. In the baptism of John the Baptist an Israelite was identifying himself with John and the repentant remnant who were awaiting the coming of the Messiah. When our Lord was baptized He was identifying Himself with the believing remnant in one sense, with guilty sinners in another sense, and the work of Calvary and redemption in still another sense. When a believer is baptized by the Holy Spirit he is so identified with Christ that he is “in Christ” (Rom. 6:1-6). He is also so identified with the Body of Christ, His Church, that he becomes a member of His Church, a part of His body (1 Cor. 12:13). So CHRISTIAN BAPTISM is an identification. He is identifying himself publicly with Jesus Christ. He is declaring his personal faith in Him. He is acknowledging that he is depending upon Jesus Christ and His death alone for his salvation. He is saying, “I am a believer. I belong to Jesus Christ. I am on His side.” In the days of the early church they had no decision cards, no altar calls, no raising of hands. It was by baptism that one identified himself with Christ as a Christian.

Identification is the basic truth expounded in Romans 6. Here the apostle writes:

Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection.

Rom. 6:3-5

It is the baptism by the Holy Spirit that is primarily in view here. By the work of the Holy Spirit the believer is united with Christ. He is identified with Him in His death. This brings to an end his old life positionally. His history as a child of Adam ends. “Old things are passed away.” The identification continues to His burial and resurrection. This brings him into a new life. His history as a child of God begins. “Behold, all things are become new.”

This is the nature of the identification he is confessing publicly when the believer is baptized in Christian baptism. He is not only declaring his personal faith in Jesus Christ but is also acknowledging that the old Adam nature with its fleshly lusts has been crucified and that he has been raised to live a new life to the glory of God. He is indicating that it is his desire and intention with the enabling power of the Holy Spirit to walk in newness of life.

Some time ago a young Jewish lawyer in Hartford, Connecticut was converted to Christ in a Missionary Alliance Church. His parents did nothing. Later he married a Gentile Protestant girl. Still his parents did nothing. But then he was baptized by Christian baptism. Immediately his parents disowned him and held a public funeral for their son. It was in his baptism that he had identified himself with Jesus Christ. That is its purpose.

Sometimes it triggers persecution from the enemies of Christ. Often it serves as a springboard into a life of obedience and service. It is a giant step forward. To be sure, it yields a good conscience before the Lord - it is an act of obedience to His command. But every other product is overshadowed by the pleasure such a confession must bring to the heart of our Lord.

One of the most controversial of all the questions on baptism is in regard to the procedure. Should it be by sprinkling, by pouring or by immersion? Again, let us turn to our only authority to discover

The Mode Of Baptism

We believe the New Testament is clear. Every indication is that baptism was administered in the early church by immersion.

The primary meaning of the Greek verb BAPTIZO is “to immerse” or “to dip” (Arndt and Gingrich). In non-Christian literature it also meant “plunge, sink, drench, overwhelm, etc.” The Greeks used the verb for the dyeing of a garment in a pot. In secular literature it was used to describe a boat which had been wrecked by being submerged. Without translating it this verb was transliterated in the authorized version “baptize”. The reason is transparent. Sprinkling was already in use in Britain and widely accepted. To translate the verb “immerse” would have declared the truth but contradicted the popular practice of the Church of England. The transliteration “baptize” avoided this contradiction.

The renowned Jewish scholar Alfred Edersheim describes in detail the baptism of a proselyte to Judaism. It was a baptism by immersion. This was the mode of baptism the early Church knew. What could be more normal than for them to take this mode over into Christianity? The baptism administered by John the Baptist was also by immersion (Matt. 3:16; John 3:23). The practice of the day would suggest baptism by immersion.

The normal sense of the Greek prepositions would certainly indicate immersion also.

And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down INTO (EIS) the water, Philip as well as the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they came OUT OF (EK) the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away.

Acts 8:38, 39

A fourth argument for immersion is that it best illustrates certain aspects of the meaning of baptism. A number of years ago a ranch hand engaged in a friendly dispute with his foreman over the mode of baptism. The ranch hand believed in immersion, the foreman thought sprinkling was surely sufficient. Then one day a young horse died on the range. The hand was given the responsibility to bury it in a secluded corner of the ranch. Several days later the foreman found it with several handfuls of earth sprinkled generously over the carcass! The foreman saw the point. Sprinkling is no burial. Christian baptism illustrates our identification with Christ in His death and burial (Rom. 6:4). How significant immersion becomes when we recognize the great truth it illustrates.

Few would deny that the practice of the early Church was immersion. Even Calvin admits this but then proceeds to say we are free to choose the mode today. But are we? Why not follow the practice of the New Testament and the early Church? The practice of the apostles was their precept and their theology cannot be set aside lightly. We have no right to modify or dispense with the commands of Christ.

Some years ago the speaker on a nationwide Christian radio broadcast defended sprinkling as the mode of baptism by referring to the several occurrences of the word “sprinkled” in the epistle to the Hebrews (9:13, 19,21; 10:22; 11:28; 12:24). To my amazement I discovered that not one of these verses was even remotely connected with baptism! In every case but one the reference is to the sprinkling of blood. Was he saying that baptism by sprinkling is the sprinkling or application of the blood of Christ to the one being baptized? This, of course, is baptismal regeneration! This is never the purpose of baptism in the New Testament. Sprinkling as a mode did not appear until the second century.

It is true that the Didache or The Teaching of the Lord through the Twelve Apostles to the Gentiles offered pouring as an optional mode of baptism. It must be remembered that many join Dr. Armitage Robinson in believing the Didache was a later production not representing the life and teaching of the early Church as it really was (Short History of the Christian Church., C. P. S. Clarke, Longmans 1961, p. 24). It must also be noted that the Didache allowed for pouring only if there was a short supply of water. It taught immersion as the normal mode. Clinical baptisms, or baptisms of dying persons in bed by pouring water on them, did not occur until the third century. Those who advocate pouring as the mode, suggest that baptism illustrates the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the individual. This is a lovely thought but it is without the sanction of scripture.

Some will object to baptism by immersion. But their objections can be answered. If it is physically impractical or dangerous, surely it is not the responsibility of a believer to do it. With proper care it need not be indecent. For some it will be inconvenient. To them we ask: Is it our convenience we are to consider with regard to obeying our Lord?

The last question which remains to be answered is the most critical of all. To whom should it be administered? Once again, what saith the scriptures?

The Candidate For Baptism

In the book of Acts there are recorded eight specific cases of baptism. Observe carefully the candidates. What are the qualifications for baptism?

So then, those who had RECEIVED HIS WORD were baptized; and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

Acts 2:41

But when they BELIEVED Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike.

Acts 8:12

And as they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?” (And Philip said, “If you BELIEVE with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I BELIEVE that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”) And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch; and he baptized him.

Acts 8:36-38

Although it is true that verse 37 in the above text is omitted by the earlier manuscripts, the insertion of these words in later manuscripts indicate what was later considered by the church to qualify one for baptism.

And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he arose and was baptized.

Acts 9:18

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. And all the circumcised believers who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon the Gentiles also. For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. They asked him to stay on for a few days.

Acts 10:44-48

And after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “BELIEVE in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved, you and your household.” And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house. And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household. And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having BELIEVED in God with his whole household.

Acts 16:30-34

And Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, BELIEVED in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were BELIEVING and being baptized.

Acts 18:8

And it came about that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper country came to Ephesus, and found some disciples, and he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said to him, “No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” And they said, “Into John’s baptism.” And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to BELIEVE in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” And when they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 19:1-5

The testimony of the New Testament is unanimous. Christian baptism is believer’s baptism. Those who were baptized were believers in Jesus Christ. They had been born again by the regenerating work of God the Holy Spirit in conjunction with their personal faith in Him as the Son of God and sacrifice for their sin.

Should There Be An Interval Between Conversion And Baptism?

To many of us today one of the most remarkable features of these recorded baptisms is that they were baptized immediately upon conversion. This seemed to be the common practice of the early church. Today there is often a lapse of months and years between conversion and baptism.

Sometimes this is the result of cowardice and shame. There is an unwillingness to confess openly one’s identification with Christ. What a disappointment to the Lord! One for whom He died, one whom He has redeemed from destruction, one with whom He will some day share His throne - that one is unwilling to acknowledge publicly that he belongs to the Lord!

Often the long interval is the product of a failure to be confronted by teaching on the doctrine of baptism. As it is the first of all outward duties of a Christian it ought to be taught repeatedly and emphatically in our churches and to the new converts.

There are times, however, when an interval between regeneration and baptism seems expedient. Today the possibility of a mere profession of salvation without a genuine work of the Holy Spirit is ever present. There is no “price to pay” for a new Christian in a land where Christianity is accepted. Often there is much to gain by such a profession. In the first century it was not so. Of course, there was still the danger of mere profession, but the certain social and religious ostracism lessened the danger considerably. In our society it may be sometimes wise to allow (not require) a period of time to elapse during which the reality of conversion may be demonstrated by fruit and perseverance.

But there is another point to consider. Against the background of John’s baptism and proselyte baptism the new converts could be expected to understand the primary significance of Christian baptism. The concept of identification was common to them all. Such understanding can be expected of no one today. For this reason it may be expedient to allow for an interval of time before baptism so the new convert can be instructed in the doctrinal and practical significance of the ordinance.

What About Our Christian Children?

Often I am asked about our children. How old should a Christian child be before he is baptized? Who ought to take the initiative toward his baptism, the child or the parent? After much contemplation and experience I have developed several personal convictions. If it is to be a significant and meaningful act the child must understand the biblical teaching on the subject. It would be a disservice to him, an abuse of the ordinance and an affront to the Lord to baptize him before he understands its basic significance. He will spend the rest of his Christian life growing to understand its full significance, but the basic meaning ought to be comprehended before he is baptized.

Also, if it is to be a public expression of his identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection, there ought to be some evidence of genuine conversion in his life. False professions are too commonplace among children with Christian parents. Are there evidences of spiritual life? Who better can observe this than the Christian parents.

The decision to be baptized surely must be the decision of the child in response to the Bible teaching of his parents and the inner prompting of the Holy Spirit. A good friend of mine has said. “The best teacher a child will ever have is his father.” As the God-ordained head of the house, the father bears the primary responsibility to teach his children. In conjunction with teaching them the gospel he will teach the doctrine of baptism. He may do it formally or informally, as a family or individually, but he will do it. One of the most effective ways I have found is to discuss the subject together as a family over supper during the week prior to a baptismal service. Through the week he may cover five questions: Who (the candidates)? Why (the meaning)? When (the time)? How (the mode)? What (the results)? One question a night is sufficient. With review quizzes, probing questions, and personal experiences this can be a very exciting time and will make the Sunday baptism very meaningful to your children. As a godly parent so teaches his child, he will earnestly pray for God the Holy Spirit to stir the heart of his child to respond. Then baptism will be an act of obedience to the Lord and His Word. You have helped him develop a pattern of responding to the Word under the influence of the Holy Spirit. This pattern will mould his life!

What About Our Infant Children

If Christian baptism is believer’s baptism there is no place for the baptism of infants.

In his Systematic Theology, A. H. Strong has enumerated several reasons which are worth considering for rejecting the baptism of children before they are believers.

There is no biblical basis for such a practice. There is not one clear example of it anywhere in the New Testament. Admittedly, the household was baptized along with the Philippian jailer (Acts 16:33). But we are distinctly told in the following verse that he believed “in God with all his house.” This seems to indicate they all became believers. I have had the privilege of baptizing several households. In each case, however, every member had become a believer. Besides the absence of any clear example of infant baptism there is the absence of any clear command in the New Testament to justify it. Matthew 19:14 does not mention baptism nor does it refer to it. Christian baptism had not yet been instituted! First Corinthians 7:14 surely does not teach it either. If baptism is here in relation to the children. then one must also say the unbelieving husband is also saved! Who would admit this? On the baptism of infants the scriptures are silent. There is neither precept or precedent in the New Testament for such a practice.

Furthermore, the notion of infant baptism is a contradiction to the scriptures. What is its purpose? To some it is the removal of original sin. This is a contradiction of 1 John 1:7. It is the blood of Christ which cleanses from sin. To others it is the way into the church. This is a contradiction of 1 John 5:11-13. The church is composed of Christians, men who have believed in Jesus Christ and possess eternal life. Even Martin Luther saw the conflict here. To our amazement he taught justification by faith while he held to infant baptism. He went on to say that the infant was justified by faith at its baptism! To still others it is a dedication of a child to the Lord. Every parent is to be commended for such a desire, but we must never confuse dedication and baptism.

According to A. H. Strong, the testimony of history is that infant baptism did not rise until the mid-second century and early part of the third century in the midst of a sacramental conception of Christianity. As a result we have already observed that many of the arguments for it are virtually the arguments for baptismal regeneration.

Perhaps the most difficult point to answer is the relationship between circumcision and infant baptism.

Advocates of infant baptism maintain it has superceded circumcision. This is only an assumption. It is true of course that both are signs. But we must not forget that while circumcision was the sign of the Abrahamic Covenant, the cup of the Lord’s Supper (not baptism) is the sign of the New Covenant. If baptism superceded circumcision, why did Paul have Timothy circumcised? The only text that places them together is Colossians 2:10-12:

And in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority; and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

Col. 2:10-12

There is no indication here that baptism has taken the place of circumcision. It only suggests that what circumcision was physically - a cutting off of the flesh, baptism illustrates spiritually - a putting off of the flesh. This verse is not even speaking of physical circumcision.

We are inclined to agree with the Paulicians of the fourth century who opposed infant baptism saying it was Satan’s number one back door for getting pagans into the church.

What About Rebaptism?

Recently a lady expressed to the elders of the Chapel her desire for baptism. She then proceeded to explain her reason for the desire. She had been baptized many years ago as a believer but only recently had she come to understand the significance of it. Now she wished to be re-baptized.

On many occasions I have been asked to re-baptize believers who had been restored from a life of sin and disobedience. They thought they ought to be re-baptized.

There is no indication in the scriptures that believers were ever re-baptized. That is, the instructions and examples of the New Testament indicate that believer’s baptism is a single episode in a Christian’s life. Who of us fully understood the significance of baptism when we were baptized? If we have been growing in grace we surely understand much more today than we did then. Shall we be re-baptized? Surely not. Shall we who have been restored from backsliding be re-baptized? The way of restoration is plainly presented in 1 John 1:9. There is no mention of re-baptism. Every indication from the scriptures is that believer’s baptism was not a rite to be repeated. As baptism emphasizes our entrance into the Christian life it is to be done only once.

However, the New Testament does teach rebaptism! A remarkable incident occurred in Ephesus. According to Acts 19:1-5 some who had previously been baptized into John’s baptism, when they heard of the coming Christ, believed and “they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus” (v. 5). This would certainly suggest that a person who has been baptized by any form of baptism other than believer’s baptism ought to be re-baptized as a believer after he is converted.

In the strictest sense, of course, this is not re-baptism because the first “baptism” (infant baptism or baptism as an unbeliever) was not a legitimate or biblical baptism at all.

The Way Of Joy

The last glimpse we have of the Ethiopian eunuch after he was baptized is that “he went on his way rejoicing” (Acts 8:39). This indeed is the experience of those who, as true believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, intelligently obey His command to be baptized.

Are you a true believer in Him? If so, have you obeyed His Word in this matter? Remember: “if you love me, keep my commandments.” Your obedience will not only bring great pleasure to the heart of your Lord but it will also be a giant step forward in the pathway of genuine Christian happiness.

How soon that joy fades for many. Although the reason escapes them, it is only too apparent to others. Baptism is a matter of the heart as well as an outward profession. The truly baptized believer is the one whose life shows that the flesh, the old nature, has been put in the place of death. This is accomplished by the enablement of the Holy Spirit alone, and results in the joy of the Lord.

“He went on his way rejoicing.”

It was not only because he had obeyed the Lord and publicly identified himself with His Lord. It was also because he had come to the end of a long search.

God had begun to work in his heart. There came a desire to know God in a personal way. The sense of guilt had grown. There was a deep longing for peace of conscience and peace with God. In the religions of Ethiopia he had found no answers. Perhaps it was this that brought him to Jerusalem. He had found no answer there either. There was religion with its rituals. But it was empty. There was nothing to bring peace and forgiveness and salvation.

Still searching, he turned homeward. Then it happened. God directed him to a prophetic word in holy scripture penned hundreds of years earlier but fulfilled just months ago.

“He was led as a sheep to slaughter; And as a Lamb before its shearer is silent, So He does not open His mouth. In humiliation His judgment was taken away; Who shall relate His generation? For His life is removed from the earth.” And the eunuch answered Philip and said, “Please tell me, of whom does the prophet say this? Of himself, or of someone else?” And Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.

Acts 8:32-35

Here is the end of long and earnest search. God brought to him the message of Jesus and His love. The eunuch learned that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, who had come to earth to die. The inquirer was told that the death of Jesus Christ was a substitutionary death. He bore the penalty for our sins. His death satisfied the righteous demands of God. He paid for our sin. The earnest searcher also learned that on the basis of the death of Christ for his sins God offered forgiveness and salvation to all men. In a simple but significant step of faith the traveler believed that Jesus was indeed the very Son of God who had died for him and he began at that moment to trust in Him and His atoning death for the forgiveness of his sin and God’s salvation.

The long search had ended. Little did he realize that in reality all the while it was the Lord who had been seeking him. Now the Shepherd had found His lost sheep. Through trusting Jesus for his salvation the eunuch entered into peace with God. God became his heavenly Father and he became a child of God. Sin was forgiven and salvation was possessed. Little wonder “he went on his way rejoicing.”

If you have a deep longing, a desire to know God personally as your heavenly Father, if you have a deep sense of guilt before God because of your sin, if you are earnestly seeking for forgiveness, peace and salvation. I assure you, my friend, it is because the Lord is seeking you. This could be the end of a long and diligent search. It could be the first step toward going on your way rejoicing. What must you do? In quiet prayer simply confess to Him you are a sinner. Thank Him for dying in your place, bearing the punishment you deserved. Trust Him to be your Savior. Trust His death to be sufficient payment for all your sin. Trust His Word which then assures you eternal life.

And the witness is this. that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God. in order that you may know that you have eternal life.

1 John 5:11-12

Posted with written permission of the author, William J. McRae. Originally published as a "Believer's Bible Booklet", Copyright 1973, 2000 Believers Chapel. Believers Chapel, 6430 Churchill Way, Dallas, Texas.

Related Topics: Ecclesiology (The Church), Basics for Christians, Discipleship, Christian Education, Baptism, Pastors

Il Battesimo del Credente

Nella Cristianesimo si trovano pochi argomenti tra i più controversi, causa di divisione o tra i più esagerati quanto quelli della dottrina del battesimo.

Per molti cristiani il battesimo è considerato oggettivamente qualcosa di insignificante. Per altri è completamente ignorato come un qualcosa di non essenziale. Per altri ancora è visto come l’ingresso per fare parte della chiesa. Alcuni lo considerano come una condizione indispensabile per la propria salvezza.

Ma cosa insegnano le Scritture?

La prima cosa che si può per certo affermare dalla Parola di Dio è che questo è un comando del Signore. Questo è

La Base del Battesimo

Il Cristo risorto, al suo piccolo gruppo di fedeli che lo seguivano, poco prima della Sua ascensione, disse:

Ogni potestà mi è stata data in cielo e sulla terra. Andate dunque, e fate discepoli di tutti i popoli, battezzandoli nel nome del Padre e del Figlio e dello Spirito Santo, insegnando loro di osservare tutte le cose che io vi ho comandato. Or ecco, io sono con voi tutti i giorni, fino alla fine dell’età presente.

Matteo 28:18-20

Qui ritroviamo un’importante responsabilità per gli apostoli e (dopo di loro) per gli insegnanti della Bibbia e per gli Anziani della Chiesa. E’ loro responsabilità battezzare coloro che sono diventati seguaci di Cristo. Il “Grande Mandato” non lo si deve predicare: si devono “fare dei Discepoli”. Come lo si fa? Il processo inizia con l’evangelizzazione che porta alla conversione. Quelli che sono convertiti devono essere battezzati e indottrinati. Il mandato richiede l’insegnamento del battesimo ai nuovi convertiti e implica che il discepolato non sia completo senza il battesimo. La pratica del battezzare altri, dunque, si basa direttamente dal comando del nostro Signore.

Qui ritroviamo un comando per le Chiese. Se un comando è solamente un rito o un rituale prescritto dal nostro Signore, praticato nella chiesa delle origini ed è esposto dagli apostoli nelle epistole del Nuovo Testamento, allora il battesimo è per certo un comando. E’ stato dato dal nostro Signore (Matteo 28:18-20). E’ stato largamente usato nella Chiesa dei primi tempi (Atti 2:41; 8:36-39; 9:18; 10:47; 16:33; 18:8; 19:5). E’ stato esposto dagli apostoli nelle epistole (Rom. 6:1-6; 1 Pet. 3:18; Heb. 6:2). Il comando del battesimo, dunque, si basa direttamente sul comando del Signore.

Qui c’è un obbligo per chi diventa discepolo di Gesù Cristo. E’ molto difficile evitare l’importanza del battesimo nel Nuovo Testamento. Se ti preoccupi di seguire il Nuovo Testamento, di vivere in comunione col Signore e vuoi piacergli, ti preoccuperai del battesimo. E’ un comando del Signore.

Chi non è d’accordo con F. B. Meyer che una volta disse che la Parola di Dio non è data per essere ammirata dalla sua bellezza o studiata per i suoi dettagli ma è stata data per essere ubbidita? Non c’è benedizione nell’ascoltarla o conoscerla se non la si pratica.

E’ stato il nostro Signore che ha detto:

“Se mi amate, osservate i miei comandamenti.”

Giovanni 14:15

L’Apostolo afferma apertamente:

Chi dice: «Io l’ho conosciuto», e non osserva i suoi comandamenti, è bugiardo e la verità non è in lui. Ma chi osserva la sua parola, l’amore di Dio in lui è perfetto. Da questo conosciamo che siamo in lui.

1 Giovanni 2:4-5

Perché? Esistono molti motivi e suggerimenti riguardo al battesimo oggi. Andiamo all’unica e suprema autorità , la Parola di Dio, per scoprire

Lo Scopo del Battesimo

Il Battesimo è il mezzo per appartenere alla Chiesa?

La risposta che da il Nuovo Testamento sembra sia “no”. Secondo Atti 2:47 è la salvezza personale che colloca la persona in chiesa.

“E il Signore aggiungeva alla chiesa ogni giorno coloro che erano salvati.” (Diodati)

L’appartenenza alla Chiesa universale è qualcosa di immediato che riguarda qualsiasi persona che si converte. Questo è l’unico aspetto dell’appartenenza alla Chiesa che sia mai stato fatto nel Nuovo Testamento. Ciò vuol dire che una persona è membro della chiesa locale grazie alla sua appartenenza alla chiesa universale. L’Eunuco etiope era in cerca di una chiesa quando è stato battezzato? No di certo. Stava tornando a casa sua in Etiopia lungo la strada del deserto (Atti 8). Il Carceriere di Filippi faceva parte di una chiesa quando fu battezzato? Difficile da dire. Era a casa sua ed era circa mezzanotte. (Atti 16). Nel Nuovo Testamento, il battesimo è sempre associato alla salvezza e mai con l’appartenenza alla Chiesa. Il Battesimo non era il mezzo per appartenere ad una chiesa.

Il Battesimo purifica dai peccati?

Ci sono due versi che sembrano suggerire ciò. Riferendoci alle parole di Anania al tempo della sua conversione, l’Apostolo Paolo dice:

“Ed ora che aspetti? Alzati e sii battezzato e lavato dai tuoi peccati, invocando il nome del Signore”.

(Atti 22:16 Nuova Diodati).

Qualsiasi cosa insegni questo passo, ci sta dicendo che la purificazione dei propri peccati è invocando il nome del Signore, non per il battesimo. Nella versione Greca il termine “alzati” è un participio, mentre il termine “battezzato” è un imperativo. Non c’è scritto “e” tra “alzati” e “sii battezzato”. Letteralmente sarebbe “Alzandoti, sii battezzato”. Poi c’è il secondo imperativo “sii lavato dai tuoi peccati” seguito dal participio “invocando”. Lo schema nel testo originale, dunque, è participio (“alzandoti”), imperativo (“sii battezzato”), imperativo (“lavati”) e participio (“invocando”). Questo schema chiaramente associa il primo imperativo con il primo participio (“Alzandoti, sii battezzato”) e il secondo imperativo col secondo participio (“lavati dei tuoi peccati” unito ad “invocando il nome del Signore”). Non c’è nessuna indicazione in questo testo in cui il battesimo ci purifichi dal peccato. Neanche se si leggesse l’interno Nuovo Testamento ci si aspetterebbe che il battesimo fosse associato alla purificazione dal peccato. La testimonianza unisona della Scrittura è che solo il sangue di Cristo purifica dal peccato.

“. . e il sangue di Gesù, suo Figliuolo, ci purifica da ogni peccato” (Riveduta)

1 Giovanni 1:7b

Un altro verso spesso usato per insegnare che il battesimo purifica i nostri peccati e ci salva, in realtà insegna proprio il contrario.

“Alla qual figura [Noè e la sua Famiglia salvati attraverso il diluvio nell’Arca] corrisponde il battesimo (non il nettamento delle sozzure della carne ma la richiesta di una buona coscienza fatta a Dio), il quale ora salva anche voi, mediante la risurrezione di Gesù Cristo.”

1 Pietro 3:21

Qualsiasi cosa insegni questo verso, dice chiaramente che il battesimo non è il nettamento delle sozzure della carne: non purifica dai peccati.

La Parola che introduce questo verso, tradotto con “alla qual figura corrisponde,” indica che quello che Pietro dice al verso 21 è in qualche modo parallelo a quello che dice nel verso 20. In quel verso Pietro ha fatto un illustrazione della salvezza. In questo verso da una seconda illustrazione di salvezza. Ritroviamo due figure di salvezza:

Pietro fa un tipico paragone tra l’Arca di Noè nel diluvio e il battesimo con acqua. Così come le acque del giudizio divino ricaddero sull’acqua , così tutte le onde e i flutti dell’ira di Dio contro il peccato caddero su Cristo alla croce. Quelli che erano nell’arca furono liberati attraverso il giudizio e furono risuscitati a nuova vita. Il fatto accaduto in Genesi da 6 a 9 è un illustrazione grafica della nostra salvezza. Pietro dice che il battesimo cristiano è anche un illustrazione della nostra salvezza. E’ una figura di morte e risurrezione (cfr Rom 6:1-6). Attraverso l’unione in Cristo per la fede personale, un credente è stato risuscitato a nuova vita. Ciò è illustrato nel battesimo così come fu il diluvio. Non c’è traccia in questa scrittura o in altre che il battesimo purifichi dal peccato.

Il Battesimo è un requisito di Salvezza?

Proprio la settimana scorsa alla radio un “Insegnante della Bibbia” ha detto: “Il Battesimo da la salvezza, la pazienza porta al Cielo”. E’ una cosa vera secondo le Scritture?

Ci sono per certo parecchi versi che sembrino voler dire che una persona deve necessariamente essere battezzata per essere salvata. La Formula sarebbe:

Credere in Cristo Gesù + Essere battezzato = Salvezza.

Il Testo chiave che ne da prova riguardo questa formula proviene dal verso conclusivo dell’evangelo di Marco.

“E disse loro: Andate per tutto il mondo e predicate l’evangelo ad ogni creatura. . Chi avrà creduto e sarà stato battezzato sarà salvato; ma chi non avrà creduto sarà condannato”. (Riveduta)

Marco 16:15-16

Si devono tenere a mente due cose:

L’Autenticità di Marco 16:19-20 è discutibile. Alcuni dei più antichi e migliori manoscritti greci (il Codice Vaticanus e il Codice Sinaiticus) omettono questi versi. Chi riconosce ciò sarà prudente nell’usare qualsiasi verso di questa parte di testo come una prova.

Comunque, è più importante osservare che l’unica pronuncia di condanna alla fine del verso riguarda quelli che non credono. Cosa accade a chi crede e non è battezzato? E’ condannato? In apparenza sembra di no. Si è spesso discusso sul fatto che non ci si battezza se non si ha già creduto e quindi il Signore prende in considerazione la prima condizione – cioè credere – nel verso che parla della condanna. Gesù lascia supporre che se non si crede, naturalmente non ci si battezza. Questo, però, non fa capire il senso di ciò. Se il battesimo è ugualmente essenziale per la salvezza, Gesù avrebbe dovuto anche dire “Colui che ha creduto, ma non è stato battezzato, sarà anche condannato”. Il Signore non dice ciò! Lui dice soltanto che la persona che non crede è condannata. Ciò è in armonia con i molti passi biblici del Nuovo Testamento che definiscono la Fede come l’unica e sola condizione per la salvezza dell’Uomo. Ad esempio:

Chi crede nel Figlio ha vita eterna, ma chi non ubbidisce al Figlio non vedrà la vita, ma l’ira di Dio dimora su di lui.

Giovannni 3:36

Quando il nostro Signore disse “Chi avrà creduto e sarà stato battezzato sarà salvato”, non stava includendo il battesimo come condizione di salvezza. L’ultima parte della frase lo rende chiaro. Lui stava indicando, piuttosto, che il battesimo è la normale confessione esterna che ci si aspetta nel cammino della vera fede in Cristo.

Un altro passo preferito da chi sostiene che il battesimo è essenziale per la salvezza proviene dal discorso di Pietro nel giorno della Pentecoste.

E Pietro a loro

“Ravvedetevi e ciascuno di voi sia battezzato nel nome di Gesù Cristo, per il perdono dei vostri peccati, e voi riceverete il dono dello Spirito Santo.”(Nuova Riveduta)

Atti 2:38

Pietro sta dicendo che il battesimo è un prerequisito? Sentiamo cosa dice Pietro in un’altra occasione. Questa volta Pietro parla a Cornelio di Gesù Cristo e dice:

“Di lui attestano tutti i profeti che chiunque crede in lui riceve il perdono dei peccati mediante il suo nome”

Atti 10:43

Qui si riferisce solo al credere. Non si parla del battesimo. Infatti notiamo che Cornelio e quelli erano con lui credettero, ricevettero lo Spirito Santo (v. 45) e parlarono in lingue (v. 46) prima di essere battezzati (v. 48).

E’ chiaro dall’affermazione di Pietro in Atti 10:43 e dalla esperienza che seguì di quei Gentili che credere è la condizione di salvezza. Credere è il punto chiave in Atti 2:38. Parlando della Salvezza, il battesimo è una cosa non essenziale sebbene ci si aspetti che sia conseguenza di ciò. Il Dott. S. L. Johnson dice che è come quando si indossa il cappello entrando in macchina per andare in città. Indossare il cappello non è essenziale per andare in città. Puoi sempre indossare il cappello quando vai in città, ma la cosa essenziale è che ci vai in macchina! La cosa essenziale per la salvezza è la fede. Il battesimo è spesso associato al credere nel Nuovo Testamento – non come cosa essenziale per la salvezza ma come una normale confessione di ciò.

Il Nuovo Testamento non considera l’idea di un credente non battezzato.

Ci rimane un ulteriore verso a cui rispondere se – e per certo – il battesimo non è una condizione di salvezza. Gesù rispose a Nicodemo:

“In verità, in verità ti dico che se uno non è nato d’acqua e di Spirito, non può entrare nel regno di Dio.”

Giovanni 3:5

Qualsiasi cosa il termine “acqua” potesse significare, non è e non si può parlare di battesimo cristiano. Non lo è fino a quando non fu istituito il battesimo cristiano dopo la resurrezione del nostro Signore . Quell’evento accade tre anni dopo! Se il nostro Signore avesse parlato del battesimo cristiano, non avrebbe avuto senso per Nicodemo il quale, a proposito, divenne un credente prima dell’istituzione del battesimo cristiano (Giovanni 19:39).

Ripeto, se il battesimo cristiano fosse ciò a cui il nostro Signore si riferiva come condizione di salvezza in questo passo, è molto strano che è l’unica volta in tutto i vangelo di Giovanni dove se ne parla come una condizione. E’ davvero notevole vedere l’enfasi ripetuta sul fatto di credere come l’unica condizione di salvezza (1:12, 3:36, 5:24, ecc. . ). In più, sarebbe sorprendente considerare il battesimo in questo passo quando si nota una completa imparzialità nell’evangelo di Giovanni del comando del battesimo cristiano e dalla santa cena. Non è neanche nominato in questo quarto evangelo.

Probabilmente il nostro Signore si riferiva al battesimo di Giovanni, cioè il battesimo di pentimento. Se è così, sta semplicemente dicendo a Nicodemo che la nuova nascita, la nascita spirituale nel regno di Dio è il lavoro di Dio Spirito Santo in coloro che si pentono.

Di recente ho cenato in un ristorante con una coppia che credeva nel battesimo come essenziale per la salvezza. Curioso. Feci una domanda: “Cosa accadrebbe se qualcuno credesse in Gesù Cristo come personale Salvatore adesso, in questo ristorante, ma venisse ucciso in un incidente stradale mentre va al lavoro o persino mentre va nella sua chiesa per essere battezzato?” A mia sorpresa e con piacere entrambi furono d’accordo sul fatto che sarebbe stato salvato perché non avrebbe avuto l’opportunità di essere battezzato. Quando l’argomento fu convincente, divenne chiaro per loro. Il battesimo non è essenziale per la salvezza.

Le Scritture dichiarano:

“Infatti è per GRAZIA che siete stati salvati, mediante la FEDE; e ciò non viene da voi; è il DONO di Dio. Non è in virtù di opere affinché nessuno se ne vanti;” (Nuova Riveduta)

Efesini 2:8-9

Di nuovo:

«Signori, che debbo fare per essere salvato? » Ed essi risposero: «Credi nel Signore Gesù, e sarai salvato tu e la tua famiglia». (Nuova Riveduta)

Atti 16:30-31

Uno dei passi più determinanti riguardo quest’argomento proviene dagli scritti di Paolo che disse:

“Infatti Cristo non mi ha mandato a battezzare ma a evangelizzare;” (Nuova Riveduta)

1 Corinzi 1:17a

Qui l’apostolo fa chiaramente distinzione tra il battesimo e l’evangelo! Se il battesimo fosse essenziale per la salvezza, non si sarebbe mai fatta tale distinzione. Sebbene Paolo di tanto in tanto battezzava le persone (v. 14), in genere lasciava fare questo ad altri mentre proclamava il messaggio dell’evangelo.

Qual è lo scopo del battesimo allora? Se non è un requisito per entrare nella fratellanza della chiesa, se non è un mezzo per purificarsi dal peccato, se non è essenziale per la salvezza, cos’è?

E’ una confessione di identificazione con Cristo.

L’identificazione è il secondo significato del verbo in Greco che è stato traslitterato in inglese con “battezzare”. Ciò è chiaro in 1 Corinzi 10:2 dove leggiamo che “tutti furono battezzati in Mosè, nella nuvola, e nel mare.” (Diodati). Gli eventi che accaddero nel libro dell’Esodo con Mosè hanno separato i figli di Israele dal Faraone e dall’Egitto. Essi (i figli di Israele) furono identificati con Mosè, sotto la sua guida.

L’Identificazione è il significato primario di tutte le altre forme di battesimo ai tempi del Nuovo Testamento. Quando un neoconvertito veniva battezzato, il neoconvertito s’identificava col giudaismo. Nel battesimo di Giovanni il Battista un israelita si identificava con Giovanni e il piccolo gruppo di persone ravvedute che aspettavano il ritorno del Messia. Quando il nostro Signore fu battezzato, egli si stava identificando da una parte con il residuo di credenti e dall’altro con i peccatori colpevoli e ancora anche con l’opera del Calvario e della Redenzione. Quando un credente è battezzato dallo Spirito Santo, egli è così identificato con Cristo poiché lui è “in Cristo”(Romani 6:1-6). Il credente è talmente identificato col corpo di Cristo, la Sua Chiesa, che il credente diviene parte della Sua Chiesa, una parte del Suo corpo (1 Corinzi 12:13). Dunque il BATTESIMO CRISTIANO è un identificazione. Il credente si identifica pubblicamente con Gesù Cristo. Egli dichiara la sua fede personale in Lui. Egli riconosce di dipendere in Gesù Cristo e soltanto nella sua morte per la sua salvezza. Lui sta dicendo “Io sono un credente, io appartengo a Cristo, io sono dalla sua parte”. Nella Chiesa dei primi tempi non avevano dei fogli in cui scrivevano la loro decisione di diventare cristiani, né chiamate all’altare, né alzate di mani: era il battesimo che identificava una persona con Cristo come cristiano.

L’Identificazione è la verità biblica esposta in Romani 6. Qui l’apostolo scrive:

“O ignorate forse che tutti noi, che siamo stati battezzati in Cristo Gesù, siamo stati battezzati nella sua morte? Siamo dunque stati sepolti con lui mediante il battesimo nella sua morte, affinché, come Cristo è stato risuscitato dai morti mediante la gloria del Padre, così anche noi camminassimo in novità di vita. Perché se siamo stati totalmente uniti a lui in una morte simile alla sua, lo saremo anche in una risurrezione simile alla sua. (Nuova Riveduta)

Romani 6:3-5

La cosa principale qui è il battesimo attraverso lo Spirito Santo. Attraverso l’Opera dello Spirito Santo il credente è unito a Cristo. E’ identificato con Lui nella sua morte. Ciò porta una fine alla realtà di prima della sua vecchia vita. Finisce la sua storia come figlio di Adamo.”Le cose vecchie sono passate”. L’Identificazione continua attraverso la sua sepoltura e la sua resurrezione. Ciò lo porta ad una nuova vita. Inizia la sua storia come figlio di Dio. “Ecco (le cose vecchie) sono diventate nuove.”

Questa è la natura di identificazione che lui confessa pubblicamente quando il credente è battezzato nel battesimo cristiano. Lui non solo dichiara la sua fede personale in Cristo Gesù ma riconosce anche che la natura del Vecchio Adamo con le sue passioni carnali è stata crocifissa e che è risorto a nuova vita per la gloria di Dio. Sta mostrando che è suo desiderio e sua intenzione con la capacità dello Spirito Santo di camminare a novità di vita.

Qualche tempo fa un giovane avvocato ebraico di Hartford, nel Connecticut, si convertì a Cristo nella chiesa Missionary Alliance. I suoi genitori non fecero nulla. Più tardi sposò una ragazza protestante non ebrea. I suoi genitori non fecero nulla. Poi il giovane avvocato si battezzò come credente cristiano. Immediatamente i suoi genitori lo rinnegano e fecero un funerale pubblico per suo figlio. Fu nel suo battesimo che egli si identificò con Gesù Cristo. Questo è il suo fine.

A volte si scatenano persecuzioni provenienti dai nemici di Cristo. Spesso ciò serve da trampolino da lancio per una vita fatta di obbedienza e servizio. E’ un gigantesco passo in avanti. Certamente ciò produrrà una buona coscienza davanti al Signore – è un atto di obbedienza al Suo Comando. Ogni altra cosa diventa ombra alla luce del piacere che tale confessione porta al cuore del nostro Maestro.

Una delle domande più controverse riguardo al battesimo è il modo di battezzare. Si deve battezzare spruzzando, versando o immergendosi in acqua? Torniamo nuovamente all’unica autorità per scoprire

Il Modo di battezzare

Noi crediamo che il Nuovo Testamento sia chiaro. Ogni cosa indica che il battesimo - nella chiesa dei primi tempi - è stato fatto per immersione.

Il significato primario del verbo greco BAPTIZO è “immergere” o “intingere” (di Arndt e Gingrich). Nella letteratura non cristiana esso significa anche “tuffarsi, andare a fondo, inzupparsi, sommergersi ecc. . ”. I Greci usavano questo verbo quando intingevano il rivestimento di un vaso. Nella letteratura secolare questo verbo è stato usato per descrivere una barca che ha fatto naufragio essendo sommersa. Senza tradurlo, questo verbo è stato traslitterato come “battezzo”. Il motivo è chiaro. L’aspersione era già in uso in Gran Bretagna ed è stato largamente accettato. Tradurre il verbo con “immersione” avrebbe dichiarato la verità, ma sarebbe andata contro l’usanza popolare nella Chiesa di Inghilterra. La traslitterazione “battezzare” evitò questa contraddizione.

Il famoso studioso ebraico Alfred Edersheim descrive nel dettaglio il battesimo di un neoconvertito all’ebraismo. Era un battesimo per immersione. Questo era il modo di battezzare che conosceva la Chiesa dei primi tempi. Cosa poteva esserci di più normale nel riportare questa modo di battezzare nel Cristianesimo? Il battesimo ministrato da Giovanni il Battista è stato fatto anche per immersione (Matteo 3:16;Giovanni 3:23). La pratica del giorno suggerisce il battesimo per immersione.

“Fece fermare il carro, e discesero tutti e due nell’ (EIS) acqua, Filippo e l’eunuco; e Filippo lo battezzò. Quando uscirono dall’ (EK) acqua, lo Spirito del Signore rapì Filippo;”

Atti 8:38-39

Un quarto argomento riguardo l’immersione è che esso illustra meglio il significato del battesimo. Alcuni anni fa un aiutante del ranch intavolò una disputa amichevole con il suo padrone riguardo il modo di battezzare. L’Aiutante credeva nell’immersione, il suo padrone credeva che l’aspersione fosse certamente sufficiente. Un giorno al ranch morì un puledro. All’aiutante venne data la responsabilità di seppellirlo in un angolo isolato del ranch. Parecchi giorni dopo il padrone trovò il puledro con parecchie manciate di terra sparse in gran quantità sulla carcassa! Il Padrone capì il motivo. L’Aspersione non è la sepoltura. Il battesimo cristiano illustra la nostra identificazione con Cristo nella Sua Morte e nella Sua Sepoltura (Romani 6:4). Quanto significativo diventa l’immersione quando riconosciamo la grande verità che esso rappresenta.

Pochi negherebbero che la pratica della Chiesa dei primi tempi era l’immersione. Persino Calvino ammette questo ma in seguito dice che oggi siamo liberi di scegliere la maniera di farlo. Noi chi siamo? Perché non seguire la pratica del Nuovo Testamento e della Chiesa dei primi tempi? La pratica degli apostoli era il loro precetto e la loro teologia non può essere messa da parte così leggermente. Non abbiamo nessun diritto di modificare o fare a meno dei comandi di Cristo.

Alcuni anni fa lo speaker di una radio cristiana nazionale difese l’aspersione come il modo di battezzare riferendosi ai diversi eventi nella epistola agli Ebrei in cui si usava la parola “asperso”(9:13, 19, 21; 10:22; 11:28; 12:24). A mia meraviglia scoprii che neanche uno di questi passi era neanche lontanamente collegato al battesimo! In nessun caso tranne al riferimento dell’aspersione del sangue. Stava dicendo che il battesimo per aspersione sarebbe l’aspersione o l’utilizzo del sangue di Cristo per colui che sta per essere battezzato? Questo certamente è la rigenerazione battesimale! Questo non si trova mai come il fine del battesimo. L’aspersione come pratica del battesimo è comparsa solo nel secondo secolo.

E’ vero che che il Didache o l’Insegnamento del Signore attraverso i dodici Apostoli ai Gentili propose il versare come una pratica di battesimo opzionale. Si deve ricordare che molti si uniscono al Dr. Armitage Robinson nel credere che il Didache è stata una produzione più tarda che non rappresenta la vita e l’insegnamento della Chiesa dei primi Tempi come lo era davvero (dalla “Short History of the Christian Church”. , C. P. S. Clarke, Longmans 1961, p. 24). Si deve anche notare che il Didache permise il versare acqua solo se c’era poca acqua. Si insegnava l’immersione come pratica normale. Il battesimo clinico o il battesimo fatto alle persone che stanno morendo nel letto versando dell’acqua su di loro è una pratica accaduta solo nel terzo secolo. Quelli che difendono o sostengono la pratica del versare come la pratica del battesimo pensano che il battesimo rappresenti un effusione dello Spirito Santo sull’individuo. E’ un bel pensiero, ma senza consenso delle Scritture.

Alcuni potranno obiettare riguardo il battesimo per immersione, ma si può rispondere alla loro obiezione. Se è fisicamente impraticabile o pericoloso, di certo non è responsabilità del credente nel farlo. Nel proprio interesse c’è bisogno che esso non sia indecente. Per alcuni è scomodo. Chiediamogli: Ci conviene il fatto che dobbiamo considerarlo con rispetto ubbidendo al nostro Signore?

L’ultima domanda che rimane a cui rispondere è la più critica di tutte: A Chi dovrebbe essere fatto? Ancora una volta, cosa dicono le Scritture?

Il Candidato per il Battesimo

Nel Libro degli Atti sono descritti otto specifici casi di battesimo. Osserviamo attentamente i battezzandi. Quali sono i requisiti per il battesimo?

“Quelli dunque che RICEVETTERO LA SUA PAROLA lietamente furono battezzati; in quel giorno furono aggiunte circa tremila persone.”

Atti 2:41

“Quando però CREDETTERO a Filippo, che annunziava la buona novella delle cose concernenti il regno di Dio e il nome di Gesù Cristo, uomini e donne si fecero battezzare.”

Atti 8:12

“E, mentre proseguivano il loro cammino, giunsero ad un luogo con dell’acqua. E l’eunuco disse: «Ecco dell’acqua, cosa mi impedisce di essere battezzato? ». E Filippo disse: «Se tu credi con tutto il cuore, lo puoi». Ed egli rispose, dicendo: «IO CREDO che Gesù Cristo è il Figlio di Dio». Allora comandò al carro di fermarsi; ed ambedue, Filippo e l’eunuco, discesero nell’acqua, ed egli lo battezzò.”

Atti 8:36-38

Sebbene sia vero che il verso 37 nel testo sopra sia omesso dai primi manoscritti, l’aggiunta di queste parole negli ultimi manoscritti indica cosa è stato considerato più tardi dalla chiesa nel qualificare qualcuno per il battesimo.

“In quell’istante gli caddero dagli occhi come delle scaglie, e riacquistò la vista; poi si alzò e fu battezzato.”

Atti 9:18

“Mentre Pietro stava ancora dicendo queste cose, lo Spirito Santo scese su tutti coloro che udivano la parola. E tutti i credenti circoncisi, che erano venuti con Pietro, rimasero meravigliati che il dono dello Spirito Santo fosse stato sparso anche sui gentili, perché li udivano parlare in altre lingue e magnificare Dio. Allora Pietro prese a dire: «Può alcuno vietare l’acqua, perché siano battezzati costoro che hanno ricevuto lo Spirito Santo proprio come noi? ». Così egli comandò che fossero battezzati nel nome del Signore Gesù. Essi poi lo pregarono di rimanere con loro alcuni giorni.”

Atti 10:44-48

“Poi li condusse fuori e disse: «Signori, cosa devo fare per essere salvato? ». Ed essi dissero: «Credi nel Signore Gesù Cristo, e sarai salvato tu e la casa tua». Poi essi annunziarono la parola del Signore a lui e a tutti coloro che erano in casa sua. Ed egli li prese in quella stessa ora della notte e lavò loro le piaghe. E lui e tutti i suoi furono subito battezzati. Condottili quindi in casa sua, apparecchiò loro la tavola e si rallegrava con tutta la sua famiglia di aver creduto in Dio.”

Atti 16:30-34

“Or Crispo, capo della sinagoga, credette al Signore con tutta la sua famiglia; anche molti dei Corinzi, udendo Paolo, credevano ed erano battezzati.”

Atti 18:8

Ora, mentre Apollo era a Corinto, Paolo, attraversate le località più alte del paese, giunse ad Efeso e, trovati là alcuni discepoli, disse loro: «Avete ricevuto lo Spirito Santo, quando avete creduto? ». Quelli gli risposero: «Non abbiamo neppure udito che vi sia uno Spirito Santo». E disse loro: «Con quale battesimo dunque siete stati battezzati? ». Essi risposero: «Col battesimo di Giovanni». Allora Paolo disse: «Giovanni battezzò con il battesimo di ravvedimento, dicendo al popolo che dovevano credere in colui che veniva dopo di lui, cioè in Cristo Gesù». Udito questo, furono battezzati nel nome del Signore Gesù.”

Atti 19:1-5

La dimostrazione del nuovo Testamento è unanime. Il battesimo cristiano è il battesimo del Credente. Quelli che furono battezzati sono stati credenti in Gesù Cristo. Sono rinati attraverso il lavoro rigeneratore di Dio lo Spirito Santo in combinazione con la propria fede personale in Lui come Figlio di Dio ed il sacrificio per i nostri peccati.

Si dovrebbe avere un periodo di tempo tra la conversione e il battesimo?

Per molti di noi una delle notevoli caratteristiche che ritroviamo in questi battesimi descritti è che furono fatti immediatamente dopo la conversione. Questo sembra essere la pratica comune della chiesa dei primi tempi. Oggi ritroviamo spesso un periodo di tempo fatto di mesi o di anni tra la conversione ed il battesimo.

A volte questo è il risultato di codardia e vergogna. C’è riluttanza nel confessare apertamente la propria identificazione con Cristo. Che delusione per il Signore! Il credente - per il quale Cristo è morto, ci ha redenti dalla distruzione e che un giorno condividerà il Suo Trono – non vuole riconoscere pubblicamente di appartenere al Signore!

A volte il lungo periodo di tempo è il risultato del fallimento che ha a che fare con l’insegnamento della dottrina del battesimo. Poiché è il primo di tutti i doveri che un Cristiano debba manifestare , esso deve essere ripetuto e sottolineato nelle nostre chiese e per i nuovi convertiti.

Ci sono comunque delle volte in cui un intervallo tra la rigenerazione e il battesimo sembri vantaggioso. Oggi la possibilità di una semplice professione di salvezza senza un genuino lavoro dello Spirito Santo è quanto mai presente. Non c’è un “prezzo da pagare” per un nuovo Cristiano in una terra dove il Cristianesimo è accettato. Spesso si ottiene molto da questa confessione . Nel primo secolo non era così. Certo, c’era ancora il pericolo di una tale confessione, ma l’ostracismo religioso e sociale minimizzava considerevolmente il pericolo. Nella nostra società è a volte saggio permettere ( non richiedere) di far passare un periodo di tempo in cui la realizzazione della conversione possa dimostrarsi tramite il frutto e la perseveranza.

C’è però un altro punto da considerare. In previsione dell’esperienza del battesimo di Giovanni e dei nuovi convertiti ci si poteva aspettare che i nuovi convertiti potessero comprendere il significato primario del battesimo Cristiano. Il concetto di identificazione era comune a tutti. Non ci si aspetta una tale comprensione da nessuno oggi. Per questo motivo forse è una cosa buona permettere un intervallo di tempo prima del battesimo affinché i nuovi convertiti possano essere istruiti nel significato dottrinale e pratico di questo regolamento.

E per quanto riguarda i giovani cristiani?

Spesso mi si chiede riguardo ai giovani. Quanti anni dovrebbe avere un giovane prima di essere battezzato? Chi dovrebbe prendere l’iniziativa per il suo battesimo? Il giovane o il genitore? Dopo molta riflessione ed esperienza sono arrivato a diverse convinzioni. Se deve essere un passo importante e significativo, il giovane deve comprendere l’insegnamento biblico sull’argomento. Battezzarlo prima che lui abbia compreso il significato di base di ciò sarebbe un danno per lui, un abuso del comando ed un affronto al Signore. Passerebbe il resto della sua vita cristiana crescendo di comprensione il suo pieno significato, ma il significato di base deve essere compreso prima che sia battezzato.

Oltretutto, se ciò deve essere un espressione pubblica della sua identificazione con Cristo nella sua morte, sepoltura e risurrezione, ci dovrebbe essere un qualche segno di conversione genuina nella vita del giovane. Confessioni false sono troppo scontate tra i figli di genitori cristiani. Ci sono segni di vita spirituale? Chi potrebbe comprendere questo se non i genitori cristiani.

La decisione di essere battezzati di certo deve essere la decisione del giovane in risposta all’insegnamento biblico dei genitori e all’incoraggiamento dal cuore che viene dallo Spirito Santo. Un mio caro amico disse: “il migliore insegnante che il giovane possa avere è suo padre”. In quanto capo della famiglia ordinato da Dio, il padre ha la responsabilità primaria di insegnare ai suoi figli. Insieme al fatto che gli insegna l’evangelo, il padre insegna la dottrina del battesimo. Forse lo farà in modo formale o informale, insieme alla famiglia o individualmente, ma lo farà. Ho scoperto che uno dei modi più efficaci è discutere sull’argomento insieme come famiglia a cena durante la settimana precedente al battesimo. Nella settimana si potrebbero affrontare cinque domande: Chi (i battezandi)? Perchè (il significato)? Quando (il tempo)? Come (il modo)? Cosa (i risultati)? Una domanda a sera è sufficiente. Facendo un gioco con delle domande sull’argomento per vedere se i figli hanno capito ed anche attraverso esperienze personali si può passare un tempo divertente e il battesimo della Domenica sarà pieno di significato per i tuoi figli. In quanto genitore devoto che insegna al giovane , il genitore pregherà Dio con serietà affinchè lo Spirito Santo tocchi il cuore alla risposta del giovane. Dunque il battesimo è un atto di ubbidienza al Signore e alla Sua Parola. Lo avrai aiutato a sviluppare un atteggiamento di risposta alla Parola sotto l’influenza dello Spirito Santo. Questo atteggiamento formerà la sua vita!

E Riguardo ai bambini?

Se il battesimo cristiano è il battesimo del credente, non c’è posto per il battesimo dei bambini.

Nella sua Teologia Sistematica , A. H. Strong ha elencato parecchi motivi per cui vale la pena considerare per rifiutare il battesimo dei bambini prima che essi siano credenti.

Non c’è una base biblica per tale pratica. Non c’è nessun episodio di ciò nel Nuovo Testamento. A dire il vero il familiare è stato battezzato con il carceriere di Filippi (Atti 16:33), ma ci viene detto chiaramente nel verso seguente che lui credette “in Dio con tutti i suoi”. Ciò sembra voglia indicare che tutti divennero credenti. Ho avuto il privilegio di battezzare parecchifamiliari. In ogni caso, comunque, ogni membro era un credente. Oltre all’assenza di qualche chiaro esempio di battesimo del bambino, non si trova nessun comando nel Nuovo Testamento che lo giustifichi. Matteo 19:14 non accenna al battesimo né si riferisce ad esso. Il battesimo cristiano non era ancora stato istituito! Neanche 1 Corinzi 7:14 di certo insegna questo. Se il battesimo qui è in relazione ai bambini, allora si deve anche pensare che il marito non credente è anche salvato! Chi ammetterebbe questo? Riguardo al battesimo dei bambini, le Scritture non dicono nulla. Non c’è neanche un precetto o un fatto accaduto prima nel Nuovo Testamento di tale pratica.

Inoltre , il concetto del battesimo del bambino è in contraddizione con le scritture. Qual’è il fine? Per alcuni è la rimozione del peccato originale. Ciò è in contraddizione con 1 Giovanni 1:7. E’ il Sangue di Gesù che ci lava dal peccato. Per altri è il mezzo per appartenere alla Chiesa. Ciò è in contraddizione con 1 Giovanni 5:11-13. La Chiesa è fatta di cristiani, uomini che hanno creduto in Cristo Gesù e possiedono la vita eterna. Persino Martin Lutero ebbe un conflitto per questo. A nostra meraviglia insegnava la giustificazione per fede mentre si atteneva al battesimo dei bambini. Continuò dicendo che il bambino era giustificato per fede nel suo battesimo! Ancora per altri è una consacrazione del bambino al Signore. A ogni genitore di deve comandare un tale desiderio, ma non dobbiamo confondere la consacrazione col battesimo.

Secondo A. H. Strong la testimonianza storica è che il battesimo del bambino apparve nella metà del secondo secolo e agli inizi del terzo secolo nella concezione sacramentale del Cristianesimo. Come risultato abbiamo già osservato che molti argomenti riguardo a ciò sono argomenti della rigenerazione battesimale.

Forse il punto più difficile a cui rispondere è il rapporto tra la circoncisione e il battesimo del bambino.

I sostenitori del battesimo ai bambini affermano che il battesimo abbia sostituito la circoncisione. Questa è solo un’ipotesi. E’ comunque vero che entrambe le cose sono dei segni, ma non dobbiamo dimenticare che mentre la circoncisione è stato il patto di Abramo, il calice della Santa Cena (non il battesimo) è il segno del Nuovo Patto. Se il battesimo ha sostituito la circoncisione, perché Paolo fece circoncidere Timoteo? L’unico passo biblico che li mette insieme è in Colossesi 2:10-12:

“e voi avete tutto pienamente in lui, che è il capo di ogni principato e di ogni potenza; in lui siete anche stati circoncisi di una circoncisione non fatta da mano d’uomo, ma della circoncisione di Cristo, che consiste nello spogliamento del corpo della carne: siete stati con lui sepolti nel battesimo, nel quale siete anche stati risuscitati con lui mediante la fede nella potenza di Dio che lo ha risuscitato dai morti.”

Col. 2:10-12

Non c’è segno qui che dica che il battesimo abbia sostituito la circoncisione. Il passo lascia intendere che la circoncisione era una cosa fisica – un taglio della carne – il battesimo lo illustra spiritualmente –lo spogliarsi della carne. Questo passo non parla neanche della circoncisione fisica.

Siamo propensi ad essere d’accordo con i Pauliciani del quarto secolo i quali si opposero al battesimo dei bambini dicendo che ciò era il migliore modo nascosto per far entrare i pagani in chiesa.

Per quanto riguarda il battezzarsi una seconda volta?

Di recente una signora ha espresso il suo desiderio di battezzarsi agli anziani della Cappella. Questa signora ha continuato a spiegare il motivo del suo desiderio. Lei era stata battezzata molti anni fa come credente ma soltanto di recente è arrivata a comprendere il significato di essere tale. Adesso voleva essere ribattezzata.

In molte occasioni mi è stato chiesto di ribattezzare i credenti che sono stati ristorati da una vita di peccato e disubbidienza. Hanno pensato di dover essere ribattezzati.

Non c’è niente che indichi nelle Scritture che i credenti fossero ribattezzati. Cioè, le istruzioni e gli esempi del Nuovo Testamento indicano che il battesimo del credente è un fatto accaduto una sola volta nella vita del Cristiano. Chi di noi ha pienamente compreso il significato del battesimo quando siamo stati battezzati? Se siamo cresciuti nella grazia di certo comprenderemo molto più oggi di quando ci siamo battezzati. Dovremmo essere ribattezzati? No di certo. Coloro che sono ritornati da un periodo di lontananza dal cristianesimo dovrebbero essere ribattezzati? Il modo per essere restaurati è chiaramente presentato in Giovanni 1:9. Non si parla di un secondo battesimo. Ogni indicazione dalle Scritture dice che il battesimo del credente non è un rito da ripetere. Poiché il battesimo enfatizza il nostro ingresso alla vita cristiana, lo si deve fare soltanto una volta.

Comunque il Nuovo Testamento insegna il ribattesimo! Un fatto notevole accadde in Efeso. Secondo Atti 19:1-5 alcuni di quelli che precedentemente furono battezzati nel battesimo di Giovanni, quando sentirono della venuta di Cristo, credettero e “furono battezzati nel nome del Signore Gesù” (Atti 19:5). Questo sicuramente lascia intendere che una persona che sia stata battezzata da qualsiasi altra forma di battesimo diverso da quello del battesimo del credente, deve essere ribattezzato come credente dopo essersi convertito.

Nel senso più stretto del termine questo non è il ribattessimo perché il primo “battesimo” (battesimo da bambino o battesimo da non credente) non è affatto un battesimo secondo la legge o biblico.

La Gioia

L’ultima cosa che sappiamo dell’eunuco etiope è che dopo che si è battezzato “continuò il suo cammino tutto allegro” (Atti 8:39). Questo per certo è l’esperienza di coloro che, essendo veri credenti nel Signore Gesù Cristo, obbediscono in maniera intelligente al suo comando di essere battezzato.

Sei un vero credente in Lui? Se è così, hai ubbidito alla Sua parola riguardo a questo? Ricorda: “Se voi mi amate, osserverete i miei comandamenti.”. La tua obbedienza non porterà soltanto grande piacere al cuore del vostro Signore ma sarà anche un grande passo avanti nel cammino della genuina felicità cristiana.

Come scompare in fretta quella gioia per molti. Anche se il motivo sfugge, per altri è solo una cosa troppo evidente. Il battesimo è una questione di cuore e di confessione esterna. Il vero credente battezzato è colui il quale nella vita dimostra che la carne, la vecchia natura, è stata messa a morte. Ciò è compiuto per la capacità dello Spirito Santo soltanto e come risultato da la gioia del Signore.

“continuò il suo cammino tutto allegro”.

E’ stato così soltanto perché aveva ubbidito al Signore e si è identificato con il Suo Signore pubblicamente. Il peso della colpa era cresciuto. C’era un profondo desiderio di avere pace nella coscienza e pace con Dio. Nelle religioni dell’Etiopia non aveva trovato nessuna risposta. Forse era questo che lo portò a Gerusalemme. Non aveva trovato risposte neanche lì. C’era religione con i suoi rituali, ma era vuoto. Non c’era niente che dava pace, perdono e salvezza.

Ancora in cerca, stava tornando a casa. Poi accade qualcosa. Dio lo guidò ad una parola profetica nella Sacra Scrittura scritta centinaia di anni prima ma adempiuta solo pochi mesi prima.

“Egli è stato menato all’uccisione come una pecora; e come un agnello che è muto dinanzi a colui che lo tosa, così egli non ha aperto la bocca. Nel suo abbassamento fu tolta via la sua condanna; chi descriverà la sua generazione? Poiché la sua vita è stata tolta dalla terra. E l’eunuco, rivolto a Filippo, gli disse: Di chi, ti prego, dice questo il profeta? Di se stesso, oppure d’un altro? E Filippo prese a parlare, e cominciando da questo passo della Scrittura gli annunziò Gesù.”

Atti 8:32-35

Qui si ritrova la fine della lunga e coscienziosa ricerca. Dio gli ha portato il messaggio di Gesù e del Suo amore. L’Eunuco imparò che Gesù era il Cristo, il Figlio di Dio, il quale era venuto sulla terra per morire. A colui che stava domandando gli fu detto che la morte di Gesù Cristo era una morte di sostituzione. Lui ha portato il castigo dei nostri peccati. La sua morte ha soddisfatto le giuste richieste di Dio. Lui ha pagato per i nostri peccati. Colui che cercava seriamente aveva anche imparato che sulla base della morte di Cristo per i peccati dell’eunuco, Dio ha offerto perdono e salvezza a tutti gli uomini. Attraverso un semplice e significativo passo di fede, questo viaggiatore ha creduto che Gesù fosse davvero il Figlio di Dio che è morto per Lui e l’Uomo in quel momento ha iniziato a credere in Lui e la sua morte di espiazione per il perdono dei suoi peccati e per la salvezza di Dio.

La lunga ricerca era finita. Aveva un po’ realizzato che in realtà per tutto il tempo il Signore lo aveva cercato. Adesso il Pastore aveva trovato la sua pecora perduta. Ponendo la sua fiducia in Gesù per la sua salvezza, l’eunuco aveva ottenuto pace con Dio. Dio divenne il suo Padre Celeste e Lui è diventato un Figlio di Dio. Il peccato era perdonato e lui aveva ottenuto salvezza. Un po’ quella meraviglia in cui “continuò il suo cammino tutto allegro”.

Se tu hai un profondo desiderio di conoscere Dio personalmente come il Padre Celeste, se hai un profondo senso di colpa davanti a Dio per i tuoi peccati, se stai cercando seriamente il perdono, la pace e la Salvezza, ti assicuro, caro amico, che è così perché il Signore ti sta cercando. Questa potrebbe essere la fine di una ricerca lunga e diligente. Potrebbe essere il primo passo per te di continuare il tuo cammino tutto allegro. Cosa devi fare? Con una semplice preghiera confessa semplicemente di essere un peccatore. Ringrazialo per essere morto al tuo posto, portanto il castigo che tu avresti meritato. Confida in Lui per essere il Salvatore. Credi alla sua morte che è stata sufficiente per il pagamento di tutti i tuoi peccati. Credi alla sua parola che ti assicura la vita eterna.

“E la testimonianza è questa: Dio ci ha dato la vita eterna, e questa vita è nel suo Figlio. Chi ha il Figlio, ha la vita; chi non ha il Figlio di Dio, non ha la vita. Ho scritto queste cose a voi che credete nel nome del Figlio di Dio, affinché sappiate che avete la vita eterna.”

1 Giovanni 5:11-13

Related Topics: Baptism

The God Of Abraham, Isaac, And Jacob

Related Media

Introduction

As was their custom, one day Peter and John went up to the temple at the time of the afternoon prayer. While they were there they had the opportunity to heal a man who had been lame since birth (Acts 3:1-11). This healing took place in the covered walkway called Solomon’s Portico (i.e., just inside the eastern section of the outer court of the Temple area). As a crowd grew around them and the formerly lame man, Peter took the opportunity to present the gospel to the astonished throng. In so doing, he first denied that the apostles had any power to accomplish the healing that they had just witnessed (Acts 3:12; cf. v. 6). Quite the contrary, it was a testimony to the presence and power of the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our forefathers” who by this act had “glorified his servant Jesus” –the very one whom the Jews had rejected (v. 13).1 Peter and John were merely the Lord’s human instruments.

At first sight, today’s reader of this account may wonder just why Peter used the precise formula, The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in referring to “The God of our forefathers.” 2 It is a fact, of course, that the Jews commonly used this formula in their times of daily prayers. Yet, as we shall see later in the discussion of this passage, there is much more than a formulaic repetition in Peter’s use of this terminology, for this pattern forms an important literary motif in the Scriptures. As Murfin and Ray point out, a literary motif is, “a unifying element in an artistic work, especially any recurrent image, symbol, theme, character, type, subject or narrative detail.”3 Many such motifs occur in the Bible such as: Israel’s wilderness trek; the remnant; the divine warrior; the widow, the orphan, and the poor; the third day; and the call-answer motif.4 In some instances a motif provides unity to a given context. In other cases it may reflect a dominant theme, often one that is well known and thus point to an earlier event.

In the following study we shall suggest that “The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” forms just such a motif—one that has important ramifications for Peter’s use in his speech at Solomon’s Portico. We shall explore the use of this pattern in its occurrence with regard to the patriarchs, its importance in relation to God’s covenant with Israel, and its employment elsewhere in the Old and New Testaments. A summary and applications for today’s believers will bring the study to its close.

The Patriarchal Period

The God Of Abraham

As Abram (later, Abraham) was instructed by God to leave his own relatives and country to go to one which the Lord would lead him, the Lord gave him some amazing promises:

I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you and I will make your name great, so that you will exemplify divine blessing. (Gen 12:2)

Abram was thus to be the source of a great nation, and personally to become well known and respected. Moreover, he in turn was so to live as to be a source through whom divine blessings could be observed and desired by others. As Hamilton astutely remarks, “Abram must be more than a recipient. He is both a receptacle for the divine blessing and a transmitter of that blessing.”5 Keil and Delitzsch agree, “Abram was not only to receive blessing, but to be a blessing; not only to be blessed by God, but to become a blessing or the medium of blessing, to others.”6 Although there are various views of the meaning of this verse, based on the Hebrew grammar in this verse, it seems best to understand it in the traditional way that Abram was to make himself a source of blessing to all. So central was Abram to God’s purpose that the Lord went on to declare,

I will bless those who bless those who bless you but the one who treats you lightly I must curse. (v. 3)

As Abram entered Canaan in accordance with the Lord’s command, God revealed to him that this land would belong to him and to his descendants (v.7). In a bit later account we are told that when Abram did finally settle down in Canaan, the Lord reaffirmed his promise concerning that land (Gen 13:15). As he did so, God declared,

I will make your descendants like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone is able to count the dust of the earth, then your descendants also can be counted. Get up and walk throughout the land, for I will give it to you. (vv. 16-17)

In later years as Abram aged and he and Sarai still had no son, Abram became increasingly concerned about the realization of the promise of heirs. Therefore, the Lord again assured him that he was indeed Abram’s God and that Abram would not only have an heir but a vast number of descendants (Gen. 15:1-5). In a classic expression of true faith it is said that, “Abram believed the LORD, and the LORD considered his response of faith as proof of genuine loyalty” (v. 6). As Ross observes, “7Abram accepted the Word of the Lord as reliable and true and acted in accordance with it; consequently the Lord declared Abram righteous, and therefore acceptable.” In answer to any concern that Abram might have with regard to the land of Canaan belonging to him, the Lord gave Abram a sign of assurance (vv. 7-17 and covenantal pledge (vv. 18-21) that such would truly be the case.

All of these promises were ratified in a formal covenant (Gen. 17:1-16). Before examining the covenant in Genesis 17, it will be helpful to note certain details about covenant structure and content. In the ancient Near East three main types of covenants were known: (1) a parity treaty between two equal powers; (2) a suzerainty treaty type covenant, in which the enacting, more powerful party placed restrictions and obligations upon a vassal state; and (3) a royal grant type of covenant, in which a beneficent king would either “often freely bestow certain privileges or benefits to a vassal or servant for faithful and loyal service,” or in some cases a king or his successor would reconfirm the benefits of the existing covenant for “continued compliance with the terms of the original grant,” in order for them to be “beneficial for the grantee and/or his heirs.” 8 Royal Grant covenants customarily consisted of four main sections: (1) a preamble, noting the parties involved; (2) the provisions in the grant; (3) restrictions or stipulations for the continuance of certain oaths taken at the time of enactment and (4) some sort of covenantal sign.

Although some have viewed Genesis 17:1-16 as a suzerainty type of covenant, it is best understood as a royal grant type. Thus after the statement of the parties involved, God and Abram, v.1a), there follow statements of covenantal stipulations (vv. 1b, 9a) covenantal enactment (vv. 2, 4a), and covenantal promises provisions (vv. 4b-8). Also included is a threefold sign (vv.9-16)) detailing (1) the changing of the names of Abram and Sarai to Abraham and Sarah (v.15), (2) the rite of circumcision (vv. 9-14), and (3) the promise that Sarah would conceive and bear a son (v. 16). That very day Abraham again demonstrated his faith and faithfulness as well as his compliance with the covenant by instituting the rite of circumcision on all the men of his household (vv. 23-27).

Together all the texts we have considered demonstrate that the Lord was truly the God of Abraham. 9 Thus the Lord assured Abraham:

I will confirm my covenant as a perpetual covenant between me and you. It will extend to your descendants after you throughout their generations. I will be your God and the God of your descendants after you. (Gen. 17:7)

That such was the case is attested throughout the following narratives concerning the life of Abraham. Moreover, Abraham’s faith was one of settled obedience to the Lord and his leading, even to the extent of being willing to sacrifice his only son Isaac if the Lord so commanded it (Gen. 22:1-14). During this active testing of Abraham’s commitment, however, the lord provided a substitute sacrifice and in the process reaffirmed his covenant with Abraham, telling him, “Because you have done this and not withheld your son, your only son, I will indeed bless you, and greatly multiply your descendants so that they will be as countless as the stars in the sky or the grains of the sand on the seashore” (vv. 16b-17a).

The God Of Abraham, Isaac, And Jacob

In the account of Abraham’s death it is reported that, “Everything he owned he left to his son Isaac.” The most important legacy was that in accordance with the Abrahamic Covenant; the God of Abraham became Isaac’s God as well. Thus at a time when Isaac visited the King of the Philistines in Gerar (Gen 26:1), the Lord appeared to him (v. 2) and entered into covenant with him. The promises given to Isaac are familiar ones: the land, a vast number of descendants, and an avenue of blessing for all people:

I will be with you and will bless you, for I will give these lands to you and to your descendants, and I will fulfill the solemn promise I made to your father Abraham. I will multiply your descendants so that they will be as numerous as the stars in the sky, and I will give them all these lands. All the nations of the earth will pronounce blessings on one another using the name of your descendants. All this will come to pass because Abraham obeyed me and kept my commandments, my charge, my statutes, and my laws. (Gen. 26:3-5)

Thus the God of Abraham became the God of Abraham and Isaac. Isaac in turn became a channel of blessing for his descendants. Although both of his twin sons, Esau and Jacob, were to receive the Lord’s blessings, it was the younger son Jacob who was the Lord’s choice as a source of spiritual heritage (cf. Gen. 25:21-23 with Gen. 27:1-29). It is not surprising, then, that in due course of time the Lord appeared to Jacob in a dream, saying:

I am the God of your grandfather Abraham and the God of your father Isaac. I will give you and your descendants the ground you are lying on. Your descendants will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west, east, north, and south. All the families of earth will pronounce blessings on one another using your name and that of your descendants. (vv. 13-14)

The God of Abraham and Isaac now became the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. This name was to become a familiar and significant pattern, which appears not only in the patriarchal narratives, but in many places in the biblical record. This formulaic pattern occurs three more times in the Genesis record. Genesis 32 records the account of Jacob’s return to his homeland after many years of service to his uncle, during which he acquired Leah and Rachel as his wives. As he approached Seir in Edomite territory, he began to fear for his life because he anticipated a possible hostile encounter with his brother Esau, whom he had cheated out of his birthright as Isaac’s older son. Therefore, he prayed to the Lord for help: “O God of my father Abraham, God of my father Isaac, O LORD, you said to me, ‘Return to your land and to your relatives and I will make you prosper.’ …You said, ‘I will certainly make you prosper and will make your descendants like the sand of the seashore, too numerous to count’” (vv. 9, 12).

The story culminates by relating how Jacob, after sending some of his herdsmen ahead with gifts designed to appease Esau and after sending his family across the Jabbok River, was left alone (v. 24). During the night, he encountered a “man,” with whom he wrestled until daybreak. Although Jacob wrestled valiantly with the one whom he thought to be a man, he at last received a blow that dislocated his hip. Still he clung tightly to his opponent in order to receive a blessing from him. When his adversary did so, he informed Jacob that, “No longer will your name be Jacob…but Israel, because you have fought with God and with men and prevailed” (v. 28). Jacob/ Israel now realized the he had been engaged in a divinely initiated encounter vv. 29-30).10

For our purposes here, it is sufficient to recognize that the changing of Jacob’s name to Israel is linked with the formula, “The God of Abraham and Isaac.” A bit later, Jacob’s name change and the blessings of the divine presence in accordance with the Abrahamic Covenant are conveyed and confirmed to Jacob upon his successful entrance into his homeland (Gen. 35:9-15). At that time the Lord instructed him, “Be fruitful and multiply! A nation--even a company of nations--will descend from you; kings will be among your descendants; the land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I will give to you. To your descendants I will also give this land” (vv. 11-12). Here once again Jacob is linked with the God of Abraham and Isaac.

Thereafter the provisions inherent in the Abrahamic Covenant become associated with the formulaic pattern, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (or Israel). Thus when Jacob’s son Joseph was near death in Egypt (where he had become Pharaoh’s vizier), he asked his brothers to see to it that his body would be carried along with his people when God led the descendants back to the land of promise (Gen. 50:25). This was in keeping with God’s assured promise. Accordingly, Joseph declared, “God will surely come to you and lead you up from this land to the land he swore on oath to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (v. 24).

The Mosaic Period

The next appearance of the formulaic pattern of the patriarchal pattern the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob occurs in connection with the incident of the burning bush. As Moses was at Mount Horeb, he came to a bush that was “ablaze with fire, but it was not being consumed!” (Exod. 3:2). When Moses turned aside to view this spectacle, the Lord spoke to him out of the bush telling him not to come any closer, for he was on holy ground. The Lord then identified himself to Moses: “I am the God of your father, the Abraham, The God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (v. 6). The reason for this miracle was that God was informing Moses that he was about to deliver his people from their 400 years of bondage in Egypt. This was all in accordance with what the Lord had told Abraham many long years before (Gen. 15:12-14; cf. Gen. 50:24). It was now time to make this happen and Moses was to be God’s representative before the Egyptian Pharaoh (vv. 9-10).

After the Lord identified himself further as “I AM that I AM” (v. 14), he told Moses that he was to inform the Israelites that, the “I AM has sent me to you” and that he should explain to the people, “The LORD--the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob--has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation (v. 15).

The Hebrew term for God’s name, LORD (or Yahweh), together with God’s self revelation as the I Am, carries the significance that he is exclusively the One being who is eternally self-existent and who causes everything to be.11 Therefore, the people could rely on him to fulfill all his promises made to the patriarchs to make them his people and to give them their own special land. Indeed, in accordance with his repeated promise, the Lord was about to deliver his people from the power of the Pharaoh and take them out of the land of Egypt. Thus Cassuto suggests that God is saying in connection with his revelation, “I am who I am always, ever alike, and consequently I am always true to My word and will fulfil (sic.) it.”12 For Moses’ part as God’s appointed representative, the Lord gave him special ability to perform certain amazing sign miracles in order that the people might “believe that the LORD, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob has appeared to you” (Exod. 4:5). This was doubtless reassuring to Moses as well, for the contest with Pharaoh was about to begin. Thus Kaiser is correct in declaring, “Moses and Israel (and later even the Egyptians) will know what ‘I am the LORD’ means.”13

In the course of Moses’ meetings with the Pharaoh God again spoke to Moses. As he did so, he again clearly identified himself as the LORD and added, “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name “the LORD” I was not known to them” (Exod. 6:3). At first sight God’s message that the people did not know him as LORD stands in stark contrast with the fact that the name LORD appears “162 times in Genesis.”14 The point, however, is that although the name LORD was not unknown to God’s people, now the people of Moses’ day would come to a much fuller knowledge. They would realize that the LORD, the God of their cherished patriarchs, was indeed the one and only true God of the universe. As such he directs all things, including the details of human history, so that as Israel’s covenant God he could be counted on to keep his promises. And greater still, all of his people could now know him in a far richer way, that is, know him personally. 15

This well-known divine formula is found several more times in the Pentateuch, all with special contextual importance. Thus during the Israelite encampment before Mount Sinai, God called Moses up the mountain to give him special instructions concerning proper worship procedures for the people to follow. When Moses was away on the mountain for a long period of time, however, the people became so worried about Moses’ disappearance that they began to lose faith in his continued leadership and even in the Lord himself. This led them to devise a substitute religion and so they fell into idolatry. Therefore, God told Moses to go down from the mountain and confront the people. They would perish, but Moses would yet be the channel for a great nation to come (Exod. 32:10). Upon hearing this, Moses interceded for the people’s safety and in so doing besought the Lord on the basis of his covenantal promise:

Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel your servants, to whom you swore by yourself and told them, “I will multiply your descendants like the stars of heaven, and all this land I have spoken about I will give to your descendants, and that they will inherit it forever.” (v. 13)16

Accordingly, God spared the people and did not utterly destroy them. Nevertheless, he did punish them because of their sin by sending a plague (v. 35). When this was done, the Lord commanded Moses, “Go up from here, you and the people you brought up out of the land of Egypt, to the land I promised on oath to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, ‘I will give it to your descendants’” (Exod. 33:1; cf. 1:6-8). God would yet deal with his people as a nation in accordance with his covenant, so that eventually Israel would enter the land of promise. Although the journey would prove to be a long and difficult one, the Lord did graciously lead the way (Exod. 40:34-38; cf. Num. 9:15-23).

Through these events the Lord, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is seen to be a gracious God who at times forgives his people despite their sins, for they are his special possession (cf. Exod. 19:5-6). For their part, God’s people in Moses’ time were to respond properly and like Abraham (Gen 15:6) to be people of faith. Although obeying the law did not produce righteousness (Rom. 9:1-5, 13-16), God’s holy standards were embedded in the regulations of the Mosaic Covenant (i.e., the Law) made between God and Israel at Mount Sinai. Not only was the covenantal law given to regulate society, but it was intended for man’s good, for in keeping the revealed standards of God they demonstrated their faith by following his holy nature in righteous living (cf. Deut 10:12). The same is no less true for God’s people today (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9-12).

The need for covenant faithfulness is emphasized in connection with Levitical stipulations. Disobedience to God’s commandments would result in various punishments, including the possibility of being exiled to the lands of their enemies. This was in keeping with God’s own faithfulness to the terms of the covenant, which included judgment for infidelity. Even then, however, God would never forget his covenant promises to the descendants of the patriarchs:

However, when they confess their iniquity and their ancestors’ iniquity which they committed by trespassing against me, by which they also walked hostility against me… and then their uncircumcised hearts become humbled and they make up for their iniquity, I will remember my covenant with Jacob and also my covenant with Isaac and also my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land. (Lev. 26:40-42)

Although the terms of the familiar covenant formula are presented here in a slightly different manner, their reiteration carries distinct significance. Certainly God must discipline his people as the covenant prescribed (cf. Amos 3:2), but Israel is still his own and in accordance with the Abrahamic Covenant he will never forget them (cf. Rom. 11:25-32).

The dual nature of God’s covenant faithfulness (blessings and chastisements) becomes evident in the course of Israel’s journey to the land of promise. On the one hand, he remembered his people, rewarding their obedience, while sometimes even forgiving them of their oft complaining. On the other hand, his covenant obligations demanded that he punish his people for their sins. This is demonstrated in the incident of the twelve Israelites (one from each tribe) who were sent into the land of promise to investigate conditions there. Although on their return Caleb and Joshua brought back an encouraging report, the report of the others was discouraging (Num. 13:21-14:9).

When the people decided to follow the negative report, they aroused God’s anger. Then Moses once again interceded with the Lord on their behalf, in order that God might forgive them (cf. Deut. 9:22-29). The Lord graciously agreed to do so, in order not to destroy Israel immediately. Nevertheless, he warned Moses that those who refused to trust God and his power would “ by no means see the land that I swore to their fathers, nor will any who despise me see it” (Num. 14:23; cf. vv. 26-45). As Cole observes, “Sometimes the consequences of sin and rebellion are irreversible, and one must endure the experience of God’s judgment before a new course of action brings blessing.”17

This incident is later recalled when Moses received the representatives of the tribes of Reuben and Gad who had asked to have their allotment of territory in Transjordan and remain behind while the rest of the Israelites entered the land of promise (Num. 32:1-5). Moses challenged them (vv. 6-10, 13) by reminding them of the God’s sentence against those who feared to trust the Lord’s ability to guide them safely into the land:

Because they have not followed me wholeheartedly, not one of the men twenty years old and upward will see the land I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob except Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenzzite, and Joshua the son of Nun, for they followed me wholeheartedly. (vv. 11-12)

When the representatives agreed to accompany their fellow Israelites, Moses assured them that their tribes would be granted their wish to settle in Transjordan (vv. 25-38). Once again we see that the Lord, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob remains faithful to his covenant promises in the Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants. This includes both his blessings and his chastisements. He expects his followers likewise to be faithful to covenant requirements.

Much of what is expressed in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers is emphasized in Deuteronomy. As Moses rehearses for the people significant points in the people’s journey to the land of promise (Deut. 1:6-3:29), he reminds them that the land to which they were coming was theirs. God had promised long before to give it to “Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and to their descendants” (Deut. 1:8). Indeed, it was the Lord who also had enacted the Mosaic Covenant (or Law), while maintaining the promise in the Abrahamic Covenant. The Lord is indeed a faithful God. Therefore, he expects his peoples’ faithfulness as well. This was true not only on their journey, but even also after he has brought them into “the land he promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (Deut. 6:10; cf. Deut. 9:5). There they were to revere the Lord and live faithful, obedient lives (Deut. 6:10-15). Yes, the land would yet belong to Israel despite the peoples’ often stubborn, wayward hearts (Deut 9:1-6).

Moses’ task as God’s representative to help guide the Israelites to the land was often a difficult one. Too often he was faced with the peoples’ rebellious hearts. Accordingly, he once again brings up the matter of Israel’s conduct during the incident of the sending of the twelve men to spy out the land of promise (Deut. 9:22-29). At that time he had to intercede passionately with God on behalf of the people so that they would not utterly be destroyed. As Moses had done so, he called God’s attention to his promise with regard to the land to give it to “your servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” as their homeland (v. 27). Indeed, if God failed to do so, Moses argued, the Lord’s own reputation could be at stake among the other residents of the land (v. 28). As well, the people of Israel were God’s “valued property, whom you brought out [of Egypt] with great strength and power” (v. 29).

As the Israelites prepared to enter the land of promise, at God’s command Moses charged them to swear allegiance to God and to their covenant with him (Deut. 29:2-12). For his part, God would “affirm that you are his people and that he is your God, just as he promised you and he swore by oath to your ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (v. 13). Moreover, this is to be an everlasting covenant with the people of Israel (vv. 14-15). The basic covenant made at Mount Sinai was, therefore, being renewed and updated for the generation that was about to enter the land. Moses ended his instructions to the community at this time by charging them not only to be obedient to God’s revealed regulations for righteous living, but by adding,

I also call on you to love the LORD your God, to obey him and be loyal to him, for he gives you life and enables you to live continually in the land the LORD promised to give your ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. (Deut. 30:20)

As an interesting aside, it should be noted that biblical scholars have long recognized that in its entirety the book of Deuteronomy is structured along the lines of a suzerainty treaty, and thus is a conditional covenant: preamble (1:1-5); historical prologue (1:6-4:49); covenant stipulations, including an exposition of the Decalogue (5:1-11:32) and accompanying laws (tipulations, including an exposition of the Decalogue (5:1-11:32) and accompanying laws (12:1-26:19); covenant sanctions (27:1-30:20), including a ratification ceremony (ch. 27), God’s blessings and cursings (ch. 28), and a covenant oath (chs. 29-30); followed by closing arrangements (31:1-33:29). These were concluded by a narrative epilogue detailing some historical notices (34:1-12).

One last occurrence in the Pentateuch of the ancient formula associated with the Abrahamic Covenant is found in Deuteronomy 34. In accordance with God’s previous pronouncements to him (cf. Num. 20:12; 27:14; Deut. 3:26-27; 4:21-22), Moses was told that although the Lord was graciously allowing him (3:25; 4:21) to see the land, he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan River with the other Israelites. They, however, were about to experience the fulfillment of God’s promise to the patriarchs:

Then the LORD said to him, “This is the land I promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob when I said, ‘I will give it to your descendants.’ I have let you see it, but you will not cross over there.” (Deut 34:4)

God was as good as his word, for Moses died there in the land of Moab, across the river from Jericho in the Promised Land (vv. 5-8). What a privilege and joy it must have been for Moses in his final hours not only to view the land to which he had labored so long to bring the people, but to be in intimate contact with the faithful, covenant keeping God of the universe! Subsequently, however, the other Israelites were to experience the Lord’s faithfulness to his promise in the Abrahamic Covenant.18 In all of this the presence of the ancient formula associated with the Abrahamic covenant once again gives assurance of the holy faithful character of the Lord.

The Post Mosaic Periods

Although the precise formula of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (or Israel) does not appear often after the days of Moses, God’s promises associated with this formula occur frequently. One of them is found in the narrative of Elijah’s prophetic ministry. Elijah had a significant ministry for the Lord, so much so that three chapters (chs. 17-19) in the book of I Kings are devoted to it as follows: Introduction (17:1-6); Elijah’s ministry at Zarephath (17:7-24); his continued ministry climaxed by the contest with the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (18:1-46); his retreat to Horeb (19:1-18); and an epilog detailing his part in the call of Elisha to the prophetic ministry (19:19-21).

It is in the account of his contest with the prophets of Baal that we find the familiar patriarchal formula. Because God’s people had been encouraged to follow the god Baal rather than the LORD (Yahweh), Elijah had arranged for a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate which of the two was truly God In this contest both Baal’s prophets and Elijah were to place a sacrificial animal upon their respective altars, so that with the consuming of the sacrifice by fire it would be shown who was the true God, Yahweh or Baal. Despite their frenzied efforts, the prophets of Baal achieved nothing in their attempts. Then at the time of Israel’s evening offering, Elijah approached his altar and prayed:

O LORD God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, prove today that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant and have done all these things at your command. Answer me. O LORD, answer me, so these people will know that you, O LORD, are the true God and that you are winning back their allegiance. (1 Kings 18:36-37)

Elijah’s prayer was answered in a convincing, spectacular fashion (vv.38-39). God sent a fire that not only consumed the sacrifice, but the altar itself and everything surrounding it. The use of the patriarchal formula not only reminded the Israelites of who was their God, but also demonstrated that those who are faithful to the Lord could call upon him and have their prayers answered (cf. Ps. 102:1-2. James 5:16-18). It is noteworthy as well that in the formula utilized here the patriarchal name Israel occurs rather than Jacob. For like Jacob of old, the Israelites of Elijah’s time (i.e., during the reign of Ahab and his wife Jezebel) needed to hold fast to the Lord if they were to experience his favor and blessing.

It is regrettable that despite the spiritual teachings available to the Israelites in the long-standing record concerning the change of Jacob’s name to Israel, as well as in the knowledge of Elijah’s triumph over the false prophets of Baal, the children of Israel continued to be attracted to the worship of Baal and indulged themselves in the religious rites associated with it.19 Therefore, their difficulties only multiplied. Nevertheless, God remained faithful to them in spite of their stubborn hearts. For example, in the early days of the fourth dynasty of the northern kingdom it is reported that,

The LORD had mercy on them and felt pity for them. He extended his favor to them because of the promise he had made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He has been unwilling to destroy them or remove them from his presence to this very day. (2 Kings 13:22-23)

The same lack of faithfulness was true during the eighth century, B.C. not only in the northern kingdom but in Judah as well. Nevertheless, a couple of good kings appear in the history of the southern kingdom. One of these is Hezekiah (729-699 B.C.). Hezekiah was remembered for his trust in and loyalty to the Lord (2 Kings 18:5). This also took the form of the instituting of religious reforms (2 Kings 18:3-7). One of these was the reinstitution of the Passover. Thus we read of his royal edict for the people throughout Israel to attend the Passover in Jerusalem, albeit it was being observed one month later than the traditional date (2 Chron. 30:1-9). Interestingly, the king’s summons read:

O Israelites, return to the LORD God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, so he may return to you who have been spared from the kings of Assyria. Don’t be like your fathers and brothers who were unfaithful to the LORD God of their ancestors, provoking him to destroy them, as you can see. Now, don’t be stubborn like your Fathers!. . . If you return to the LORD, your brothers and sons will be shown mercy by their captors and return to the land. The LORD your God is merciful and compassionate; he will not reject you if you return to him. (vv. 6-9)

Thus we can see in Israel’s post-pentateuchal history that the Lord remained faithful to his people, and despite their inconsistent unspiritual walk and at times outright apostasy was available to help them. Throughout the days of the Old Testament, then, The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel was ever his people’s gracious and merciful God -- even though in accordance with his covenant faithfulness he must of necessity judge them for their infidelity and sins. Thus the Psalmist declares:

He always remembers his covenantal decree, the promise he made to a thousand generations—the promise he made to Abraham, the promise he made by oath to Isaac! He gave it to Jacob as a decree,  to Israel as a lasting promise, saying, “To you I will give the land of Canaan  as the portion of your inheritance.”(Ps 105:8-11)

The New Testament Era

The role of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob continued to be one of great importance to the Jewish people even into New Testament times. Each of the three is mentioned in the New Testament writings not only in the genealogies of Jesus’ family but also as an example of faith. Thus Paul addresses a special section in his Epistle to the Romans (Rom. 4:1-25) demonstrating that Abraham’s righteousness did not come by the works of the Law but by faith. Therefore, he became the progenitor of all people to follow who possess genuine faith, whether Jew or Gentile.

It must be noted, of course, that the Apostle James makes it clear that true faith is demonstrated in doing righteous acts, even as did Abraham (James 2:14-26; cf. Heb 6:1-12). Osborne encapsulates the basic idea in James’ argument by saying, “Works are necessary to prove that one’s faith is valid . . . clarifying that Abraham’s faith and actions worked together.” 20 Abraham is also shown to be a prime example of faith by the author of Hebrews (Heb. 11:8-19) as well as the progenitor of an abundant number of descendants (Heb. 6:13-20). These include not only natural descendants but those of faith, and especially those of genuine faith in Christ Jesus.

Isaac and Jacob are also of interest to Paul. Paul puts forward Isaac as an example of an heir of God’s promise through Abraham (Gal. 4:21-31). Elsewhere Paul challenges his Jewish hearers to remember their great privilege of being descendants of the patriarchs through divine election by their God. Indeed, the Lord has remained faithful to his promise to Abraham, which was channeled through Isaac and Jacob (Rom 9:13).21 Isaac and Jacob are also linked together with Abraham in the incident where Jesus healed the Roman centurion’s servant. Having commended the centurion’s faith, Jesus declares that not only Jewish people but all people of true faith in Christ will enjoy fellowship as God’s family: “I tell you that many will come from the east and west to share the banquet with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 8:11).

Thus the patriarchal formula was yet felt and confessed in New Testament times. One of these is found in a dialogue between Jesus and the Sadducees. When the Sadducees presented to Jesus a theoretical case apparently detrimental to a belief in the resurrection, Jesus taught them about the changed conditions in the post-resurrection life (Luke 20:27-36). Jesus then reminded them of the well-known incident of Moses standing before the burning bush saying,

Even Moses revealed that the dead are raised in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live before him. (Luke 20:37-38)

The Sadducees were thus informed that on the authority of God’s word through Moses, whom they cherished, that “Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are also going to ‘rise.’ Therefore, their existence does not lie in the past but in the future as well and God is called, in contemporary terms, their God.”22 Gooding also adds, “The eternal cannot be characterized by something that no longer exists. Resurrection is therefore not a fantasy dreamed up the wishful thinking of less than rigorous theologians; resurrection is a necessary outcome of the character and nature of God.”23 That the patriarchs will enjoy the resurrected life in God’s eternal kingdom is also shown in that true believers will see, “Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God” (Luke 13:28).

Having examined the Old Testament and New Testament references to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, we are now in a position to appreciate more fully Peter’s sermon at Solomon’s Portico. As we noted in our opening remarks, Peter uses the occasion of the healing of the lame man first to deny any personal power of healing (Acts 3:12) and then to deliver a message to the amazed crowd that had gathered around them (vv. 13-22). In that message Peter laid a foundation for identifying himself with his Jewish audience by referring to their common belief in “The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our forefathers” (v.12). Peter’s audience would doubtless recall that this formula had special relevance for Israel ever since the incident of Moses standing before the burning bush. Accordingly, in the course of his remarks Peter reminded his hearers that this same Moses (as well as the Old Testament prophets) spoke of a coming prophet whom the people must listen to and obey. That prophet was indeed Jesus the Messiah, the very one whom the Jewish people had crucified rather than obeying. Yet it was not too late, for the Lord stood ready to receive repentant sinners who put their faith in the resurrected Christ Jesus. By doing so they could experience the times of refreshment prophesied in God’s Word.

Therefore, the patriarchal formula held importance in Peter’s remarks by demonstrating that Jesus was the ultimate fulfillment of Moses’ teaching and thus was of supreme importance to the Jewish people—the very ones who had rejected him. But there is more, for as we noted above, the patriarchal formula had already been utilized before the incident of the burning bush. As he faced death, Joseph expressed his confident belief in God’s word to give the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob the Promised Land as their everlasting in heritance (Gen. 50:24-25). Moreover, Peter’s Jewish audience should remember that were themselves heirs of that promise. Yet there is even more, for all of this is built upon the foundation of the Abrahamic Covenant, which disclosed to Abraham:

I will make you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you extremely fruitful. I will make nations of you and kings will descend from you. I will confirm my covenant as a perpetual covenant between me and you. It will extend to your descendants after you throughout their generations. I will be your God and the God of your descendants after you. I will give the whole land of Canaan--the land where you are now residing--to you and your descendants after you as a permanent possession. I will be their God. (Gen. 17: 5-8; cf. Gen. 22:18)

It is of further importance to note that the word rendered “descendants” in Peter’s sermon (Acts 3:25) as well as in Genesis 22:18 is more literally, “seed.” This in turn hearkens even further back to the original promise of a redeemer (Gen. 3:15), a promise that finds its fulfillment in Jesus Christ. Accordingly, Larkin observes, “Through the ‘seed,’ who is the Messiah, the blessing was intended to extend beyond the Jews to the Gentiles, but the Jews still had priority in receiving the fulfillment, for God raised up his servant Jesus and sent him ‘first’ to them (3:26).24 The implication is clear. Peter’s hearers should place full confidence in God’s plan, by repenting and receiving Jesus as he truly is, the Savior of all people and their promised Messiah. For it is in Christ Jesus that all of God’s covenantal promises will be realized both in the future and in righteous living here and now. Indeed, Peter’s use of the formula of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was well suited to the occasion and of great spiritual significance.

Application

Our exploration of the patriarchal formula of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob has disclosed that, rather than being a mere linguistic or literary feature, it is a recurring and unifying biblical motif, which carries great significance. First and foremost, it reinforces the truth that God is supreme and sovereignly controls all things. Second, the Lord is a faithful God who has been true to his word through all the course of history in his dealings with mankind. This is especially seen in regard to his divinely chosen patriarchs and their Israelite descendants with whom he has established the Abrahamic Covenant with its attendant blessings. God’s faithfulness is further demonstrated in the Mosaic Covenant, whose blessings and cursings he has administered in accordance with the terms of the covenant. Third, both covenants are solemn reminders that the Lord in turn expects faithfulness from his followers. Such entails not only genuine faith in God .but also an adherence to the high standards in his revealed Word. Fourth, even in the midst of administering his chastisements God could and did demonstrate that he also forgives his people when they truly repent of their sin. In still other times God’s patient tolerance of his peoples’ spiritual stubbornness testifies of his graciousness and mercy. Fifth, the repeated use of the patriarchal formula in connection with God’s covenants finds its most significant application in the promised Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, the One in whom all of the assured promises of God will be fulfilled.

Yet, there is still more. The truth of the need of covenant faithfulness has application for today’s world as well, not only for the people of Israel but for Christian believers. God’s people in Old Testament times were to live in accordance with God’s revealed standards of righteousness and proper conduct. It is no less the case for believers today. It is true that Christians, whether Jew or Gentile, are free from the ritual requirements of the Mosaic Law (Gal. 4:21-5:1). Nevertheless, as united to Christ believers must remember that Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them” (Matt. 5:17). Moreover, the principles of holiness in the law are now written on the hearts of true believers under provisions in the New Covenant, which Christ himself has initiated (cf. Jer. 31:31-34 with Matt. 26:27-29; 2 Cor. 3:6; Heb. 8; 12:24). Accordingly, believers are to live in faithfulness to the Lord and his revealed holy standards (Col. 2:6-10; Titus 2:11-15; 1 Pet. 2:9-12; Rev. 2:10).

As we do, it is of comfort to realize that the Abrahamic Covenant, channeled through the Davidic Covenant (cf. Jer. 33:23-26; Ps. 89:1-4, 20-27), finds its fulfillment in the New Covenant, so that in a special sense as united to Christ all believers are “one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:28-29; cf. Rom. 4:1-5, 23-25). Indeed, as “heirs of God and also fellow heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:17) we too look forward to a land of promise, an even better land, to which our Lord will bring us in the everlasting state (Rev. 21-22). And as believers in Christ who await that promised glorious future, we, no less than Abraham (Rom. 4:20-22), may have full confidence in the promise of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel to meet our every need (cf. Deut. 30:20; cf. 2 Cor. 1:19-22; Gal. 3:16).

The God of Abraham praise, who reigns enthroned above;

ancient of everlasting days, and God of love.

…….

He by Himself hath sworn, I on His oath depend;

I shall on eagles’ wings upborne, to Heaven ascend.

I shall behold His face, I shall His pow’r adore,

and sing the wonders of His grace forevermore.25


1 Unless otherwise noted, all scriptural citations will be taken from the NET Bible.

2 For a discussion of the original text as to this formula, see the NET textual note.

3 Ross Murfin and Supriya M. Ray, The Bedford Glossary of Critical and Literary Terms (Boston: Bedford Books, 1997), 224.

4 See further, A. Altmann, ed., Biblical Motifs (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966).

5 Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1-17, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 373.

6 C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: The Pentateuch, ed. James Martin, 3 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956) 1:193.

7 Allen P. Ross, Creation & Blessing (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988), 310. Abram’s declaration of faith had a far reaching impact upon Hebrew thought. It can doubtless be recognized as embedded in Habakkuk’s prophetic words that, “The person of integrity will live because of his integrity” (Hab. 2:4; cf. Rom. 3:17; Gal. 3:11). See further, Richard D. Patterson, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (Chicago: Moody, 1991), 221-23; see also reprint edition by Biblical Studies Press (2003), 202-03).

8 Andreas J. Kӧstenberger and Richard D. Patterson, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2011), 178. For further details, see pages 174-187.

9 For further helpful details concerning God’s gracious dealings with Abraham, see Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., The Promise-Plan of God (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978, 2008), 54-61.

10 The Genesis account would seem to indicate that Jacob had actually wrestled with God and seen him “Face to face” and “survived” (v. 30). This, however seems to be contrary to God’s word to Moses that, “No man can see me and live” (Deut. 33:20; cf. vv. 21-23). As Kenneth A. Matthews (Genesis 11:27-50: 26, The New American Commentary, ed. E. Ray Clendenen [Nashville, 2005], 560) points out, “Much ancient Jewish and Christian speculation arose from this fascinating encounter of Jacob and the ‘man’.” Jewish tradition held that Jacob’s opponent was an angel. Some Christian interpreters suggested that the angel was a type of Christ. Interestingly, the prophet Hosea declares that Jacob, “Struggled with an angel and prevailed” (Hos. 12:4). Accordingly, Thomas Edward McComiskey, (“Hosea,” in The Minor Prophets, ed. Thomas Edward McComiskey, 3 vols.[Grand Rapids; Baker, 1992]1:201), decides that the “manifestation of the divine presence was an angel” sent by the Lord. He goes on to add, “It is best to understand that the angel of the Lord as a self-manifestation of God in a way that would communicate certain aspects of God’s character peculiar to the existing circumstances.”

11 It is also of great importance that Jesus used the term “I Am” not only in revealing to the Samaritan woman that he is the promised Messiah of Israel, but on several different occasions he employed this term metaphorically to emphasize his unique position as the Savior of the world. Thus he declared himself to be: the bread of life (John 6:35; cf. vv. 41, 48, 51), the light of the world (John 8:12), the door (John 10:9), the good shepherd (John 10:11, 14), the resurrection and the life (John 11:25), the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6), and the true vine (John 15:1; cf. v. 5).

12 U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1974), 38. For further implications as to the force of Exodus 3:5, see especially the NET text notes, #1 and #4.

13 Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., “Exodus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, eds. Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland, 13 vols. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, Rev. ed., 2008) 1:392.

14 Ibid.

15 See further the helpful discussion in John N. Osborne, “Exodus,” in Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort, 18 vols. (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2008) 1:328-30.

16 The use of the name Isaac here reinforced the covenantal nature of Moses’ request, for it reflects Jacob’s name change at the time of God’s blessing of Jacob as an heir of the Abrahamic Covenant and his name being included as the third part of the covenant formula.

17 R. Dennis Cole, Numbers, The New American Commentary, ed. E. Ray Clendenen (Nashville, Broadman & Holman, 2000), 240.

18 For further details, see the discussions in Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 404-405; Eugene H. Merrill, Deuteronomy, The New American Commentary, ed. E. Ray Clendenen (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 451-54.

19 For further information concerning Hosea’s prophetic teaching concerning Jacob’s struggle with the angel of the Lord (Hos. 12:2-6), see Richard D. Patterson and Andrew E. Hill, Minor Prophets; Hosea-Malachi, Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort, 18 vols. (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2008)10: 22-24; Richard D. Patterson, Hosea, Biblical Studies Press (Richardson, TX: 2009), 11-18.

20 Grant R. Osborne, “James,” in Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort, 18 vols. (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2011) 18:63. Osborne goes on to add. “Neither faith nor works can function properly apart from each other. The two are ‘co-workers’ in the journey of the Christian life.”

21 Note also the remembrance of Jacob in the narrative of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s Well (John 4: 5-6, 12).

22 David W. Pao, “Luke,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, eds. Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland, 13 vols. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, Rev. ed., 2007) 10: 301.

23 David Gooding, According to Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 323. It is of interest to note as well that in his defense before the Jewish council Stephen also refers to the incident of the burning bush (Acts 7:30-34) in which he also cites the familiar patriarchal formula (v. 32).

24 William J. Larkin, “Acts,” in Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort, 18 vols. (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House. 2006) 12: 405.

25 Thomas Olivers, “The God of Abraham Praise.”

Related Topics: Character of God

Pages