Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All
Delve into the history of the early Church, tracing its origins back to the teachings of Jesus and the apostolic missions. This article offers insights into the initial challenges, triumphs, and pivotal events that fueled the expansion of Christianity from a small group of believers to a global faith.
The Biblical Foundation of the Christian Congregation
The Christian congregation, as depicted in the Scriptures, is fundamentally a gathering of individuals called by God, transcending a mere assembly for social or religious purposes. This concept stems from the Hebrew word “qahal” and the Greek term “ekklesia,” both signifying a gathering or assembly, but with profound spiritual implications. In the Old Testament, the term “qahal” frequently appears, denoting an organized body such as the “congregation of Israel” (Leviticus 16:17; Joshua 8:35) and the “congregation of Jehovah” (Numbers 20:4; 1 Chronicles 28:8). It encompasses gatherings for worship, civil affairs, and warfare, illustrating the diverse nature of congregational assemblies.
In the New Testament, “ekklesia” often refers to the Christian congregation. It is used to describe the general Christian congregation (1 Corinthians 12:28), specific congregations in cities like Jerusalem (Acts 8:1) or Corinth (2 Corinthians 1:1), and even small groups meeting in homes (Romans 16:5; Philemon 2). This term is also used to translate “qahal” in the Greek Septuagint, further connecting the Christian congregation with its Jewish roots in concept and language.
Christ as the Foundation and Head of the Christian Congregation
The establishment of the Christian congregation is intricately linked to Jesus Christ. He declared Himself as the “rock-mass” upon which His congregation would be built (Matthew 16:18). This was understood by Peter and later expounded by Paul, who identified Christ as the foundation and cornerstone of the congregation (Ephesians 2:19-22; 1 Corinthians 3:11). This congregation, belonging to Jehovah and founded on Christ, appropriately came to be known as “the congregation of God” (Acts 20:28; Galatians 1:13).
The Christian congregation also recognizes Christ as its head, affirming His role in guiding and directing the congregation (Ephesians 1:22-23; Colossians 1:18). This relationship is pivotal to understanding the congregation’s structure, purpose, and function.
The Emergence of the Christian Congregation at Pentecost
The transformation of the congregation of Israel into the Christian congregation of God is marked by the events of Pentecost in 33 C.E. (Acts 2:1-4). This pivotal moment, when the Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus’ followers, signified the birth of the Christian congregation and the fulfillment of Jesus’ earlier promises. The early followers of Jesus, including the twelve apostles and Saul of Tarsus, played significant roles in laying the foundations of this congregation (Acts 1:23-26; Revelation 21:14).
The Nature and Purpose of the Christian Congregation
Understanding the Christian congregation requires more than recognizing its biblical foundation; it involves discerning its nature and purpose. The term “church,” often used interchangeably with “congregation,” can lead to misconceptions if perceived merely as a building or a casual assembly. Instead, it signifies a group of individuals “called out” for a divine purpose. This is evident in various uses of “ekklesia” in the Scriptures, whether referring to local assemblies (Romans 16:16; 1 Corinthians 11:16) or the universal body of Christ (Ephesians 1:22; 3:10).
The local church, therefore, is not just any gathering of Christians. It is an assembly that convenes for the right purpose, under appropriate authority, with a commitment to fulfilling the Great Commission. It is characterized by the presence of Christ through the Holy Spirit, adherence to the Word of God, and a clear focus on glorifying God. The authenticity of a local church is validated by its ability to nurture spiritual growth and reproduce itself, manifesting through the exercise of spiritual gifts.
The Christian congregation, both in its universal and local expressions, is a divinely instituted assembly, rooted in biblical teachings and centered around Christ. Its existence and function are not confined to physical structures or casual gatherings but are defined by its spiritual character, purpose, and commitment to God’s mission. Understanding this profound truth is essential for appreciating the role and significance of the Christian congregation in the grand narrative of God’s redemptive plan.
The Early Church: A Community of Faith and Obedience
The Essential Nature of the Early Christian Assembly
The early Christian church, as revealed in the New Testament, was a unique assembly of individuals who were not merely gathered by human summons but were called out by God Himself. This distinction is embedded in the Greek term “ekklesia,” used to describe the church. It carries the meaning of a group distinct from the general populace, called out for a special purpose. In Acts 19:32, “ekklesia” is used to denote a town meeting, but in the Christian context, it takes on a more profound meaning, indicating those called out of darkness into God’s marvelous light, as Peter articulates in 1 Peter 2:9. The church, therefore, was not just an assembly; it was a divinely ordained congregation, set apart for God’s purposes.
Believers as the Core of the Church
A pivotal aspect of the New Testament church was its composition exclusively of believers. This is a consistent theme throughout the New Testament, emphasizing the necessity of genuine faith in Jesus Christ as a prerequisite for church membership. Acts 5:13-14 illustrates this principle, where despite the awe and respect the apostles commanded among the populace, only true believers were added to the church. This distinction underscores the church’s identity as a community of the regenerate, those who have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It highlights the critical nature of genuine faith, not mere association or nominal adherence, as the basis for being part of the Christian assembly.
Baptism: The Public Declaration of Faith
Baptism in the early church was not a mere ritual but a vital step of obedience following one’s confession of faith in Jesus Christ. Acts 2:41 vividly depicts this, where those who received Peter’s message were baptized, symbolizing their incorporation into the Christian community. This practice established a clear pattern in the early church: faith followed by baptism. Baptism served as a public declaration of one’s allegiance to Christ and His teachings, an outward symbol of an inward grace. While baptism did not contribute to one’s salvation, it was a significant act of discipleship, a public identification with Christ and His church. The New Testament does not present unbaptized believers as the norm, with the exception of the thief on the cross, whose unique circumstances and faith in Christ serve as an extraordinary case.
The Distinctiveness of the New Testament Church
The New Testament church was characterized by distinctiveness in its membership and practices. This distinctiveness was not rooted in cultural, social, or ritualistic aspects but was fundamentally a matter of faith and obedience to Christ. The early Christians were not merely a group of people who shared common religious beliefs; they were a community transformed by the Gospel, marked by their faith in Jesus Christ and their commitment to living out His teachings. The church’s practices, particularly baptism, were outward expressions of this inner transformation and obedience to Christ’s commands.
Conclusion: The Early Church as a Model for Today
The early Christian church, as depicted in the New Testament, stands as a model for the church in all ages. It was a community distinctly marked by faith in Jesus Christ, characterized by obedience to His commands, and set apart by God for His purposes. The principles of faith, baptism, and assembly that defined the early church continue to be relevant for the church today. They remind us that the church is not merely a human institution but a divine entity, called out by God, comprised of believers, and committed to living out the Gospel in obedience to Christ. This understanding is crucial for grasping the true nature and purpose of the church, both in its historical context and in its contemporary expression.
Foundations of Faith and Practice in the Early Church
Adherence to Apostolic Doctrine
One of the defining characteristics of the early church was its unwavering commitment to apostolic teaching. The church in Jerusalem set a precedent by “continuing steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine” (Acts 2:42). This doctrinal purity was not merely about intellectual assent to theological concepts but was a dynamic engagement with the teachings that the apostles received from Christ. It shaped the community’s beliefs, practices, and identity. The Bereans in Acts 17:11 exemplify this dedication, as they received the word with eagerness and examined the Scriptures daily to see if what the apostles taught was true. This adherence to biblical doctrine was foundational to the early church’s identity and mission.
Biblical Theology as a Guide for Church Practices
The early church viewed the Bible not just as a theological document but as a practical manual for living. The apostle Paul emphasized this when he wrote that “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). The early Christians understood that their beliefs, rooted in Scripture, had profound implications for their daily lives. The apostles not only imparted doctrinal knowledge but also applied these teachings to real-life situations, demonstrating that faith and practice are inextricably linked.
Positive and Negative Discipline in the Church
Discipline, both positive and negative, was a significant aspect of life in the early church. The positive aspect involved teaching, guiding, and nurturing believers to grow in their faith and conform to Christ-like living. The negative aspect, though more challenging, was equally vital. It entailed corrective measures to address moral or doctrinal deviations within the church. Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians to remove an immoral brother (1 Corinthians 5) exemplifies this negative discipline. It was not meant to be punitive but restorative, aimed at the spiritual health and purity of both the individual and the church community. Just as a parent disciplines a child for their growth and well-being, the early church applied biblical discipline to maintain doctrinal integrity and godly living among its members.
Conclusion: The Word of God as the Church’s Authority
The early church’s commitment to biblical discipline underpins its growth and vitality. By placing itself under the authority of God’s Word, the church in the New Testament era exemplified a model of spiritual integrity and maturity. This model serves as a timeless standard for all churches, calling them to uphold doctrinal purity, apply biblical teachings in practical living, and exercise discipline guided by Scripture. The early church’s faithfulness to these principles not only defined its character but also enabled it to navigate challenges and fulfill its mission in the world. As contemporary believers, learning from and emulating these foundational aspects of the early church can help maintain the purity and effectiveness of the church in fulfilling its divine mandate.
The Structure and Mission of the Early Christian Church
Authority and Unity under the Jerusalem Governing Body
The early Christian congregations were distinctive in their structure and governance. While they were established in various locations, they were not autonomous entities but were united under the authority of the governing body in Jerusalem. This body, comprising apostles and elders, played a pivotal role in directing the early church, ensuring doctrinal uniformity and practical coherence among the congregations. The resolution of the circumcision issue in Acts 15:22-31 exemplifies this centralized authority. Decisions made by this body, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, were binding across all Christian congregations, reflecting a unified approach to doctrine and practice.
Role of Traveling Representatives and Local Leaders
The Jerusalem governing body dispatched traveling representatives like Paul to communicate its decisions and provide oversight to local congregations (Acts 16:4-5). Additionally, these representatives, following Christ’s example, played a key role in appointing local leaders, such as elders and ministerial servants, within each congregation (1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9). These leaders were chosen based on specific spiritual qualifications and were expected to be examples to the flock (1 Peter 5:2-3), demonstrating loving concern and providing assistance to those in need (Galatians 6:1; James 5:13-16).
Organizational Structure Reflecting God’s Arrangement
The Christian congregation’s structure mirrored the organizational pattern established in ancient Israel, where older men, judges, and officers played key roles (Joshua 23:2). Similarly, in the Christian context, elders were appointed in each congregation for responsible positions, entrusted with representing and guiding the congregation in spiritual matters (Acts 14:23; 20:28; 1 Corinthians 5:1-5). This structure ensured that each congregation was well-managed and capable of addressing internal challenges effectively.
Spiritual Gifts and Roles within the Congregation
The diversity of spiritual gifts and roles within the Christian congregation was crucial for its growth and edification. Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 12:12-31) highlights this diversity, emphasizing the importance of each member’s contribution to the body of Christ. Apostles, prophets, teachers, and others with gifts of healing, assistance, administration, and various languages were all vital for the congregation’s well-being (Ephesians 4:11-16). This diversity ensured the congregation’s ability to nurture faith, provide ministerial work, and build up the body of Christ.
The Purpose and Mission of the Church
The early church was characterized by steadfast devotion to the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayer (Acts 2:42). This commitment to doctrine, communal life, and worship set a foundational pattern for church life. The church’s mission, as outlined in the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20; Mark 16:15; Luke 24:47), was to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them and teaching them to observe all that Christ commanded. This mission was carried out fervently, as seen in the early church’s persistent efforts in teaching and preaching about Jesus Christ, both in the temple and from house to house (Acts 5:42). The urgency with which the early Christians approached evangelism stemmed from their belief in the gospel’s life-changing power and the necessity of sharing it with a lost world.
Concluding Reflections on the Early Christian Church
The early Christian church serves as a profound model for today’s church in terms of structure, leadership, mission, and communal life. Its commitment to apostolic teaching, unified governance, diversity of spiritual gifts, and fervent evangelism are timeless principles that continue to guide the Christian church. By studying and emulating these aspects of the early church, contemporary Christian congregations can align more closely with the biblical model of a vibrant, mission-oriented community of faith.
Sacraments of Faith: Baptism and the Lord’s Supper in the Early Church
Baptism: A Public Declaration of Faith
Baptism, the first ordinance of the early Christian church, was a pivotal act of obedience and public declaration of faith. It symbolized the believer’s identification with Christ and the church. Acts 2:41 shows that those who accepted Peter’s message were baptized, signifying their incorporation into the Christian community. Paul, in Romans 6, delves deeper into the meaning of baptism, illustrating how it represents a believer’s union with Christ in His death and resurrection, signifying a new life in Christ (Romans 6:3-7; Galatians 2:20). Baptism served as a visible testimony to others of a person’s commitment to Christ, often termed a “badge of discipleship.”
The Lord’s Supper: A Remembrance of Christ’s Sacrifice
The Lord’s Supper, instituted by Jesus during His last Passover meal with His disciples, is the second ordinance of the church. This sacrament is a solemn remembrance of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross and a proclamation of His death until He returns (1 Corinthians 11:26). During the observance, believers partake of bread and wine, symbolizing Christ’s body and blood. This ordinance not only commemorates Jesus’ sacrifice but also invites believers to introspect and examine their faith and lives (1 Corinthians 11:28). It serves as a continual reminder of the central truth of Christianity: Christ’s atoning death and its significance for believers.
The Significance of These Ordinances
Both baptism and the Lord’s Supper are more than mere rituals; they are profound expressions of faith and crucial aspects of Christian worship and identity. These ordinances, as practiced by the early church, provide a tangible connection to the fundamental truths of the Christian faith. They remind believers of their personal commitment to Christ and their communal identity as part of His body, the church. Furthermore, they serve as a means of grace, deepening the believer’s relationship with Christ and the church community.
Conclusion: Keeping the Church Pure and Connected to Christ
In these sacraments, the early church found both a declaration of faith and a means to maintain purity and separation from the world. Baptism publicly affirmed one’s faith and entrance into the Christian community, while the Lord’s Supper offered a recurring opportunity for reflection and recommitment to Christ’s teachings. Through these practices, the early church continually realigned itself with the core tenets of the Christian faith, fostering a strong, vibrant, and committed community of believers. In modern times, these ordinances continue to hold profound significance, grounding the church in its historical faith and keeping it connected to the pivotal events of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.
About the Author
EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).
SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW
BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM
BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM
BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION
EARLY CHRISTIANITY
HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY
CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC EVANGELISM
TECHNOLOGY AND THE CHRISTIAN
CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY
CHILDREN’S BOOKS
HOW TO PRAY AND PRAYER LIFE
TEENS-YOUTH-ADOLESCENCE-JUVENILE
CHRISTIAN LIVING
APOLOGETIC BIBLE BACKGROUND EXPOSITION BIBLE COMMENTARIES
CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONALS
CHURCH HEALTH, GROWTH, AND HISTORY
Apocalyptic-Eschatology [End Times]
CHRISTIAN FICTION
Like this:
Like Loading...
Edward,
Excellent post in covering the ground as to what the “church” is versus what it is not. The introduction with the emphasis on “qahal” and “ekklesia” was good.
One area that I did not see addressed was that change from “The Way” to “Church” as a designation of the group. The early believers were all “Jewish.” They would have been considered a “Jewish sect.” That would change after the gospel was believed by the Samaritans, then after Cornelius, a Roman Centurian, a “Gentile” believed. Thus, by that time Gentiles and Jewish believers were worshipping together in Antioch, Syria. This contuued until in Acts 11:26, when “The Way” became known by a new title, “Christian,”
The reasons vary, but two stand out. First, the title “Christian,” reflects what the people saw in the believers, “Christ.” Second, it also reflected the change in status as a ‘sect” of Judaism to one that was no longer a sect of Judaism but the “union of “Gentiles and Jews” as “one in Christ.”
All that you say is true. I am writing a book CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY: The Christian’s Ultimate Guide to Learning from the Bible.
PART ELEVEN Studying Ecclesiology has seven chapters and I have two more sections to go, and I am running low on pages.
I have a book that you might enjoy
EARLY CHRISTIANITY IN THE FIRST CENTURY: Jesus’ Witnesses to the Ends of the Earth
Ignore the one bad review. It covers far more than you might think based on the title. Take a look at the chapter titles using the look inside feature.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1945757507
Here is what is taught in the New Testament with regard to baptism: 1) one receives the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 22:16), 2) one puts on Christ (Gal. 3:26-27), 3) baptism saves (1 Peter 3:21), 4) one is buried with Christ in baptism (Rom. 6:3-4), 5) one is raised from the dead in baptism (Col. 2:12). Baptism is God’s command for each believer to submit to, for without doing so none of the above will result.
Not true. Baptism is an outward display. Jesus Christ saves, not baptism.
Really? That is all you’re going to say. Your wave-of-the-hand dismissal is a blanket thrown over the passages that covers nothing in the way of substance.
Yes, Jesus saves, and there is salvation is no other. Jesus said baptism saves, not by itself, but as a culmination of a faithful response to his will.
No where in the NT does the assertion ring true that baptism is an outward display. Your assertion is not true, not even close to being true.
SCRIPTURES OFTEN MISUNDERSTOOD: Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21: Does Water Baptism Save You?
https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2022/10/07/scriptures-often-misunderstood-acts-238-2216-1-peter-321-does-water-baptism-save-you/
There is no misunderstanding to those passages, you know it. You simply don’t like what is said.
Since you want to include citations, did Charles Williams mistranslate 2:38: “You must repent — and, as an expression of it, let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ — that you may have your sins forgiven; and then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
True or False: Peter said baptism saves.
True or False: Ananias told Saul to arise and be baptized and wash away his sin.
True, the book of Acts does record Ananias telling Saul (who later became Paul) to be baptized and wash away his sins (Acts 22:16). However, it’s important to understand the broader biblical context of these statements.
In the New Testament, baptism is often associated with the repentance and forgiveness of sins, but it is not the act of baptism itself that saves. The emphasis is on faith in Jesus Christ and His sacrifice as the means of salvation. For instance, Ephesians 2:8-9 clearly states, “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, so that no one may boast.” This underscores that salvation is a gift from God, received through faith, not earned through works, including the act of baptism.
Regarding Peter’s statement, 1 Peter 3:21 does say, “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Here, Peter is not saying that the physical act of baptism saves. Instead, he is referring to what baptism represents – an appeal to God for a clean conscience, made possible through Jesus Christ’s resurrection. It symbolizes the believer’s identification with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection.
In essence, while baptism is an important step of obedience for a believer and a public declaration of faith in Christ, the New Testament teaches that it is faith in Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice that saves, not the act of baptism itself. It’s crucial to interpret these passages within the larger context of the Bible’s teaching on salvation by grace through faith.
Understanding the broader context is perfectly in order, but that does not change what was said, even the meaning of the words used in what was said.
It is true that it is not the act of baptism itself that saves, and it is also true that one is justified by faith, but it is not true that baptism is a work of righteousness, and neither does Matthew 3:15 say that it is. Where does the New Testament say “works” are equated with God’s commands? The “works” prohibited in the New Testament are those that have their origin in the minds of man. A command to be obeyed is a not a “work of righteousness” that originates with man.
Regarding 1 Peter 3:21, it is certainly the case that baptism saves (just as Peter said) and it saves in that which it represents, an appeal of a good conscience toward God.
Your last paragraph is mostly correct. Baptism is more than an important step in obedience, it is crucial, essential. It is never used in the New Testament as an expression as a “public declaration of faith,” but it is the culmination of a faith that saves. This is foundationed (if you will) on the atoning sacrifice of the Lord Christ.” The act of baptism by itself is nothing, but when the Lord said to do it for a reason, that is the reason it is essential to salvation. By itself, it’s just water; coupled with faith it saves.
Your view reflects a perspective that sees baptism as essential for salvation, not just as an act of obedience or a symbol of faith. While it’s true that baptism is an important aspect of Christian practice, the core issue at hand is whether baptism itself is a requirement for salvation or if it’s an outward expression of a pre-existing faith in Jesus Christ.
Understanding Baptism in Context: The New Testament indeed commands baptism (Matthew 28:19), but it consistently emphasizes faith in Jesus Christ as the primary means of salvation. Romans 10:9 states, “If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” The emphasis here is on belief and confession, not on the act of baptism.
Works vs. Obedience: It’s important to differentiate between “works” and “obedience.” The New Testament often criticizes reliance on “works” for salvation – actions done to earn God’s favor. In contrast, “obedience,” including baptism, is a response to the salvation already received through faith. Ephesians 2:8-9 emphasizes salvation as a gift, not earned by works, but it also calls for a life of good works in response to this gift (Ephesians 2:10).
Baptism as a Symbol: The act of baptism symbolizes the believer’s identification with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. It’s a public declaration of a personal faith in Christ and His atoning sacrifice. While baptism is a command and should be obeyed, it is not presented as a precondition for salvation but as a subsequent step of faith.
1 Peter 3:21 and the Role of Baptism: Peter’s reference to baptism in 1 Peter 3:21 is complex. He does say baptism saves, but he clarifies that it’s not the physical act (not the removal of dirt from the body) but the pledge of a clear conscience towards God. This indicates that the efficacy of baptism is not in the ritual itself but in the faith and repentance it represents.
Faith and Baptism: You correctly note that baptism coupled with faith is meaningful, the New Testament narrative suggests that it is faith that is foundational to salvation. Baptism is an important act of obedience and a powerful symbol of that faith, but it is not the mechanism by which salvation is granted.
In conclusion, while baptism is a critical and commanded act of obedience in the Christian faith, the New Testament teachings consistently point to faith in Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice as the basis of salvation. Baptism, therefore, is an outward expression of this inward faith, a significant step in a believer’s journey, but not the means by which salvation is obtained.
Emphasis is not a matter of arithmetic. Quantity / frequency has no bearing on essentiality. If that were so, “faith” is more important than “repentance” and ‘baptism” more important than “repentance.” Neither of which is true. Surely, I am not understanding you correctly.
The way you used Romans 10:9-10 leaves you open to the obvious criticism that since baptism is not mentioned, thus not a condition (or emphasis) of salvation, the same with repentance.
Your idea behind “works” I accept. I accept this because you stated, correctly, the issue: “actions done to earn God’s favor.” Baptism is not that, and never has been in a New Testament application. Is faith obedience, is it a work? It is. Salvation is a gift, but Ephesians 2:8-9 speaks of the Father creating us unto good works, not “obedience” to baptism.
Your remark on 1 Peter 3:21 is only partially accurate. It does not represent faith and repentance, it represents the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord. This is not said about faith and repentance. Moreover, this notion of a “public declaration” is not a New Testament idea, but a construct outside the New Testament. Faith is a declaration, as is confession, and repentance – which are responses to the Lord of glory. Are these public? One is as much as the other.
Baptism is a precondition to salvation, there is no “should be obeyed” in this at all. Peter said to those who asked him what must be done (2:37), he replied (by the authority of the Holy Spirit), repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus (by His authority) and they would receive the forgiveness of sin and the gift of the Holy Spirit. That is a precondition. Salvation is based on the Lord’s atoning work, but it was (is) the Lord who sets forth the conditions of His salvation to be enjoyed, and in these conditions, it is still a gift. Just as Paul set forth an answer (16:31), so Peter did the same (2:38); both spoke by the authority of the Lord. Baptism is not a work of man, and it never has been; if it is anything, it is a work of God.
While I have certainly enjoyed this respectful discussion, we must agree to disagree. I have to get back to saving the world. 🙂
I have enjoyed the same; thank you for taking time and reasoning with me on this matter. You’ve been very charitable to me in this matter.
Ron,
You wrote,
“Your idea behind “works” I accept. I accept this because you stated, correctly, the issue: “actions done to earn God’s favor.” Baptism is not that, and never has been in a New Testament application. Is faith obedience, is it a work? It is. Salvation is a gift, but Ephesians 2:8-9 speaks of the Father creating us unto good works, not “obedience” to baptism.”
The middle statement, “s faith obedience, is it a work? It is.”
1. Fiath is not a work. This is misconstrue what Paul and James are stating. The cults do this. The cults make “faith: a work. It is not a work. Too often faith is thought to be a work because, “faith without works is dead.” What is forgotten is that fiath is always present, but it is a dead faith, not a faith that is alive, is living.
Furthermore, Titus 3:4-7 states,
“But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”
Ther Titus passage also reflects Isaiah 64:6,
“We have all become like one who is unclean,
“and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment (menstrual cloth).”
Baptism is always after faith and repentance. Baptism is always an ordinance of the church commanded by Jesus. Baptism always reflects the death, burial, and resurrection of the old man, old life, the sinner. It also reflects the newness of life of the new believer. (Romans 6:3-4)
Now, Acts 2:38 is a problem text in more more ways than one. First, the one thing to remember is that Peter gives a direct answer to the question, “What shall we do?” (2:31) Second, there are two imperatives, “repent” and “bre baptized.” The “repentance” comes first. It is changing of the mind, the way one thinks, or change of attitude.” It also implys that there will be a corresponding change of behavior. Baptize is by immersion. The crowds would be familiar to the baptism of John the Baptist. The difference is that baptism here is “in the name of Jesus.” Luke uses shorthand here for the entire baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19. This is where the forgiveness of sins occurs, “faith in the name of Jesus.”
Third, the move from the plural to the singular. Peter moves to the fact that everyone needs to repent, then it is followed individually by baptism. This is not a group exercise. Finally, the Greek, εις, eis, in, into, a preposition indicative of purpose or aim, or as the basis or ground of something. It is “in (εν, εν) the name of Jesus” that is the ground or basis of our salvation, not baptism. Baptism does not justify, but it is the first step of sanctification.
Thus, the view that the forgiveness of sins by means of baptism is one that is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught. So, my understanding is Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.
Bryant, I truly appreciate your insights and taking the time to offer such an amount of information. Paul and James compliment each other. Those who do not understand this tend to pit Paul against James. As Paul tells us, salvation is a free gift, not works required. However, as James makes clear, if you have genuine faith you will have works. So if you have no works, your faith is not genuine.
Faith is not a work, you state. Jesus, on the other hand, said, “Jesus answered and said unto them, ‘This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent’” (John 6:29, ASV). What is the difference between “faith” and “believe”?
Neither Titus nor Isaiah helped you in this matter.
Your final 2 sentences on your Acts 2:38 paragraph are simply wrong. Shorthand? Baptismal formula? The terms mean “by the authority of”, it’s not a formula. You said, in relation to Matthew 28:19, “This is where the forgiveness of sins occurs, “faith in the name of Jesus.” Except, that’s not what the verse says.
“Baptism is the first step of sanctification”? Evidently, it’s not one’s belief that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? Okay, then, now that’s settled.
With your remark on the plural and singular, then let me ask you, did the New English Translation render this verse inaccurately: Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
Jesus is the ground or basis of one’s salvation, and it was He who said what Peter told those in Jerusalem to do, that is, repent, be baptized, with a view to receiving the forgiveness of sins. Simply because Peter said what he did does not mitigate Jesus being the ground or basis of salvation.
Your view “on the basis” of forgiveness is just a replacement for “because.” What English translation do you have that renders the verse that way?
Ron,
Understand that Jesus is saying that faith, belief, trust, are the work of God. It is all of Him and nothing of me. Also faith, belief, and trust translate πίστις, pistis. Each gloss is determined by the context as you are aware of.
Regarding Titus and Isaiah. I referenced both because they reference “works done by us in righteousness,” and “righteous deeds,” respectively. They both refer to the fact that any good work,, and that would include baptism (if viewed as a work) does not save us. They are linked.
Regarding the issue of “in the name of …”
First, you know as well as I do that “name” refers to both “authority of” and “name of.” I say shorthand due to the fact that baptism was in the name of Jesus, not the full “formula” as mentioned by Jesus, “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit….” Thus, Acts 2:28. and 10:38 use “in the name of Jesus Christ” instead of the full phrase.
As to issue of the plural and singular. The English has hard time of translating the plural used with the Imperative, “Repent (μετανοέω metanoeo, Aorist Active Imperative, 2nd Person Plural), and the singular used with the Imperative “baptize, (βαπτίζω, baptizo, Aorist Passive Imperative, 3rd Person Singular). Peter is addressing the crowd (plural) to “Repent” and each one to be “baptized.”
That is why I answered, Baptism is the first step of sanctification. Baptism always follows justification. Repentance is part of justification. One believes, then one follows in baptism.
See my articles on Repentance and Justification at
https://www.academia.edu/12339203/Repentance.
https://www.academia.edu/12339158/Justification.
Finally,
I use the following translations: Hebrew, Greek, ESV, NASB, NIV. Thus, I go to the original languages before looking at the English. I had the original aand 2nd Edition of the NET Bible Translation, but when my hard drive gave up the ghost, I could not retrieve it. I liked the 60,000 translation notes.
Why Is the Greek Verb Pisteuo (faith, Believe, trust in) Rendered Differently at Times?
https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2016/11/01/why-is-the-greek-verb-pisteuo-rendered-differently-at-times/
Salvation is all of God, but one’s personal response is his own. Every individual has an obligation to hear and respond to God’s call; thus, it is inaccurate to say, “nothing of me.”
Yes, the English word used in translation is best determine by the context. It is still the case “this is the work of God…”, similar to what Paul wrote in 1 Thess. 1:3. Faith is a work, whether on the front side or back side.
The NET, accordingly, is rendered accurately in 2:38. Yes, Peter spoke to the crowd (plural), and yes those who responded would have to do so individually.
Baptism is not the first step in sanctification, one’s response of belief is. It is at that point that one begins to make a conscience decision (cf. 24:15) to separate himself (herself) from the ways of the world and move in the singular way (14:6) of direction to God. It is accomplished by the Lord when one submits to Peter’s invitation in Acts 2. Paul gave attention to this in Colossians 3:1-4. As one trusts the Lord, turns away from sin (a sinful life), his (her) sins are washed away in submission to the command of baptism, which is the point at which one is identified by the Lord with His Son in the death, burial, and resurrection (Gal. 3:26-27).
Baptism is nothing unless it is connected to faith in Jesus. It does nothing, but the Lord does everything when one submits to His will.
I did have formal training in Greek and Hebrew decades ago. At this point in my life, I only use the English translations, like the ones you use.
Ron,
Justification ALWAYS comes before sanctification. Works of any kind do NOT justify. Justification is two-fold: Legal and Ethical. Paul emphasized the Legal in Galatians 2-3 and Romans 3:19-26, while James emphasized the Ethical in James 2:14ff.
μετανοέω, Metanoeo + cognates are used of the changing of one’s way of thinking and attitude/belief and corresponds to a person’s justification (there is a corresponding change in behavior implied) and positional sanctification, while ἐπιστρέφω, Epistrepho refers to one’s practical sanctification no matter how small that step maybe (there is a corresponding change in one’s way of thinking implied). It is here that one include baptism since it is not a part of jusification.
See also Acts 3:19 where repentance: change of attitude/thinking and change of behavior are given in point of order, ” Repent therefore, and turn back,” (“μετανοήσατε οὖν καὶ ἐπιστρέψατε,…”); and, I Thessalonians 1:9 where ἐπιστρέφω, epistrepho, is used to “and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God,” (“(καὶ πῶς ἐπεστρέψατε πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων δουλεύειν θεῷ ζῶντι καὶ ἀληθινῷ,)” i.e. an about face, a change of direction or behavior.
Bryantiii, You evidently think I said something about justification/sanctification that I did not say. You might want to read it again. I know what 1 Corinthians 6:11 says.
Where is the word “legal” located in Galatians 2 or 3? For that matter, where is this word to be found in the pages of the New Testament? Where is the word “ethical” located in James 2? For that matter, where is the word found in the remainder of the New Testament?
Legal, ethical, practical, positional. 4 words the New Testament does not use.
Your assertion of “Works of any kind do NOT justify” is plainly false, because Paul wrote, “but glory and honor and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Rom. 2:10, ASV). Is this “legal” or “ethical”? What about 2:13, is that legal, ethical, practical, or positional? Is there such a thing as the “law of faith”? which one of those four terms would fit that “law of faith”?
1) faith is a work, 2) faith justifies, 3) therefore, faith as a work justifies. This is valid, and it is sound. Proved: (1) faith is a work. “Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent” (John 6:29, ASV). (2) Faith justifies. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:16). “Being therefore justified by faith, …” (Rom. 5:1). (3) Therefore, faith as a work justifies.
When the Holy Spirit refers to “works” that do not justify, it pertains to the Law of Moses and works that originate in the mind of man. It never refers to those things God commands man to obey.
To my regret, I failed to rework the argument before I sent it, a failure in reviewing and editing. REVISED: Faith is a work of God. One is justified by faith. Therefore, one is justified by a work of God. AAA-1 (mood / figure) 1) M is P, 2) S is M, 3) S is P – valid and sound
Ron,
Justification is represented by tsaddiq + cognates in Hebrew and δικαιος + cognates in Greek.
Hebrew.
The overall use of tsdq and cognate words throughout the Old Testament that there are several factors involved.
The basic meaning is conformity to a norm or standard which to the Hebrew mind is the character of God, His Holiness. The words are legal or forensic terms emphasizing this conformity, or lack thereof, to the norm as revealed: God’s Law, Ex 20:1-17, The Ten Commandments, the Judicial Process, Deut 16:20; Jer 22:3, the Justice of the King as Judge, I Ki 10:9; Ps 119:21; Prov 8:15, and God Himself, Ps 35:24, 28.
Because of the legal use of the tsdq, word group, it becomes apparent that the verb acquired a causative use meaning “to declare not guilty”; while the nouns and adjective acquired the idea of a state of righteousness.
Righteousness, therefore, is a state of being (static) and of behavior (dynamic). Static- a state of being in which one has to be righteous if one is to practice righteousness. This static sense is based on faith as found in Gen 15:6 (NIV), Hab 2:4 (Hab 2:4b literally reads: “and the righteous by faith shall live”; emphasis is on the Hebrew “‘emunah),.” This static sense is imputed and in no way, shape or form based on works, cf. Hab 2:4; Ps 143:2; Job 25:4; Isa 57:1,2; 64:6. It is never identified with condemnation, but increasingly with salvation both in temporal and eternal terms, cf. Isa 45:21; 51:5f; 56:1; 62:1; et al.
Dynamic-what God expects of an individual, people or nation(s) in a very practical way (reflecting His Holiness), cf. Hos 6:6; Amos 5:22ff; Isa 1:10-15; and Mic 6:6-8. One judges, deals, sacrifices and speaks righteously. One learns, teaches and pursues after righteousness. These, then, speak of righteousness as an attitude (thought life) and behavior (word and deed).
Therefore, righteousness is very close to the idea of practical sanctification.
The Classical Greek and Septuagint (LXX)
Dike, dikh, “punishment,” is the root word for the words (dikaios, dikaio”, and cognates) that are used to translate “tsdq, qds,” in the LXX. Originally it meant “instructness” or “instruction” as found in Hesiod, Works, 256ff; 275ff. The basic religious sense, in common with all things divine in Greek religion, is an elemental cosmic force which men feel to be superior to themselves that is not imposed by god/gods upon the world, but something immanent, inherent in the very nature of being related to men’s living together in society.
Dikaios, dikaio”, was originally used for one whose behavior/conduct fitted into the necessary framework of society corresponding to the fulfilling of their rightful obligations towards the gods and fellowmen, Homer, Odysseus 13, 209. The other cognate forms of dikaios, followed the same pattern of “conformity to a norm as revealed by the gods.”
The LXX used these Greek words to match with Tzaddiq and cognates. Both Hebrew and Greek word groups were used with “conformity to a norm as revealed by the character of God in the Law (Hebrew Torah) and the Greeks as by the “gods.” Thus, whether it is through YHWH or “gods” the basic meaning is there in forensic (judicial justification) or ethical (righterousness).
The NT took what was found via Hebrew, then Greek, anf amplified the meaning to be “conformity to the character of God as revealed in the Law through Christ,” This conformity would be a judicial declaration of ‘Not Guilty,” followed by the person performing the ethical requirements in Christ, as Galatians 2:20, “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
Thus, justification is not one that is conditioned on doing good works, but is conditioned on faith in Jesus which will issue forth good works. Furthermore, look at Galatians 2:12-3:29 especially 2:15-16,
“We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.”
The Romans 1:18-3:18 is to prove that mankind is condemned including the moral person in 2:1-16, and the Jewish religious person in 2:17-29,,,”as it is written 3:9-18,
“What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
“Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”
“Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”
“Their feet are swift to shed blood;
in their paths are ruin and misery,
and the way of peace they have not known.”
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
James looks at the believer who “claims” to have ‘faith,’ but does not a life that backs that claim up, That person’s faith is DEAD! In modern parlance, “His walk does not match the talk!”
Here is the difference between you and me, and this is why I stay with the English translation: not a thing of what you presented in this discussion will be understood by the common man. All he has is his English translation, his understanding of how to use words from his daily life experiences, and his intellect to put thoughts together to make a proper application from what he reads. He understands 6:29, and he understands “works” in Romans 3 and 4; he understands “works” in Galatians 2, how they mean the same thing because Paul addresses the same topic. He is able to make sense of all that. This is where you’ll find me – with the common man.
When he takes notice of all the academia that others use, he turns away and says “in their much learning” they confuse things. Thank you for taking the time in this brief discussion to engage me on this topic. At this point, on my part, I bring this to a close.