APPLICATION PROJECT II
SHEPHERDS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
APPLICATION PROJECT II
SUBMITTED TO DR. MICHAEL VLACH
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
TH 601 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY IV
BY
MICHAEL SEETHALER
APRIL 15, 2024
CONTENTS
QUESTIONS:
1. Offer a definition of the church and what makes the church what it is. Also address your view on (1) when the church began; (2) what the purpose of the church is; and (3) how the church relates both to this age and the age to come (millennium and eternal state)
2. What is your view of church government? Make sure to contrast your view with the other views of church government.
3. Explain your view of elders and deacons? Who are they and what do they do? What is the difference between elders and deacons. Also discuss how a pastor relates to an elder.
4. What is baptism and who is baptism for? Explain the biblical truths represented when a person is baptized. How does your answer relate to the debate concerning infant baptism vs. believers’ baptism?
Question 1
Offer a definition of the church and what makes the church what it is. Also address your view on (1) when the church began; (2) what the purpose of the church is; and (3) how the church relates both to this age and the age to come (millennium and eternal state)
“The catholic or universal church, which (with respect to the internal work of the Spirit and truth of grace) may be called invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ, the head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fullness of him that fills all in all.”[1]
The ἐκκλησία or church assembly Christ consists of all believers who are chosen by God for eternal salvation in all ages. All those who attain to eternal life via the benefits acquired by Christ through His the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ on the cross, whether before or after the cross may be considered the church (Rom 3:25). Before Christ came, believers were saved by faith in the promise of God (Gal 3:6, Rom 4:3, Gen 15:6, Psa 119:41), and after the cross, believers are saved by faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of the Christ for the forgiveness of sins according to the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3, Rom 1:16).
The universal Church consists of the children of promise, who are covenanted to God by faith. They are those whom God names and calls from the ends of the earth and creates for His glory (Isa 43:7, 41:8-9). The church consisted exclusively of faithful Jews (the circumcised descendants Abraham, who also had faith in Yahweh [Jer 9:25] and any faithful sojourner who joined that house through circumcision [Ex 12:48]) during the period of the OT; and of Jews and Gentiles (circumcised and uncircumcised) who have faith in the revealed Messiah during the period of the New Testament (Isa 63:16, 66:18-21, Rom 9:8, 11, 25, Gal 3:26-29, John 10:16, col 3:11). This group of the elect was the spiritual Israel within Israel in the time of the Old Testament (Rom 9:6, 11:1-5), the faithful Jews amongst those circumcised in flesh only. This group is the rich root of the olive tree, into which the Gentiles are grafted in their salvation (Rom 11:16-24, Isa 66:23—notice how the seed of Zion is continued through the gathering of the Gentiles to be taken as Levites).
In Heb 12:22, the chuch, the ἐκκλησία of the firstborn (Christ, c.f. Rev 1:5, Col 1:18) is called Mt. Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, the festal gathering. Mt. Zion is the heavenly Jerusalem, which is the mother of all believers (Gal 4:26-28, c.f. Isa 54:1 ff., Isa 49:21-23 c.f. Rev 3:9). This Zion is comprised of the elect, from all over the world. Both natural and unnatural born children (Isa 49:21, 63:15, 66:18-21, Eph 2:11-12 c.f. 19-20 — notice that it is the citizenship/commonwealth of Israel into which the Gentiles are brought[2]).
The Church is also called the house of God (1 Tim 3:15), and the temple of God (2 Cor 6:16-18 c.f. Ezek 37:27, Isa 52:11, Ex 29:45, Lev 26:12—notice the language of the temple is applied without qualification to the church, as the church is the fulfillment of the temple). The church is the place of His dwelling. Moses was a servant in this house (Heb 3:5) in Moses’ service and ministry during his sojourn on earth, yet Christ is the Son over this house. It is the same house. Christ is the chief cornerstone of this house (Eph 2:20), which has already been laid in Zion. (1 Peter 2:7). Peter writes 1 Peter 2:17 to the elect, the church, scattered, who are identified as the “chosen” 1 Peter 1:1, those who have been purchased by the blood of Christ, which is the church (1 Peter 1:19, c.f. Acts 20:28). The foundation of the house of God was built on the foundation of Apostles and Prophets (Eph 2:20) in the inscripturation of the revelation of God; the house which the Messiah came to build is none other than the Church, which is being and will be built. (Matt 16:18)
Peter describes the church as a spiritual house, and the believers as living stones, to be a holy priesthood (fufilling texts such as Isa 66:51). The church is a kingdom of priests, a holy nation, the people of God’s own possession, which is obviously the exclusive designation given to Israel in it’s constitution in Ex. 19. Therefore, the church is the continuation and fulfillment of the nation of Israel. God has one house. Peter emphasizes that they are not natural born citizens, but children whom God has chosen and grafted-in, using the same quotation of Hosea (1:9), which Paul quotes in Rom 9 for the ingrafting the Gentiles. The description of the church here is Zion, a spiritual house, having a clear continuity with the believers in the Old Testament (unless one desires to say that the NT community of believers has displaced and replaced the OT Zion, which is untennable). Thus again the continunity is seen; In the Old and New Testament, there is but one house, even though the external administrations and governance of that house differ; the substance is one. This house consists of Jews and Gentiles of the flesh (1 Peter 2:10), but only those who are God’s children.
This house, which is consistently spoken of by the Apostles, is the one whom the seed of David is said to build. The Messianic descendent of David was promised to build a house for God, (2 Sam 2:9, Hagg 2:9 – The “desire of the nations shall come”), Haggai’s “shaking of the nations” for the building of God’s house and the filling thereof with the treasures of the nation’s is interpreted by the author of Hebrews as the church receiving the kingdom of God. This description of the house of God being filled with the treasures of the nations is consistent with both OT and NT images of the nation’s streaming into the Church (Isa 2;2-4, 49:23, 60:10, Rev 21:24). The prophetic picture of this house is that the nations will come to it, and thereby the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (Hab 2:14).
In Ephesians 2, Paul confirms that the Gentiles of the flesh, have been brought into the citizenship of Israel, and made to be partakers of the covenants of the promise (vs. 12). Christ has broken down the dividing wall of the commandments which separated Jews and Gentiles in the flesh, and has created the two into one new man, making peace. Christ has abolished the separation principles in the Old Testament which distinguished Jews from Gentiles in the flesh, and Christ, through His death and resurrection, has reconciled both Jew and Gentile to God, creating one new man, which is His body, the church (the “new man” refers to the adminstrative change in the breakdown of the law contained in ordinances, the uniting of Jew and Gentile in one new group which is comprised of both groups formerly at emnity, and reconciling both through the Holy Spirit—it does not mean that the citizenship of vs.19 is different from that of 12). This description of a corporate body with a single Messianic federal Head is consistent with the description of the Servant of Yahweh in the book of Isaiah as both a corporate body and a single entity (41:9, 42:1-6, 42:19, 43:10, 53, etc.).
The saints of the Old Testament, even though they were partakers of the covenant of promise, still were saved under an administration of promise. The New Covenant had yet to be enacted; the foundation of the Church was still being laid. Those who were saved in the Old Testament were saved due to the patience of God passing over their sin, and not in debited righteousness which Christ had not yet in fact purchased (Rom 3:25-26). Now that Christ has purchased the church with His blood, He has reconciled those who were far off and those who were near, and thus, Gentiles are no longer strangers and sojourners, but are fellow citizens (of Israel c.f. 12), and are fellow members of this household of God, the Church, built on the foundation of the Prophets and the Apostles.
The Old Testament Prophets and the New Testament Apostles were used of God to lay the foundation of the Scripture, which is the rule and life of faith for the church of all ages. In the book of Revelation 21, the nations are seen streaming into Zion, into the new Jerusalem, which is built on the foundation of the Apostles, and on the gates are written the twelve tribes of Israel, again demonstrating the unity of the Church, the household of God, of both testaments and the true nation of Israel. The Old Testament Prophets were laying the foundation for the household of God, which is the church; Peter teaches that the Old Testament prophets were minister unto the New Testament church (1 Peter 1:12).
Paul again in Eph 4 after clearly asserting that there is only one faith, one Lord, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all: making an indefatigable strong statement about the unity of the Church, then quotes an Old Testament Psalm about Yahweh Ascending above Mt. Zion to give gifts to Israel, and applies it to Christ giving gifts to the Church. Thus again the prophets mentioned are to be seen as the prophets of the Old and New testament, which served to receive and inscripturated revelation for the building of the church of God, along with the various other gifting of the saints to build up the church of God.
Is is therefore incorrect and inappropriate to reject the continuity of the believing remnant of the Old Testament to be the same body of the Church as it is in the New Testament. Though there are discontinuities, they are part of the same house, they are saved by the same Savior, and they are memebers of the same body for all eternity.
The evidence for this is further supported in 1 Cor 10, where Paul speaking to the Corinthian church, calls the fathers of Israel "our fathers", and also that these fathers drank from the rock of Christ. This language can only be accounted for in seeing a continuity of the seed of Abraham, and the elect of the OT being continued and fulfilled in the Church of the NT, under a new a liberated economy.
Furthermore, in Gal 4, in the context of Paul explaining that the ceremonial distinctives of the Mosaic law have been fulfilled and thus OT obedience to them has passed away, describes the people of God, the seed of Abraham, the children of promise existing in the Old Testament, as a child which is under a tutor. This child has now grown up. He says, "we, while we were children, were enslaved under the elemental things of the world. But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.” Thus Paul describes the OT community of saints in first person plural language, identifying himself both with the saints in Galatia, and the saints of the Old Testament simultaneously.
Furthermore, Paul describes these saints of Galatia as children of promise in accordance with Isaac, and the children of the Heavenly Jerusalem. Then by quoting Isa 54 to substantiate his claim, Paul gives the New Testament believers the same identity as the Zion of Isa 54; the barren women who is given many children (c.f. Isa 49:21), Zion which consist of children of God whom Abraham does not known, nor did Israel recognize (63:15). This Zion to which Paul refers is described as the bride of Yahweh (54:5), just as the church is said to be the bride of Christ (Eph 5:22-27). They are the same woman, same body, same house, same Church.
Another piece of evidence is the parallel visions of Zechariah 4 to the seven lampstands of Rev 1-3. The prophet Zechariah receives a vision concerning the construnction of the temple, where a multifaceted lampstand in the vision represents the construction of God’s house, the construction of which is being fueled by Zerubbabbel and Joshua, as the olive trees. The house which is being built is a multifaceted lampstand, and it said that it is God’s Spirit who is the one who will construct it and bring it to completion. There is only one lampstand, as there is only one temple. In Revelation 1:20, Christ walks amongst the 7 lampstands which are the seven churches. This is because the central location of God’s house, the temple, has been reconstituted and liberated to the local church. Thus now there are 7 lampstands, which are ministered directly to by Christ.
With the above summary of the evidence, there is simply no consistent Scriptural justification for determining that that the church, or the body of saints is a different body in the Old and New Testament. Those who are saved in the New Testament are not a different coorporate body, saved in some different way, or are another bride, another house, or another church, or assembly as the one repeatedly mentioned in the Psalms.
The word church (ἐκκλησία) is used twice in the NT to describe the community of faith in the OT (Acts 7:37, Heb 2:12). It is used 60 times in the LXX as a translation of the OT word קָהָל, which is used consistently to be the assembly of Israel. The distinction between church and Israel can be blurred if one stays away from the original languages, but the concept of the ἐκκλησία exists in the Old Testament to describe the believing remnant. The meaning of the church is properly precised to mean the elect and chosen of God, believers of all generations. It did not start in the New Testament. The church began with the first elected saint who was faithful, which is Able (Scripture is silent on the eternal state of Adam and Eve), (Heb 2:4, Matt 23:35).
Does this mean that there is no substantial or significant difference between the New and Old Testament church? Absolutely not! The NT saint is now living under the enacted New Covenant, no longer as promise, but as the enacted covenant made by the shedding of the blood of the Messiah. (Heb 8-9). The church now has the Spirit of God poured out upon it, as prophesied in the OT, and the result is many coming from the east and the west to join Israel, writing on their hands, belonging to Yahweh, and naming the name of Israel with Honor. (Isa 44, John 7:39). Thus the NT church is distinct from the OT by the pouring of the Spirit in great measure, the continual indwelling of the Spirit, saving all under the New Covenant (Acts 2:17-20), the liberation from the Mosaic ceremonial system (Gal 4) and the grafting-in of the Gentiles on equal footing as Jewish believers (Eph 3), all of which is accomplished through the Redemption Christ worked on the cross.
The author of Hebrews says it best when he says to those who have come into the New Covenant that they have come to “Mt. Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the festal gathering and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect.
Question 2
What is your view of church government? Make sure to contrast your view with the other views of church government.
“A particular church, gathered and completely organized according to the mind of Christ, consists of officers and members; and the officers appointed by Christ to be chosen and set apart by the church (so called and gathered), for the peculiar administration of ordinances, and execution of power or duty, which he intrusts them with, or calls them to, to be continued to the end of the world, are bishops or elders, and deacons.”[3] In Revelation 1-3, one sees a pictures of how the church is goverened in this age. Christ Himself as the Head of the Church walks amongst the churches, ministering to each direcly.
Many traditions of church government have instilled an authority between the individual church and Christ. Many, not trusting in Christ to exercise direct rule over His people, instead have bishops, Popes, councils and other offices which are given rule over individual churches.
In the Episcopal tradition the direct authority over the congregation resides in the separate office of the bishops, with power transcending ordinary ministers. Bishops ordain and places pastors, holding a distinct and more powerful office. This form of government characterizes the Roman Catholic, greek orthodox and anglican fellowships.
For the Presbyterian denomination, representative bodies which consist of representatives from many churches are federated. They make representative decisions, they judge certain interpretations on behalf of local churches. The representative bodies consist of elders from each congregation. The federated body maintains control over the individual churches in many significant areas.
The congregationalist tradition places the seat of authority in the local congregation; there are variations of decision making processes within the congregationalist stream, with differing degrees of authority residing in the elders or the congregation. Elders are chosen from among the congregation by the current elders, or sending elders, and the congregation. The elders are ordained under the goal and model of a unanimous decision, as the congregation strives to maintain a unity of mind in all things.
The New Testament picture is that of Christ ministering directly to the churches, communicating to their elders (Rev 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14). This is picture is of individually operating and functioning churches, being directly ministered to by Christ, as they directly serve Christ. Churches support one another (1 Cor 16:3), they seek unity with another, but one church does not rule others. While each invidual church has the responsibility to obey Christ directly, different churches have different reasources, and different levels of spiritual maturity. Churches are to aid and help one another in times of need (Acts 11:27).
One does not see Christ ministering to one church, which in turn, in an umbrella fashion ministeres to all others. One does not see the primacy of one church toward any others. Rather, you see each church being under the care and authority of Christ Himself. Therefore an obedient expression of congregationalism is the Biblical form of church governement.
A text worth examining in light of this view is the Jerusalem counsel of Acts 15. Because of a doctrinal controversy, Paul and Barnabas go up “to the apostles and elders concerning this issue.” (vs 3). Firstly it is to be oberseved that the council consisted of the apostles and elders from the Jersalem church; it is not a gathering of elders from all different churches. One then sees the leaders deliberate over an important doctrinal issue, then James (not Peter) makes a judgment as a leader. While James speaks the judgment, it is agreed upon by all, as they all came to one accord (vs. 22, 25). That judgment is attributed as the collective action of the whole body and the Holy Spirit (28). The Holy Spirit through James voiced a judgment which was accepted by all the apostles and elders.
This unity of mind is a continuing principle and command from the NT in all church goverenance. It is to be strived for and fought for (Phil 2:1-2, Col 3:14) One does not see James imposing his will top-down aganist the rest of the leaders, but them all coming to an agreement. When the letter is sent out, One does not see the Jersusalem church force a judgment against the unwilling church at Antioch, but rather, they were encouraged by the letter (vs. 31). One sees the more mature and strong church lovingly instruct and encourage it’s younger sibling.
In regard to church governement, one must acknowledge that historically unique circumstances granted the church at Jersualem unique authority over the surrounding churches. This reality comes from the fact that the Jerusalem church begat all the surrounding churches, being ground zero for the redemptive work of Messiah, and the location from which He sent His witnesses to the ends of the earth with the Gospel, as well as the fact that the Jerusalem church was led by the apostles.
Therefore, the Jerusalem church was in a unique historical position with unique authority. Many principles can be taken from the example of Acts 15 and applied throughout the ages, including the necessity for unity of mind for the church amongst her leader, the responsibility of stronger churches to encourage and instruct weaker churches, and more. Though the seat of authority for local decisions is made in the local congregation, as the Holy Spirit leads each through their immediate elders, so also leaders of churches should gather when necessary for important interpretative judgments to attain unity of mind in the catholic church (Acts 15). But Acts 15 does not provide sufficient basis for an ongoing presbytery to govern other churches in normative matters, nor for the continued historical primacy of one church above the rest.
One sees Peter in 1 Peter 5:1-5 pleading with the churches as a fellow elder, not making any appeal to a papal authority. The concept of the primacy of a Pope in Rome developed historically and gradually. It’s foundations do not exist in the New Testament. Christ built His church on the foundation stones of the Apostles and Prophets; this does not include a continuing Apostolic office. Once the foundation is laid, the church operates atop that foundation.
Each local branch of the church is part of the whole universal church, and thus churches ought not to think of themselves as independent of one another; yet it in terms of the daily governing, in the selecting of elders, that is to be done with the full unity of mind of the local church, having cultivated the mind of Christ in prayer and in the study of the Scriptures, that all churches may act in unity and in one accord.
Question 3
Explain your view of elders and deacons? Who are they and what do they do? What is the difference between elders and deacons. Also discuss how a pastor relates to an elder.
Christ has direct authority over each congregation. Elected and ordained elders of the church are undershepherds which hold legitimate and delegated authority; they are directly responsible to Christ for their shepherding (1 Thes 5:12, 1 Peter 5:1-5, Heb 13:17). A plurality of elders is the Biblical model (Titus 1:5, Acts 11:30, 14:23, 20:17, Phil 1:1, 1 Tim 4:14, Titus 1:5, James 5:14). This does not mean that one elder cannot be a leader of the rest, or a representative of the rest. In the NT Peter is seen in many instances to act as a representative leader of the Apostles, and in Revelation, Christ speaks to the angel of the church, which is one elder who represents the whole congregation. (Rev 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14).
Elders have the authority of Christ Himself in matters which are under their proper domain (Matt 16:18-19, 18:15-18). The church (both elders and the congregations they lead) having the mind of Christ in the Scriptures (1 Tim 3:1-7), select on Scripture standards elder qualified men and ordain them unto that office (Acts 14:23, 1 Tim 5:22). Both the elders of the church and the congregation need to be in agreement as to the selection and ordination of elders. (Acts 6:1-6). A new church also needs to have unity of mind with their sending church (Acts 14:23).
The elders exercise discipline in the regular administration of their office (2 Tim 4:2); in the act of making disciples, elders continuallly rebuke, exhort, encourage, and train up newer believers to attain the full knowledge of God (Col 1:28). In cases of unrepentent sin in the church, the whole congregation becomes involved in any judgments of excommunication (Mat 18:18-19, 2 Cor 2:6).
Elders are to follow the example of the Apostles and are to be devoted to “prayer and to the service of the word.” (Acts 6:4, 1 Tim 2:1). They are to refute the gainsayers and silence those who teach false doctrine. (1 Tim 1:3, 4:6-7, 2 Tim 2:24-26). They are to keep the faith, and maintaint the body of doctrine and teaching which was once and for all delivered from the apostles. They are to command and teach that confession. (Jude 3, 1 Tim 3:16, 4:10, 6:14). They are leaders and must maintain and instruct proper conduct in the household of God (1 Tim 3:15). They are to preach the word of God, in season and out (2 Tim 4:5).They are to study the word (1 Tim 4:15-16, 2 Tim 2:15). They are to take care of widows (1 Tim 5:5). They are to have excellent character (1 Tim 3:1-7, 2 Tim 2:21-22). Elders are to be honored and paid (1 Tim 5:17).
The the term “Bishop” or “Overseer” as well as “Pastor” are mostly interchangible with “elder”, in that they describe the same office. One sees in Acts 20:17, c.f. 28 that the “elders” are those whom God has made to be Overseers to shepherd or pastor the flock of God. Elder is the primary term for the office, but the position includes authority (oversight) and responsibility for shepherding the flock of God.
Along with elders, the office of deacon is a continual office in the church (1 Tim 3:10). The same process of the selection of elders is true for the selection of deacons. All the qualification for elder are the same as for deacon, except for the ability to teach. The office of deacon is reserved for men (1 Tim 10, 12).[4] The difference of deacons and elders is illustrated in Acts 6. The apostles, functioning in an exemplary role as elders, will not leave the misntry of the word of God and prayer to serve tables. Elders are called to be in the word, teaching, preaching, ministering the sacriments, and praying; deacons are more of the make-it-happen-captain sort. They are executioners of the vision of the elders. The are most necessary to the function of the church. They are those who are continually devoted to serving the church.
Elder’s are commanded to "do the work of an evangelist" (2 Tim 4:5). The office includes evangelistic work. Any pastor or elder who is not training up his people in evangelism nor doing evangelism himself, is in disobedience to the function of his office.
Some argue that a separate ongoing office of evangelist exists in the church (based on Eph 4:11). The command “do the work of an evangelist” could mean out-of-context “do the work of the other office of evangelist”, but contextually, it is best understood in the sense of: “do the rightful work of your office, which is to be an evangelist”. As evangelism is a regular requirement of the elder office, it is inconsistent with the pastoral epistles and wholly unncessary to see an unmentioned other office of “evangelist”. Rather, pastors are to be evangelistic, and evangelists are to be pastoral. Both are to be qualified elders. As Christ gifts men differently (Eph 4:11), some elders will be more inclined to pastoral work, and others to evangelistic work, but neither may neglect that which they are not naturally inclined unto.
The best way to bring it all together is to see the 1 Timothy 3 office of “elder” to describe a broad office which can have different focuses. Churches which have the reasources ought to have an elder who specializes in evangelism, others which specialize in teaching, others in pastoral work. These are not all separate offices, but separate focuses and emphasies of those who wield the office of elder. Anyone holding an “office of Evangelist” ought to be an ordained elder in a congregation. Any elder is to be training of up the saints and the equipping of the body for ministry. Some will be gifted to bring the raw lumber from the forest onto the construction site; some will be gifted to take that raw lumber and turn it into God’s house.
Question 4
What is baptism and who is baptism for? Explain the biblical truths represented when a person is baptized. How does your answer relate to the debate concerning infant baptism vs. believers’ baptism?
The ordinance of water baptism is a outward sign of an inward reality (1 Pet 4:5, Isa 1:12-15). Baptism is a declaration and that a person believes in the death burrial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The believer who is baptized is stating that their old man has been crucified with Christ, that Christ has died the death that they deserve, that the believer has been burried with Christ, and the believer identifies with the resurrection of the Christ. Baptism is the symbol of entering into the church, which has been baptized with the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:13)
The Christ was promised to baptize the church in the Holy Spirit (Johh 7:28); This was to pour out the Spirit in great measure upon the church, in fulfillment and enactment of the New Covenant. The Messiah was promised to baptize in both the Holy Spirit and fire (Matt 3:11). This baptism of fire refers to the judgment of God, which was poured out on apostate Israel in 70 AD (Matt 24). Christ took away the wrath of God from the church. As a result, they were baptized in pentacaust by the Holy Spirit, with toungues of fire, and they were not consumed.
When Christ died and rose again, He sent His disciples to Jerusalem, to receive power from on high. This was the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which was installed in parts on the church. First the apostles (John 20:22), then the church in Jerusalem, then Samaria, then to the Gentiles, and to the ends of the earth. When a beliver is saved, this baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs at the point of his conversion.
Baptism as a symbol existed prior to these historical events, but it evolved in meaning when the Christ baptized the church. Before the Messiah came, John was baptizing for the forgiveness of sins. Jesus came to be baptized by John, for the purposes of fulfilling all righteousness, to approve and identify with the work of John the Baptist, to enact perfect obedience to the Father, to be prophetically annointed with the Holy Spirit (Isa 42:1-2). The Lord’s water baptism was a natural ordinance which demonstrated and was coincident with the supernatural anointing of the Holy Spirit.
The baptism of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer is also called regeneration (John 3:5 c.f. Ezek 36:25, Isa 52:15, Titus 3:5). The Holy Spirit is given to believers in regeneration; it is the union of the person with Christ through justification (Rom 5:5, 6:3-11). It takes place at the point of conversion (1 Cor 12:13). When one is born of the Spirit, it results in saving faith (1 John 5:1). Thus God gives faith to a person, and the Holy Spirit is poured out into a person's heart. When someone is born again, they are born of the Spirit and they can see the kingdom of God. Someone who "has been borne of the Spirit" is the one who believes that Jesus is the Christ.
All this is symbolized in the water baptism. Peter summarizes the whole salvation of the believer as "baptism" (1 Pet 3:21). Peter states that baptism saves a person; Peter clarifies that it is not the removal of the dirt from the flesh, i.e. the act of the water passing over a persons flesh, but the salvation is the drawing near to God with a clean conscience. As seen in Heb 10:22, this drawing near to God is the salvation by faith in Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection for the forgivness of sins. It is one approaching the throne of God by faith. That is the salvation which Peter summarizes as “baptism” in parallel with Noah’s salvation on the ark. Baptism of water is symbollic of the Spiritual regeneration, which results in faithful obedience to the Son of God (John 3:34-36).
Who should receive baptism? Many Christians, such as the presbyterian fellowship, believe that the covenant of grace (the covenant which saves sinners) applies to those who have faith in the son of God, and their children. They believe that the Mosaic, Abrahamic, and Davidic covenants are the covenant of grace, under different administrations. They believe that the covenant by which a sinner is saved and regenerated is administered differently in different covenant administrations. Thus the covenant of Moses and Abraham are the covenant of grace, and the effective coveants which save sinners.
Because under these previous covenants, there is covenant succession unto children (the children of Israel were circumcised and were brought into the Abrahamic covenant and the covenant of Moses), and that therefore covenant succession in this dispensation is still valid, since the New Covenant is a new administration of the same covenant. Therefore belivers and their children should be baptized.
The greatest issue with this view is that it fails to sufficiently account with the clear distinctiveness of the language of the Old Covenant and the New Covenant as given by the propehts and the Apostles.
For example, in Jeremiah, the covenant is said to be "not like the covenant which God made with their fathers". While the Law of God and the Promises to Abraham are clearly imported into the New Covenant, the covenant itself is distinct, and effectual to save, coinciding with the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (Jer 31:31-36), unlike the previous covenants. The distinctive aspects of the New Covenant is effective regeneration, the success of Gospel preaching, and the reality of the enacted atonment[5]. The Law of God given to Moses would now be written on the hearts of the believers, and the people will now effecitively walk in the commandments of God, and that God will be their God, and they will be His people (the promises given to Abraham).
Thus the pouring out of the Holy Spirit on the Church is to this end, that the covenant would effectively save all who are under it. Not only this, but all who were ever saved, were saved under this New Covenant, whether in the form of promise in the OT, or in enacated reality in the New (Rom 3:25-26). There is no outward and inward administration of the New Covenant, as the Presbyterian fellowship affirms, (meaning that someone can be outwardly in the covenant, yet not enjoying the effective inward working and saving effects of the covenant). No, but the only people who are considered in the covenant are those regenerated and effectively saved. Therefore the only people who should be treated or recognized as a covenant member is one who has a credible profession of faith.
Someone may appear to be in the body of Christ (John 15:5), they may appear by all outward signs to have received the word of God with joy and belief, but if they fall away (Matt 13:5, Heb 6:8), they never were truly regenerated members of the covenant (1 John 2:19). Someone who has the profession of faith and no works likewise will be removed from the congregation (James 2:14-26, Psalm 1:4-6, Matt 22:12-14, 2 Peter 1 c.f. 20-22).
One can see the contrast of the old and the new covenant in 2 Cor 3, in Rom 3:19-31 and in Gal 3. The Mosaic covenant was a covenant of works; the Law, which has manifold functions; it condemns all people. It is the standard of God’s character by which all people will be judged. It guarded the seed of Abraham by it's particular distinctive ceremonial elements until the Messiah would come of the flesh (Gal 3); it is the rule of life of the believer: “He who does them shall live by them”.
The Law is also a restatement of the covenant of works given to Adam, that if one obeys then life would come. This needed to take place so that the Messiah could come and through obedience to the Law obtain life for all the elect. Unless the promise of the reward for righteousness was restated, this could not take place.
With these manifold uses of the Law, it is clear that the Law is distinct from the Grace which was revealed fully through Jesus Christ. The law and the prophets, bore witness to the coming covenant of grace, so that the saint living in the OT was saved by faith in the promise of God, and not by keeping the Law (Heb 11). However, the Law is the rule of life for both the saint of the Old and New Testament (Matt 5:17-20). The Law of Moses witnessess and testifies to the grace of God enacted in the covenant of grace.
The law and the prophets bore witness to the covenant of grace, beginning in Gen 3:15. The terms of the covenant were revealed to Jeremiah, and the covenant was enacted and sealed in the blood of the Lamb of Jesus Christ on the cross (Heb 8). Again, the the New Covenant effectively saves all those who are under it.
Under this view, makes no sense to baptize infants; they are not regenerated, or at least display no signs of regeneration (God can regenerated children from the womb like John the baptist and Jeremiah). Thus only those who have a credible profession of faith are to be baptized.
The baptist view does not mean that there is no promise of God toward the children of believers. Children of believers are said to be holy (1 Cor 7:14). Parents who train up their children in the nurture and admonision of the Lord, disciplining them and teaching them the Scriptures, ought to regularly expect the result to be the regeneration and salvation of the children; The promise is for the seed of believers just as it is for the beilevers (Isa 59:21). Yet that is still God's perogative. Even David’s have Absaloms.
[1] Peter Masters, ed., The Baptist Confession of Faith 1689, Paperback. (Ashland, OH: BookMasters Inc, n.d.), 42.
[2] There is no satisfying exegetical justification for taking the “prophets” here to be New Testament prophets exclusively. The interpreter should make no additional distinction where Paul made none. Paul is speaking of Gentiles being brought into the promises of the nation of Israel, it most natural and plain to see that the foundation of the house of God is built on the foundation of the OT Prophets as well as the NT Apostles. There is also no justification to believe the house of God spoken of is a different house than the OT saint is a part of. The image Paul presents aligns perfectly with the New Jerusalem seen in Rev 21-22, which has the Apostle’s names on the foundation stones and the names of the 12 tribes on the gates.
[3] Masters, The Baptist Confession of Faith 1689. Chapter 2, Paragraph 8
[4] Woman are not to exercise authority over men in the church. (1 Tim 2:12). Deacons are said twice to be men (1 Tim 3:8,10). The women mentioned in 1 Tim 3:11 are proceeded by “likewise” indicating a different group than that previously mentioned. Paul is speaking here of the wives of elders and deacons, or mature women in general.
The strongest evidence against this view is that Pheobe is called a deacon of the church in Rom 16:1. διάκονον however has a very large semantic domain. It often has a general sense of “servant”, as the ruling governor is called a deacon of God in Rom 13. In Col 4:7, Tychius is called a deacon, without respect to a church office, and Paul calls himself God’s deacon in 2 Cor 6:4 without respect to the office. Pheobe is likey a deacon in this sense. Any woman may be a servant of the church, but the continuing authoritative office of 1 Timothy is reserved from men in the immediate context.
[5] Greg L. Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics, Third edition. (Nacogdoches, TX: Covenant Media Press, 2013), 190.