House Church Talk - Baptisms and Administrations

[Ross J Purdy]

Hi Bruce,
You wrote

> Dear brother, every doctrine of scripture is stated in words of scripture.
> Can you show us a statement of the doctrine of
dispensations'administrations
> (plural)?

I take Paul's exposition in Ephesians 2 and 3 to be exactly that.
Eph 3:2-10 WEB if it is so that you have heard of the administration of that
grace of God which was given me toward you; (3) how that by revelation the
mystery was made known to me, as I wrote before in few words, (4) by which,
when you read, you can perceive my understanding in the mystery of Christ;
(5) which in other generations was not made known to the children of men, as
it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit;
(6) that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, and fellow members of the body, and
fellow partakers of his promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel, (7)
whereof I was made a servant, according to the gift of that grace of God
which was given me according to the working of his power. (8) To me, the
very least of all saints, was this grace given, to preach to the Gentiles
the unsearchable riches of Christ, (9) and to make all men see what is the
administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God, who
created all things through Jesus Christ; (10) to the intent that now through
the assembly the manifold wisdom of God might be made known to the
principalities and the powers in the heavenly places,

Paul is saying he has a new administration for the new
temple/man/body/assembly of God. I don't know how to be any clearer than
that.


> But brother, I peter 3 does not call the flood a baptism!

Verse 21 calls it a figure of baptism, sorry for not being precise.

> I asked:"what scripture has lead you to believe that the Holy Spirit is
the
> baptizer of new believers into identification with Christ?"
>
> You responded:"Rom 6:3-4 EMTV Or do you not know that as many of us as
were
> baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? (4) Therefore we
> were buried with Him through baptism into death, so that just as Christ
was
> raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also should
walk
> in newness of life.
> If this is water baptism, then it is self-evident that water baptism
places
> us into Christ which would mean baptismal regeneration. Now that means all
> the non-water baptized are unsaved. But Paul was NOT sent to water baptize
> (even if he baptized a few, he did not baptize all and the reason is, I
take
> it, succeeding revelation), but he was sent to save! (As per 1Cor 10:33
> etc.) The apostle to the Gentiles never mentions water baptism as a
> requirement for salvation but rather explicitly states that it is through
> faith apart from works. So this baptism can not involve water."
>
> Brother, the word "into"(Strong's #1519) used here does NOT indicate the
> medium of the baptism, but rather the purpose or reason for that baptism.
> This is seen in 1 Corinthians 10:2  And were all baptized unto Moses in
the
> cloud and in the sea;  The mediums were the cloud and the sea indicated by
> the preposition "en" Strong's #1722, but the purpose was that they were
> baptized "unto" (#1519) Moses that is, unto his leadership. Moses was NOT
> the medium in which they were baptized!

All Paul is saying is that they all were united together in the experience.
Both Moses and the people went through it together.

>
> So regarding the baptism of Romans 6:3, it is the purpose of the baptism
in
> the spirit to unite believers with Christ as their Head.  But the baptism
of
> verse 4 is a different baptism! The word " indicates that the first (v3)
is
> the reason for the second (v.4).  So baptism of believers in water is the
> acknowledgment of the believer of what God has said and done regarding
their
> death, burial and resurrection with Christ. I Peter 3:21 says that baptism
> is the answer (acknowledgement) of a good conscience toward God."
Baptism
> is not primarily a demonstration to men who observe but primarily an
> acknowledgement of the believer to God!
>

Well, Bruce, we take two different positions on this one. I think your
exegesis is faulty here. I grew up Baptist and was taught the position you
are presenting and am now convinced it doesn't hold water anymore! ;^)  I
was surprised to learn that a number of Baptist scholars and exegetes see
only one baptism in Romans 6 without water. If Romans 6 doesn't hold water
and Eph 4 says there is only one baptism, I can't be the one all wet on this
issue. (Sorry, I couldn't resist! ;^) Romans 6 is showing our unity with
Christ, i.e., our total identification with Him, and His death, burial, and
resurrection. That doesn't have anything to do with water. 1 Peter is not
addressed to the Body of Christ, it was addressed to the circumcision of the
dispersion by the apostle to the circumcision. It was appropriate for them
to be baptized in preparation for the restoration of the Davidic kingdom.
Acts 19:19, 20, 24,29 has the Jewish elders and apostles denying that the
Gentiles should have to conform to any ordinance keeping, but there was no
repeal for the Jewish saints. Timothy in the next chapter still had to get
circumcised since his mother was Jewish, and in Acts 21:20, the Jewish
saints are still zealous of the Law. Note verse 25 where again it is
re-enforced that the Gentiles do not have to keep the Law. Brother, water
baptism was for the Jews and not us. It is connected to John's ministry as
the fore runner of the Messiah of the New Covenant with Israel.

In Christ,
Ross Purdy

In Christ,
Ross Purdy