Bully's Blog

Blood Shed for Bloodshedders

“Now thanks be to God who always leads us in triumph in Christ, and through us diffuses the fragrance of His knowledge in every place. For we are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing. To the one we are the aroma of death leading to death, and to the other the aroma of life leading to life.”  2 Cor. 2:14-16

For those who questioned whether the image of Day 5′s swarms corresponds to the clouds of incense as armies of God, Paul himself does it in 2 Corinthians 2.[1] The saints are soldiers who wield the two-edged sword of the gospel. It brings both life and death, depending on whether those warned respond like Rahab or not. Which brings me to my point.

Doug Wilson recently posted about the sacraments being promises of salvation.

“Every sacrament, by definition, contains and manifests a promise of salvation. That is what a sacrament is. The sacrament of baptism contains a promise of salvation at its inception, and the Supper contains a promise of salvation related to perseverance. What God began God will complete. These promises are apprehended with the heart, whenever someone receives them in faith.”

There is much he wrote that I agree with, but what he said highlighted the major difference between paedo- and credobaptism. Here’s my response for what it’s worth. It does repeat some things I have posted elsewhere here, but it might make my position clearer to some, and the reasons for it. It’s not an argument I’ve seen used by credobaptists, so it might be of interest to you.

Dear Pastor Wilson,

Hope you don’t mind some feedback from a baptist.

The fact that you left out a baptism received by faith stands out like a sore thumb. You swapped baptism for Word.

Circumcision was a promise of salvation (Jesus’ death). Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are not. Baptism is a promise of resurrection and the Lord’s supper of eating at His table as kings. In these the faithful enter weekly into the new government established after His resurrection and enthronement.

Circumcision was for an infant church. The NT sacraments are for a mature one.
I thought the rest of your post was excellent of course. I know this isn’t really the place for such a debate, and it wasn’t the point of your post, but I just had to say something. I appreciate your ministry very much.

Michael, don’t mind your feedback at all. But I am not sure I get your objection. In what sense would “resurrection” not be salvation? Or assumption of kingly status in Christ not part of salvation? 

Thanks. Just the order of events.

All this comes under “salvation”, for sure, but the Bible repeatedly shows us the process of salvation in a specific order.

We leave the old city under a covering of blood shed for us by the Father (circumcision/Passover/Red Sea). Obedience to the gospel puts us under the blood. It takes us out of the old Adam, through whom every child was born a sinner. Circumcision is about the bloody Covenant head. It kills the first birth with the sword. It makes a new people.

But in baptism we enter the new city to shed blood for the Son (baptism/Atonement/ Jordan). It is not about the head but about the whole body, a robe of office. It is the second birth. It makes, not a new people, but an army. It hands the sword to us.

So baptism is a promise of government, not of salvation, within this biblical structure. This is the theme of the New Covenant. Infant baptism confounds the picture by conflating the two waters.To illustrate, in Matthew’s gospel, Jesus’ baptism was “Red Sea/Passover.” After the wilderness and the sermon on the mount (as Deut.), the Jordan waters are Jesus crossing the Sea with His disciples (body) and expelling the demons into pigs as Atonement.[2]

In His baptism, He is alone. He ascends to govern. In ours, we enter the place He has gone to prepare for us. That is the promise. That is why I believe infant baptism as a promise of salvation messes up the picture. Baptism is a robe of office for those who have already been obedient to the gospel. It is a sacrament for warriors. You can’t have re-entry as a mediator unless you have exited the old city. You can’t shed blood (preach the gospel) unless you have bowed in obedience under the blood shed. You can’t wield the sword of Joshua unless you have been slain in Christ already.

Hope all that makes sense. It might sound persnickety but this pattern appears in the Bible a million times. Mediator (head), Mediators (body).

Tim commented:

“Sacrament” is not a word occurring in the Bible, and the concept is an inductive one. Therefore, one had better be cautious stating “what a sacrament must contain.” There is danger, perhaps one that cannot be fixed, of arbitrariness or circularity.

 Dear Tim,

I agree with that. But we have the entire freight train of carefully structured Old Testament typology bearing down on these two simple rites. Each one is a whole world in a drop of water or wine. We might be left wondering but we are not left guessing.

_____________________________________
[1] See A Terrible Marvel.
[2] See Why Jesus Healed Some.