Baptist Catechism 102

Q. 102. What is the Lord’s Supper?

A. The Lord’s Supper is an ordinance of the New Testament, instituted by Jesus Christ; wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to His appointment, His death is shown forth, and the worthy receivers are, not after a corporeal and carnal manner, but by faith, made partakers of His body and blood, with all His benefits, to their spiritual nourishment, and growth in grace. (1 Cor. 11:23-26; 10:16)

Scripture Reading: 1 Corinthians 11:23–34

“For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, ‘This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world. So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another— if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23–34, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

The question, what is the Lord’s Supper? has been somewhat controversial throughout the history of the church and especially at the time of the Protestant Reformation. Over time, four views emerged concerning the substance of the bread and the wine. These four views each differ in their opinion concerning what Christ meant when he said, “this is my body”, and “this is my blood”. How are we to take that?

The Romanist view is called transubstantiation. It is the idea that when the priest blesses the elements they do actually turn into the body and blood of Jesus. The Reformers dismissed this as unbiblical and superstitious. 

The Lutherans, following Luther, hold to a view called consubstantiation. The idea here is that the elements remain bread and wine, but that the real body and blood of Christ are present all around the elements when they are blessed. 

Those following the Reformer, Ulrich Zwingli, hold to what is known as the memorialist view. The idea here is that Christ is not present at all in or around the elements, but that the church is merely called to remember the work of Christ in the Supper. 

And finally, the Calvinists walk a middle road between the memorialists and the Lutherans by insisting that though Christ is not present bodily, he is present in a special way spiritually when the church assembles to observe the Supper. The Calvinist position agrees with Zwingli that the Supper is a memorial and that there is no real presence of Christ bodily. And the Calvinist position also agrees with the Lutherans,  that the Supper is more than a memorial, for Christ is present in a special way according to his divinity. We hold to the Calvinistic position here at Emmaus.  

When Christ said, “this is my body”, and “this is my blood”, it should be clear to all that he was not speaking in a literal way, but rather meant, this signifies or represents my body and blood. That would have been the natural way for the disciples to take it, for they sat with him and watched him hold the bread and cup with his hands. They could easily distinguish between the bread and his body, and the wine and his blood. Add to this the fact that Christ also said “this cup is the New Covenant in my blood”. Clearly, he meant that the cup represented the New Covenant with all of its promises and terms, just as the bread and cup represented his body and blood. The disciples must have known that he was speaking figuratively. 

And when Christ instituted the Supper he did call his disciples to remember him. “Do this in remembrance of me” he said. So the Supper is a memorial. It is a time for remembering and for giving thanks. 

But we say that it is also more than a memorial. The Supper is to be viewed as a means of grace through which God nourishes his people by the Spirit. That it is a means of grace is proven, in part, by the fact that to eat and drink in an unworthy manner results in judgment. That is what Paul clearly said in 1 Corinthians 11: “For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged.” If the Supper were only a memorial — if it is true that Christ is not really present at all — then why the judgment? I think we must view the Supper as more than a memorial. Christ is present. The Supper is sacred, therefore, not because Christ is present bodily, but because he is present in his divinity and by the Spirit. The Supper is to be approached with reverence, therefore. 

This is what our catechism teaches. 

“The Lord’s Supper is an ordinance of the New Testament”, it says. True, the Lord’s Supper was instituted as Christ celebrated the last Passover with his disciples. But the Lord’s Supper is distinct from the Passover. It is a new thing, “an ordinance of the New Testament instituted by Jesus Christ.” So then, if we wish to know what the Lord’s Supper is and how it is to be observed, we must go to the New Testament scriptures and listen to the words of Christ and his Apostles. 

The word “wherein” indicates that we are about to learn what happens in the Supper. “[W]herein by giving and receiving bread and wine…” So these are the elements: bread and wine. 

And these elements are to be given and received, “according to [Christ’s] appointment”, that to say, in accordance with his instructions. 

When this is done faithfully, “[Christ’s] death is shown forth”. The breaking of the bread is a symbol of Christ’s broken body, and when the cup is presented, it is a symbol of Christ’s shed blood. We are reminded of the incarnation, of Christ’s sinlessness, of his substitutionary sacrifice. We also remember his resurrection, his ascension, and the hope of his eventual return. 

And those who receive the elements in a worthy manner are “made partakers of [Christ’s] body and blood”. Listen to 1 Corinthians 10:16 which is listed as a proof text in our catechism. “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Corinthians 10:16, ESV). So there is a sense in which when we partake of the bread and cup we participate or have fellowship or communion with, Christ. Sounds like more than a memorial to me! 

But notice the qualifications that our catechism makes to help guard us against the errors of the Romanists and the Lutherans. “[W]orthy receivers are, not after a corporeal and carnal manner, but by faith, made partakers of His body and blood…” “Corporeal” means fleshly. “Carnal” means bodily. The point is clear, isn’t it? When believers partake of the Supper worthily and by faith, they feast on Christ, not in a fleshly way, but spiritually to the nourishment of the souls. They partake of Christ and receive “all His benefits, to their spiritual nourishment, and growth in grace.”

*****

Conclusion

This is a wonderful summary of what the scriptures teach regarding the Lord’s Supper. 

One, It should move us to never neglect the sacrament, but to partake each Lord’s Day, knowing that it is a means of grace. God nourishes his people through this ordinance. Christ is really present with his people in the covenant meal, but not in a fleshly way. 

Two, it should move us to partake worthily. That is to say, by faith and with repentance.

Three, it should move the church, particularly the elders, to guard the table. Elders must warn Christians to come worthy, and warn the faithless to abstain, for here our union with Christ is signified and enjoyed. The Lord’s Supper is a sacred meal to be enjoyed by Christ’s church. It is not for the world.  

Q. 102. What is the Lord’s Supper?

A. The Lord’s Supper is an ordinance of the New Testament, instituted by Jesus Christ; wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to His appointment, His death is shown forth, and the worthy receivers are, not after a corporeal and carnal manner, but by faith, made partakers of His body and blood, with all His benefits, to their spiritual nourishment, and growth in grace. (1 Cor. 11:23-26; 10:16)

Old Testament Reading: Malachi 3:1–5

“Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap. He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, and they will bring offerings in righteousness to the LORD. Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the LORD as in the days of old and as in former years. Then I will draw near to you for judgment. I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against those who thrust aside the sojourner, and do not fear me, says the LORD of hosts.” (Malachi 3:1–5, ESV)

New Testament Reading: Luke 7:24-30

“When John’s messengers had gone, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John: ‘What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who are dressed in splendid clothing and live in luxury are in kings’ courts. What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written, ‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.’ I tell you, among those born of women none is greater than John. Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.’ (When all the people heard this, and the tax collectors too, they declared God just, having been baptized with the baptism of John, but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.)” (Luke 7:24–30, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

Introduction

The passage that is before us today is rather straightforward. Here we learn that Jesus testified concerning the goodness and greatness of John the Baptist. So, just as John the Baptist was faithful to testify concerning Jesus as the Messiah, so too Jesus was faithful to testify concerning John, that he was indeed the great prophet who prepared the way for the Messiah. As I said, the text is rather straightforward and simple, and yet I think there is a lot to glean from it if we would only slow down enough to reflect upon what it says. 

Friends, you and I are living a long time after the Messiah has come to accomplish salvation and to inaugurate the New Covenant. We have the Holy Scriptures – the Old Testament and the New. And we also benefit from nearly 2,000 years of church history wherein men and women have reflected on the Scriptures, the Christ who is revealed within and have written great works of theology. I think it is important for us to remember the uniqueness of the time in which we live. We live under the New Covenant. We live a long time after Jesus the Messiah has come to accomplish our redemption. It is especially important for us to remember these things when we consider passages like the one that is before us today. Luke 7:24-30 tells us about things that happened as Jesus Christ was just beginning his earthly ministry. Men and women were just beginning to recognize him as the Messiah, therefore. What exactly he would be, and what exactly he would do to bring salvation to his people, was still a mystery to them. 

The word “mystery” is very important. It is a word that is used often in the Bible, especially in the writings of Paul. Particularly in Ephesians and Colossians, Paul uses the word “mystery” to describe the information that people had about the Messiah before he lived, died, and rose again (see, for example, Ephesians 3:8-11). Did people know about the Messiah before he was born? Yes. Did they know that he would accomplish salvation? Yes. Did some place their faith in him for the forgiveness of their sins and life everlasting? Yes. Abraham, for example, “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness” (Romans 4:3, ESV). And there were many others who had the faith of Abraham and were saved. But what did those who lived prior to the coming of Christ believe in? They believed in God’s Word. They trusted in the promises of God concerning the Messiah who was to come. They believed in God’s promise that redemption would someday be accomplished, that sins would someday be atoned for, and that Satan, sin, and death would someday be overthrown and defeated. But who the Messiah would be, when he would come, what he would be like, and how exactly he would accomplish our redemption, was mysterious to them. Some who lived prior to the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Christ received light from God concerning the coming Messiah, but the light was very dim when compared to the light that we enjoy now that Christ has come. 

In fact, we know what it is like to believe in truths cloaked in mystery. I’m thinking here of what the Scriptures say regarding the return of Christ. Do we know that Christ will return? Yes. Do we know that he will judge? Yes. Do we know that he will bring his people into the new creation? Yes. But many of the details remain a mystery. When will Christ return? What exactly will he and we be like? What will be the glory of the new creation? It is hard to say, exactly. But we will know when it happens. Until then, we trust in Christ and in the promises of God’s Word. And I am saying that something very similar was experienced by the people of God concerning their knowledge of the Messiah prior to his birth, life, death, resurrection, and ascension. They knew he would come. They understood some things about who he would be and what he would do. They knew enough to place their faith in him! But the picture they had of him was not nearly as clear as the one that we have, now that he has come.   

So why am I reminding you of these things in the introduction to this sermon on Luke 7:24-30? Well, so we might recognize that the events and sayings recorded here took place during a time of great transition. There have been a few great transitions that have taken place in human history. Man’s fall into sin was a great transitional moment. The global flood in the days of Noah was a great transitional moment. By it, the world that once was was separated from the world that now is (2 Peter 3:6-7). Israel’s redemption from Egyptian bondage was a transitional moment. For then the kingdom of God was pictured (or prefigured) on earth for the first time. The greatest of all transitions is still in our future. It will happen when Christ returns to usher in a new heaven and new earth. Then, the first heaven and earth – the one in which we now live – will pass away, and the new will come (Revelation 21). But of course, the new creation that will be brought into existence at Christ’s second coming was earned and inaugurated (or begun) at his first coming. And that is what we are now considering in Luke’s gospel – Christ’s first coming. The period of time that Luke records for us was a time of great transition, for in those days the Christ, who was promised by God from long ago, was coming into the world to accomplish salvation for God’s elect, to inaugurate (or begin) the kingdom of God on earth, and to begin a new creation. 

In those days, Christ was coming into the world.  I say, “was coming” to stress that his first coming was progressive. The eternal Son of God became incarnate by being conceived in the womb of the virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit. He was born. He grew in wisdom and stature. At about the age of 30, John the Baptist introduced him as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. He lived in perfect obedience to the Father, and, after about three years, he was unjustly crucified. He died, was buried, and rose again on the third day. After showing himself to be alive for 40 days, he ascended to the right hand of the Father, from wince he will return. His first coming was progressive – it was a process that lasted about 33 years. The progressive nature of Christ’s first coming can be compared to the redemption that was worked for Isarel from Egyptian bondage through Moses. That act of redemption was also progressive. It began with the birth and calling of Moses and culminated in the outpouring of ten plagues and the parting of the Red Sea. That act of redemption was a picture or type of the greater act of redemption that Christ has worked. The two acts share this in common – they were both progressive. Friends, Christ’s second coming will not be progressive. It will happen in a moment and without warning. Christ’s second coming can be compared to the judgment of the flood that came upon the earth in the days of Noah. In fact, Jesus is the one who makes this comparison in Matthew 24:38, saying, “For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man” (Matthew 24:38–39, ESV). When Christ came into the world the first time, he came to accomplish our salvation. And like the redemption worked through Moses, he redeemed us progressively through his whole life. When Christ comes into the world again, it will be for judgment and for consummation. There will be nothing progressive about his second coming. No, he will come like a thief in the night.   

With all of that as an introduction, let us dive into our text for today being mindful of the fact that was a time of great transition. In these days, the Christ was coming to the world to accomplish redemption for all whom the Father had given to him in eternity. John the Baptist had faithfully testified concerning Jesus. He told everyone he could that Jesus was the Messiah and urged them to turn from their sins and follow him. Now John is in prison. And here in our text for today, Jesus testifies concerning him – his goodness and his greatness.   

*****

Jesus Declared John The Baptist To Be The Greatest Of The Old Testament Prophets

First, in verses 24-28, Jesus declares that John the Baptist is the greatest of the Old Testament prophets.  

In verse 24 we read, “When John’s messengers had gone, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John…” He did this because the people likely had questions concerning John. Not long before this great masses of people were going out into the wilderness to listen to John’s teaching and to be baptized by him. The people regarded him as a prophet. Some wondered if he was the Messiah. He insisted he was not, but that Jesus was. And now John was in prison. I’m sure many wondered what to make of John. They wondered how they were to interpret this change of events. Some slandered him, I’m sure.  And so Jesus spoke up to defend him. 

He said,  “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who are dressed in splendid clothing and live in luxury are in kings’ courts. What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written, “Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.’ I tell you, among those born of women none is greater than John.”

When Jesus asked,  “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?”, he was asserting that John was not a person who was easily shaken. A reed is easily shaken. A soft breeze will make it quiver. The obvious answer to the question, “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?”, was, of course not. The multitudes did not flock to John because he was a man easily shaken. Instead, they flocked to him because he was a man of substance, resolve, and strong faith. 

When Jesus said, “What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who are dressed in splendid clothing and live in luxury are in kings’ courts”, he was asserting that John was not the kind of person who would compromise when faced with hardships. John had already decided to separate himself from the world and to forsake the pleasures of this world. He lived in the wilderness, wore rough clothing, ate locust and wild honey, and devoted himself to fasting and prayer. John had already forsaken the world for the sake of Christ. He would not compromise when threatened with discomfort or death. He would not be tempted by the pleasantries of this life, for he had already died to them. 

So, the answer to the first two questions posed by Jesus was “no”. But the answer to the third question, was “yes”. “What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet.” Jesus declared John to be a prophet – a prophet like Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah. When he declared him to be more than a prophet, he meant that he was a prophet like no other, for he was a prophet about whom other prophets had prophesied. Jesus then quoted from the prophet Malachi 3:1, saying, “This is he of whom it is written, ‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.’” John was more than an ordinary prophet. He was the prophet who was blessed to prepare the way for the immediate arrival of the Messiah, Christ the Lord.  

Jesus then made this remarkable comment: “I tell you, among those born of women none is greater than John.” He is to be regarded as the greatest of all the prophets and people who had ever lived up until then.

A question we should ask is, what made John the Baptist so great? The answer is that it was Christ who made him great. By the grace of God, John was born to be the one who prepared the way for Christ. By the grace of God, John was given the gift of faith to know that Jesus was the Christ. By the grace of God, John forsook all of the pleasures of this world and even life itself to be the forerunner for Christ. And by the grace of God, John was uniquely blessed to say the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29, ESV). The prophets who had lived before John were blessed to speak of Christ, but they spoke of him from a distance. John was blessed to see him with his own, to touch him with his own hands, to baptize him with water, to witness with his own eyes his anointing with the Holy Spirit, to hear with his own ears the declaration of the Father, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased” (Luke 3:22, ESV), and to point with his own hand while uttering the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29, ESV). By the grace of God, John was a great man who was strong in faith, hope, and love, but it was his proximity to Jesus that set him apart as truly great. He was a prophet. But he was more than a prophet. He was the prophet who was blessed to minister at this time of great transition to announce that the Messiah was coming into the world to finally accomplish our redemption in fulfillment of the promises of God previously made. 

*****

Jesus Declared That John The Baptist Was Lower Than The Least In The Kingdom Of God 

That this is what made John the greatest of all the prophets of Old – his proximity to Christ –  is made clear by what Jesus says next. Look at the end of verse 28. There Jesus adds, “Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.”

This is a mysterious saying, wouldn’t you agree? 

And yes, I am intentionally playing off of the word mystery as it was used earlier in this sermon, for I do believe that the key to understanding the meaning of this saying of Jesus is to interpret it in light of the doctrine of the mystery of Christ once concealed but now revealed.

What does Jesus mean by the words, “Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.” You should know that there are many interpretations found within the commentary tradition. Some think that Jesus is speaking of the angels – the least of the angels is greater than John. Though true, I doubt that this is the meaning. Some think that Jesus is speaking of those who have died and gone to glory. The least in paradise are greater than John who is on earth. Though this is, in a way, also true, I doubt it is the meaning. 

Instead, to understand what Jesus meant when he said, “Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than [John]”,  we must remember that both John the Baptist and Jesus preached that the kingdom of God (or of heaven) was at hand. According to Luke 1:33, Jesus was born to establish an eternal kingdom. According to Matthew 3:1-2, “John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’”. In Luke 4:43 we were told that Jesus went about preaching the “good news of the kingdom of God” (Luke 4:43, ESV). And in Luke 6:20 we hear the words of Christ as he came down from the mountain with his disciples to preach in that level place: “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.” 

So, the kingdom of God (or of heaven) of which John the Baptist and Christ spoke not confined to heaven, but is present on earth. And it was not present on earth before Christ came, but was at hand in the days of John and Jesus’ earthly ministry. In other words, it was very near. Clearly, the arrival of this kingdom was associated with the arrival of the Messiah, for Jesus is the King of this eternal kingdom. 

When Jesus said that none was greater than John the Baptist, “Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he”, he was not comparing John with the angels in heaven or with the saints who had died and were in paradise. No, Jesus was comparing the greatness of John, who lived and would die before the death, burial, and, resurrection of Christ, with the far surpassing greatness of those with faith in Christ who would live after Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection. 

You see, this is a comparison between the Old Covanant and the New, the kingdom of God prefigured within Isarel and the Kingdom present in power in the church of Jesus Christ. The comparison is not a vertical one, comparing John on earth with the angels in heaven, but a horizontal, redemptive-historical one. 

When Jesus said, “Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he”, he meant that the lowliest disciple of his who lives after his death and resurrection will experience something greater than what John the Baptist ever experienced on earth, namely life in his inaugurated kingdom. Though it is true that none who lived up till then was greater than John, it is also true that John would never experience life in the inaugurated kingdom of God on earth. He preached about the arrival of the kingdom –  “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand”, he said –  but he would die before it was present with power. In this way, John the Baptist was like Moses. Moses prepared the people to enter the promised land where the kingdom of God would be prefigured on earth, but he himself never entered in. 

When did the kingdom of God come to be present on earth with power?

It was after Christ lived a life of perfect obedience to God the Father as the second and greater Adam. It was after he suffered and died in the place of those given to him by the Father in eternity, to bear the wrath of God in their place, and to atone for their sins. It was after Christ died and was raised, thus defeating sin, Satan, and death. And it was after he ascended to the Father’s right hand to sit down on the throne of his eternal kingdom. You see, it was through the suffering of the cross and the victory of resurrection that Christ bound Satan so that he could no longer deceive the nations. He bound Satan so that he could plunder his house. The nations belong to Christ the King! They will be held captive in idolatry and in bondage to the evil one no longer, for Christ is risen. Satan has been cast down and bound, and Christ has ascended to his rightful throne. He has opened up the way in the very presence of God for his people. He has set the captives free. And he has poured out the Holy Spirit on all flesh. Indeed, all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to him. Disciples will be made nations. These will baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, thus marking their entrance into Christ’s eternal Kingdom. These will be taught to observe all that Christ has commanded. And behold, he will be with us, to the end of the age. Then his kingdom, which is now here in part, will be here in full (see Matthew 28:18–20).

John the Baptist was the greatest of the prophets of Old given his proximity to Christ. More light was given to him than was given to all who preceded him. But he still lived in the age of darkness and mystery. Though he knew that Christ was “the one who is to come”, he still did not know what exactly he would do to accomplish our redemption or what the result would be. 

After Christ died, rose again, and ascended, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, Peter, and Paul– indeed all who have heard of Christ, his finished work, and have believed in his name – have received a revelation that is much greater and brighter than the revelation that John, the greatest of the prophets of Old, had received. By God’s grace, John walked confidently in an age of relative darkness by the light of the full moon. He could see Christ clearly so as to believe in him and proclaim him. But those who have heard the good news of Jesus Christ after his death, resurrection, and ascension walk in the light of the noontime sun. One needs only to compare the writings of Paul the Apostle with the writings of all of the prophets of Old, to observe the difference that the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ has made.    

The revelation we have received now that Christ has risen is much greater, and so too is our experience. What should I say about this? I could go on for a long time. Our redemption has been accomplished. We are united to Christ by faith. The way into the presence of God has been opened up through Christ’s mediation. We are invited to come boldly before the throne of grace, therefore! We have been set free from the rigor and curse of the law. We have a sympathetic high priest who intercedes for us uninterrupted by fatigue, sickness, or death. And Satan, our advisory, has been bound. That is what passages such as Matthew 12:29, Matk 3:27, and Revelation 20:1-3 so clearly teach. People may wonder what it means for Satan to have been at Christ’s first coming when he is so clearly active in this world. He is bound so that Christ may plunder his house. He is bound so that he cannot deceive the nations any long. He is bound so that disciples of Jesus can be made of all nations!  Think of how the nations were bound in the darkness of idolatry prior to the resurrection and ascension of Christ. And think of the progress that the kingdom of God has made! The gospel of the kingdom has gone to the ends of the earth! This is the result of Christ’s victory, the binding of the strongman, and the pouring out of the Spirit of God on all flesh. 

I hope you have a better understanding of what Christ meant when, after declaring John to be the greatest of the prophets of Old, then said, “Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.” The insights into the mystery of Christ are greater. The benefits that we have received are greater. Why? Because Christ, his Kingdom, and the Covenant he mediators are greater than all that came before.   

*****

Some Of The People Received John, And Therefore, Jesus – Others Rejected Them Both 

The last observation I have is that in those days some of the people received John and therefore, Jesus, whereas others rejected them both. 

Look at verse 29: “When all the people heard this, and the tax collectors too, they declared God just, having been baptized with the baptism of John, but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.” (Luke 7:29–30, ESV)

To reject the testimony of John was to reject the Messiah, for John testified concerning the Messiah. And the same can be said for the prophets of Old. To reject them was to reject the Lord, for these prophets spoke God’s word to the people. 

We should remember the history of Israel, and how often the true prophets of God were mistreated while the false prophets were shown honor. Christ made mention of this in his sermon on the plane, remember? “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man! Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven; for so their fathers did to the prophets” (Luke 6:22–23, ESV). And a little later he said, “Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets” (Luke 6:26, ESV).

We should not be surprised, therefore, that John the Baptist was imprisoned (and Christ crucified!). Nor should we be surprised that it was the “Pharisees and the lawyers” who “rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by {John]”, while it was the common people and even the tax collectors people who “declared God just, having been baptized with the baptism of John”. In their self-righteous pride the “Pharisees and the lawyers” rejected God purpose of salvation in Christ Jesus. But God showed mercy to sinners to draw them to faith and repentance. 

*****

Suggestions For Application

How might we apply this text to our lives? I have two suggestions. 

One, I would urge you to learn from John the Baptist and to imitate his unwavering faith, his forsaking of the pleasures of this world, and his willingness to suffer – yes, even to die – for the sake of knowing Christ. He was not reed shaken by the wind. He was tempted by soft and luxurious clothing. He was a man of strong faith and unwavering conviction, and he is to be imitated.  

Two, I would urge you to think of the many blessings that are ours through faith in Christ with special attention given to the blessing of the New Covenant. It would be a great error to think that salvation was not possible under the Old Covenant, or that it was obtained in some other way than through faith in Christ alone. The Scriptures are very clear that Abraham was justified in the same way that we are – through faith in Christ alone. But it would also be a great error to think that there is no difference between the Old Covenant and the New. The New Covenant and its blessings are far superior to the Old (see Hebrews). I will not repeat all that I said earlier about the superiority of the New Covenant. I think it will suffice to encourage you to reflect upon the knowledge we have of Christ, his finished work, his victory, and his eternal reward. These truths were revealed in a dim way under the Old Covenant, now we see them clearly. Let us think often of Christ and our salvation in him. Let us draw near to him. And let us rejoice. 

Baptist Catechism 101

Q. 101. What is the duty of such who are rightly baptized?

A. It is the duty of those who are rightly baptized to give up themselves to some particular and orderly church of Jesus Christ, that they may walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. (Acts 2:46,47; Acts 9:26; 1 Peter 2:5; Heb. 10:25; Rom. 16:5)

Scripture Reading: Romans 16:1–15

“I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church at Cenchreae, that you may welcome her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints, and help her in whatever she may need from you, for she has been a patron of many and of myself as well. Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who risked their necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks but all the churches of the Gentiles give thanks as well. Greet also the church in their house. Greet my beloved Epaenetus, who was the first convert to Christ in Asia. Greet Mary, who has worked hard for you. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me. Greet Ampliatus, my beloved in the Lord. Greet Urbanus, our fellow worker in Christ, and my beloved Stachys. Greet Apelles, who is approved in Christ. Greet those who belong to the family of Aristobulus. Greet my kinsman Herodion. Greet those in the Lord who belong to the family of Narcissus. Greet those workers in the Lord, Tryphaena and Tryphosa. Greet the beloved Persis, who has worked hard in the Lord. Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord; also his mother, who has been a mother to me as well. Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas, and the brothers who are with them. Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints who are with them.” (Romans 16:1–15, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

So why have I tortured myself with the task of reading all of these unfamiliar and hard to pronounce names that are found at the end of Paul’s letter to the church in Rome? The reason I’ve done this is to remind you that those who have faith in Christ are to be baptized and join themselves to churches. These names are names of real people who believed in Christ, were baptized upon their profession of faith, and were members of the church in Rome. Isn’t that awesome to think about. These hard-to-pronounce names represent people — real people, who lived real lives, a long, long time ago. They lived in a very different time and place from the time and place we live in today, but we share this in common — our faith in Christ, or baptism, and our membership in Christ’s church. They were members of the church in Rome. They heard the word read and preached there, and they celebrated the Lord’s Supper there, much in the same way that you and I do in this place today. 

The question that we are considering from our catechism today reminds us of the same thing. Those who have faith in Christ are to be baptized, and those who are baptized are to join themselves to a local church where they will be taught to obey all that Christ has commanded us. 

Let’s consider question 101 of the baptism catechism piece by piece. First the question: “What is the duty of such who are rightly baptized?” In other words, what are those who are baptized then to do?

That is a really important question. Baptism is to be applied near the beginning of the Christian life. It marks one’s entrance into the kingdom of God and shows that we are partakers of the Covenant of Grace. It should be applied not long after someone makes a credible profession of faith. So baptism is applied at the beginning of the Christian life… but what then?

Our catechism is right to say that “[i]t is the duty of those who are rightly baptized to give up themselves to some particular and orderly church of Jesus Christ…

What does “particular” mean in this context? Here “particular” refers to a local, or visible, church. 

Is there such a thing as the universal, or catholic, church? Yes, of course, there is. When we speak of the universal church we are speaking of all who have true faith in Christ throughout the world. The universal church is sometimes called the invisible church because we cannot see it with our eyes. God sees it, but we cannot. The universal church cannot assemble on earth. It assembles in heaven now, spiritually speaking. And it will assemble for all eternity in the new heavens and earth after Christ returns. But it cannot assemble on earth today, for the universal church is too large, and it is separated by geographical distance, not to mention language and even culture. When a person places their faith in Christ they are automatically joined to this universal and invisible church by virtue of their Spirit-wrought union with Christ. All who have faith in Christ are joined together in him. 

But that is not the church that our catechism is talking about. No, our catechism is teaching that the one who has faith in Christ out to join themselves to a particular church, a local church, a visible church, consisting of officers and members,  where the Word of God is preached and Sacraments are administered as the church assembles each Lord’s Day. That is what the word “particular” means in this context. 

You know, as you read the New Testament, you’ll find that references to particular, local churched are everywhere. You just need to look for them. The gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were to be circulated amongst the churches and they contain instructions for life in the church. The book of Acts is all about the local church. We hear of churches being planted, of elders and deacons, and of members. Most of Paul’s letters were written either to local churches — churches in Rome, Ephesus, Colossi, etc. — or to men who were serving as ministers within these churches. Even the book of Revelation was addressed to seven particular churches. 

The topic of the local church is so pervasive in the NT that it is really hard to imagine the Christain faith being practiced apart from it… and yet so many try in our day and age. Many claim to love Jesus, but they want nothing to do with the church. These seem to have forgotten that Jesus did not merely die for them individually — no, he laid down his life for the church. It is the church, and not you and me as individuals, that he calls his bride (see Eph 5:25ff.).

So, we must acknowledge that this is what the Scriptures call us to do. After believing upon Christ, we are to be baptized. And having been baptized, we are to join ourselves to a particular church (preferably the one we were baptized in, but people do move, don’t they?).

Notice also the word “orderly”. “It is the duty of those who are rightly baptized to give up themselves to some particular and orderly church of Jesus Christ…” An orderly church is ordered (organized) according to the Scriptures. No church is perfect. But a church that is well ordered will have officers and members. The Scriptures will be faithfully taught there, and the Sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper will be faithfully administered. And lastly, an orderly church will be disciplined. And by this I mean that the church — its elders and members together — will be faithful to do what is commanded in Matthew 18 and described is 1 Corinthians 5. Those who are struggling with sin will be lovingly and patiently called to repentance, and those who persist in sin will, in an orderly manner, be removed from the church.  

“Orderly” means properly ordered. And properly ordered implies that there is a standard to which we are to conform.  I’m afraid that many churches have forgotten this. So many take it upon themselves to decide how they should “do church”, but that is not our place. Some decisions are naturally left to us, but our main concern should be to conform ourselves to the order prescribed by Christ which is found in the Scriptures. If I can offer a word of wisdom to my brothers and sisters in Christ who are outside of this local congregation who may happen to be listening in: stop looking for a hip church, and start looking for a faithful church — one that is well ordered according to the Scriptures.

The words “give up themselves” are also important. “Church” is not a service to attend, but a body to join. Are you following me? When someone joins a church they make a commitment to that congregation, and the congregation makes a commitment to them. And what is that commitment? Well, in brief, we commit to be the church together, to assemble for worship, to receive the word together, to partake of the ordinances, and to do, and even be subject to, discipline. When someone joins a church they make a commitment to love the members of that congregation, and they receive a commitment to be loved. The Scriptures teach that new members are to be received (Romans 14:1), and that does imply some formality. Please remember this: Christains are not merely to attend church, as if attending a conference, or worse yet, a concert or comedy club. Christians are to give themselves up to a local church. They are to entrust themselves to the elders, deacons, and members of that church, and they themselves are to endeavor to use whatever gifts God has given to them for the building up of the body of Christ in that place, for we are all members one of another (Romans 12:5).

Lastly, our catechism says, “that they may walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.”

The Christian life is a walk. It is a journey. Where we end up matters more than where we begin. And Christians are to walk with others. They are to walk by faith in the church. 

And in this walk, we are to be concerned with keeping the commandments of God. Remember what Jesus said when he commissioned his disciples?  “And Jesus came and said to them, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:18–20, ESV). One of the primary responsibilities of the church, with elders at the lead, is to teach Christians to observe all that Christ has commanded them. This is a process. Sometimes it is a grueling process. We must be patient and kind towards one another. 

God’s commands are to be obeyed, and Christ’s ordinances are to be kept. Here we are to think primarily of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. 

You know, the Reformers had to wrestle with the question, what constitutes a true church after breaking from Rome. For those in Rome, that question was easy to answer. Rome is the true church. Anything outside of its structure with the Pope at the head is to be rejected. The Reformers were right to reject this organizational approach and to put the stress elsewhere. True churches are those churches that preach and teach the Word of God accurately, administer the Sacraments of the Lord’s Supper and baptism faithfully, and some would also add, are disciplined. True churches may be strong or weak, pure or impure, relatively speaking. But these three marks characterize true churches. And I think they were right.  

Remember, this catechism that we are working our way through was compiled by Particular (Reformed) Baptists. Isn’t interesting that they did not say, it is the duty of those who are rightly baptized to give up themselves to some particular and orderly Particular Baptist Church, that they may walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. My point is this: our Particular Baptist forefathers felt and thought strongly about their particular church tradition, just as we do. But they were also charitable. They knew that there were many churches outside of their tradition that were true churches of Jesus Christ, and we should rejoice whenever a person turns from their sins, is rightly baptized, and gives themselves up to one of these true churches to walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. 

*****

Conclusion

Q. 101. What is the duty of such who are rightly baptized?

A. It is the duty of those who are rightly baptized to give up themselves to some particular and orderly church of Jesus Christ, that they may walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. (Acts 2:46,47; Acts 9:26; 1 Peter 2:5; Heb. 10:25; Rom. 16:5)

Baptist Catechism 100

Q. 100. How is baptism rightly administered?

A. Baptism is rightly administered by immersion, or dipping the whole body of the party in water, into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, according to Christ’s institution, and the practice of the apostles, and not by sprinkling or pouring of water, or dipping some part of the body, after the tradition of man. (Matt. 3:16; John 3:23; Acts 8:38,39)

Scripture Reading: Acts 8:26-40

“Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, ‘Rise and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.’ This is a desert place. And he rose and went. And there was an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure. He had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning, seated in his chariot, and he was reading the prophet Isaiah. And the Spirit said to Philip, ‘Go over and join this chariot.’ So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ And he said, ‘How can I, unless someone guides me?’ And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. Now the passage of the Scripture that he was reading was this: ‘Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter and like a lamb before its shearer is silent, so he opens not his mouth. In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth.’ And the eunuch said to Philip, ‘About whom, I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?’ Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus. And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, ‘See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?’ And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord carried Philip away, and the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing. But Philip found himself at Azotus, and as he passed through he preached the gospel to all the towns until he came to Caesarea.” (Acts 8:26–40, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

The question before us today is, “How is baptism rightly administered?“ In other words, how is a baptism properly done?

You know, in some traditions baptisms are administered by the pouring or sprinkling of water. And the question is, is this right or proper?

Our catechism is quite direct, isn’t it?  At the end, it says, “not by sprinkling or pouring of water, or dipping some part of the body, after the tradition of man.” In our opinion, this practice of sprinkling, pouring, or dipping some part of the body into the baptismal water is not from Christ, but is the tradition of man. 

Where did this tradition come from?  Well, I have not studied that question in detail, but I wonder if it did not develop along with the tradition of applying the sign of baptism to infants and to those on their deathbeds. Sprinkling, pouring, or dipping only a part of the body in situations like these would certainly be more convenient. 

However the tradition developed, we are saying that it is not from Scripture, which means that it is not from God. It is the tradition of man, and it is to be rejected. 

Notice again that the question is “How is baptism rightly administered?“ In other words, what is the correct way to do it? 

As is usually the case, it is helpful to compare our catechism with our confession to gain a fuller understanding of the doctrine being presented. Our confession teaches in chapters 28 and 29 that those who have faith in Christ are the only proper subjects of baptism — never should those who do not profess faith be baptized, and this includes infants. Infant baptisms are invalid baptisms, therefore. Water is always to be used. And those baptized are to be baptized in the name of the Triune God – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by one who is qualified and called to administer the sacrament, according to the commission of Christ (2LCF 28.2). A baptism that lacks these things should be considered invalid. But our confession says in 29.4 that “Immersion, or dipping of the person in water, is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance.” In other words, the right way to do it is by immersion, or the dipping of the person in water. But what about those who have been baptized as believers, with water, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, by one who is qualified and called to administer the sacrament, but by sprinkling, pouring, or dipping o a part of the body into the water. What should we think of that baptism? Is it valid?

This is a question that comes up from time to time even today, but it was a very common question for the Particular Baptists living in the 17th century. They had to wrestle with the question, should we receive the baptisms of those who were baptized as believers, but by sprinkling. Many thought yes. Though their baptisms were improperly done, they were to be considered valid.  And that is why 29.4 of our confession says that “Immersion, or dipping of the person in water, is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance.” Due means proper.

Would we consider an infant baptism valid? No, never. For that one was not baptized upon profession of faith. The one who was baptized as an infant was not really baptized. They should be baptized properly as a believer now, and thus say to God and to the world, Jesus is Lord. 

Would we consider a Roman Catholic, Mormon, or a Jehovah’s Witness baptism to be valid? No, never. For those are different religions with different conceptions of sin and salvation. In the case of Mormon and JW doctrine, their view of God and Christ is fundamentally different too. Those who were baptized in these religions were not baptized into Christ’s church, but into something else. 

Would we consider the baptism of one who was sprinkled with water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit upon profession of faith, let’s say,  in a Reformed or Presbyterian church to be valid? Yes, I think we would. Our view would be that it was improperly done, but may be regarded valid. 

So why do we say that “[b]aptism is rightly administered by immersion, or dipping the whole body of the party in water, into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit…” Why is this the right way to do it?

The answer is rather simple. One, this is what the word “baptism” means – to immerse or submerge. Two, this is what Christ taught. And three, this is what the Apostles did. In other words, baptism by immersion is what we find in scripture. 

Read the New Testament and see. Baptisms were performed in bodies of water —  rivers, lakes, and such. People “went down into the water” to be baptized. 

The passage that I read from Acts 8 regarding Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch is a good example. Philip preached the gospel to him from Isaiah the prophet. The Ethiopian believed. And after believing he said, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?’ He commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord carried Philip away, and the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing.”  

If ever there was a time for baptism by sprinkling or pouring, it was here, for they were in an arid region. But baptism was made possible by the body of water. It was large enough for them to go down into it and to come up out of it again. Read the New Testament and see that this is always the case. It is always baptism by immersion that is described. 

Add to this the symbolism of baptism. Baptism signifies cleansing. It signifies our union with Christ in his death and resurrection. Through immersion, the who body is washed. Through immersion, our death in Christ, and our resurrection in Christ are signified as we go under the water and come up again. Baptism by pouring or sprinkling doesn’t quite capture this, does it?

*****

Conclusion

And this is why we say, “Baptism is rightly administered by immersion, or dipping the whole body of the party in water, into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, according to Christ’s institution, and the practice of the apostles, and not by sprinkling or pouring of water, or dipping some part of the body, after the tradition of man. (Matt. 3:16; John 3:23; Acts 8:38,39)