How or Whom?

For a subject entirely devoted to water, baptism discussions are among the most heated. We have two options regarding how Mainers will continue to relate to this question. We can build thicker walls or make some windows. We can ensconce ourselves in trenches or run a telegraph wire across the field. I propose we run a wire. This debate won’t be resolved overnight. Furthermore, this debate can’t be resolved by even starting with the question of whether babies of Christians are valid baptismal candidates. As anyone who has spent time berating a brother over baptism realizes, this question involves an array of hermeneutical choices. Entire libraries are dedicated to finding the “last word” on baptism. Yet here we are as Mainers, despite being a predominantly credobaptist state, still unsettled on the issue. As a former Baptist turned paedobaptist, I would like to throw forth a line in hopes that my credobaptists brothers will receive the call and begin to engage in dialogue. 

Since the question of “who shall be baptized” is fundamentally a question about the nature of the New Covenant, I would like us to begin our discourse there. Seeing that the topic of “covenant” is so broad, I propose we think even smaller. I would like to pose a precising question: Is the “newness” of the New Covenant primarily referring to “how” the covenant is administered or with “whom” the covenant applies? I am not so foolish to suppose that even if I sway you on the question of “who or how” that you will buy full covenantalism whole hog. At the very least perhaps you will begin to see how reasonable and level-headed your baby baptizing brethren are. Just maybe, if I am charming enough, you will even acknowledge the baptism of my children as legitimate even if you wouldn’t baptize your own...but I doth protest too much. 

The Bible spends most of its discourse about what makes the New Covenant new by determining how the covenant is administered, not who is included. It seems to be the only significant who question the New Covenant is aimed at is an expanded inclusion. The Gentiles can now enter the throne room. As Galatians tell us, equal access to the Father is given to men, women, slaves, freemen, Jews, and Gentiles. The most technical discussion we have concerning the covenant is in the book of Hebrews. We will spend most of our time there as we see what elements are being shown to have “changed” and what are “remaining the same”. 

In Hebrews 3:1-6, we are shown the manner in which Jesus is the covenant head. We are told that He is the greater Moses. The passage then spends much time holding the two next to each other and comparing how they administered God’s will among his people. Moses is shown to be a faithful servant, tending to “all of God’s household” (v2b). The work Moses began is assumed to be continuous in the sense that Jesus glorifies it. The difference here is how the covenant is administered. The old covenant was administered by a servant; the new is administered by the Son:

“For Jesus is considered worthy of more glory than Moses, just as the builder has more honor than the house, now every house is built by someone, but the one who built everything is God. Moses was faithful as a servant in all God’s household as a testimony to what would be said in the future. But Christ as faithful as a Son over his household. And we are that household if we hold on to our confidence and the hope in which we boast.” (v3-6)

Wherever God’s house is, there must be God’s priest. Hebrews 4:12-5:10 articulates the ways in which the high priesthood most truly belongs to Jesus. This new high priest is not new as in novel, but new in His quality and quantity of glory and power. This high priest is of the order of Melchizedek. He himself became our sacrifice. He makes way for us to approach the mercy seat (previously only possible on the Day of Atonement by the high priest). Again, we see that the distinctions between old and new being made are distinctions with regards to how the covenant functions. The implications of the Melchizedekian priesthood of Jesus come up again in chapter 7 of Hebrews. The new priest can actually get us near to God, the new priest has the power of immortality. The mere assertion here is that “law”, in this passage, is in reference to the old covenant stipulations and is not making an argument for the sake of time and focus. 

“...who (Melchizedek and Jesus) did not become priest based on a legal regulation about physical descent but based on the power of an indestructible life...so the previous command is annulled because it was weak and unprofitable (for the law perfected nothing), but a better hope is introduced through which we draw near to God.” (Heb 7:16-19)

As we approach Hebrews 8, which continues to riff on this refrain of Jesus as the eternal High Priest, we have a lengthy citation from Jeremiah 31;

“Behold, the days are coming declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt...”

This passage in particular is identified by many Baptists as vindication of the discontinuity between the old and new. “See it’s not like the old one!”. To which it must be said, “Of course, it’s the new covenant!” Bear in mind, however, what the author is identifying as new? A new priesthood, a new entrance — one that is not through animal blood but through the bloody side of the God-Man. After citing Jeremiah 31 the author of Hebrews immediately compares the tabernacle of the old, which was not able to accomplish what the greater and more perfect tent of Jesus does accomplish. 

“How much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.”  (Heb 9:14) 

This covenant is not like the old because there is no continual day of atonement. The animal-shaped imperfect offering has grown up into the final Adam dying for the first Adam. Our conscience can be clear and satisfied by the blood of Christ. The priest and the sacrifice are now one and the same. The Word has been made flesh and dwelt among us. The law of stone now is embodied in the new humanity. God has made peace with humanity by His Son. The tension of anticipation has been resolved. Full revelation of the Father has come through His only begotten Son. This is the how of the New Covenant.

The failing old covenant priesthood has been cleansed by the perfect obedience and blood of Jesus, making way for the priesthood of all believers. The weight of newness and glory in the New Covenant is first and foremost found in how it is administered. God himself has become our Mediator by His Son taking on true humanity. The local tabernacle/temple of Jerusalem is now globalized so that all nations can be drawn into the holy of holies. We have a perfect high priest that offered Himself as our ransom. The Law has been made flesh, the shadowy animal offerings have been glorified into our human offerings of praise, confession, and holiness. We can place ourselves on the altar of the earth, ignited by the Holy Spirit to bring praise to the Lord as an everlasting pleasing aroma. That’s better. That’s new.

I invite any responses to this essay from a Baptists perspective.