Sunday Sermons
Hezekiah's Passover
2 Chronicles 30:13-20
The reason we are examining this section of Scripture is because recently certain voices have attempted to use the above verses to prove that one does not have to be baptized to be saved. In the book Down In the River to Pray Revisioning Baptism as God’s Transforming Work, John Mark Hicks and Greg Taylor contend that there are “Theological Trajectories in Scripture”. “Trajectories”, we are told, show that “ritual is only important as it relates to God’s ultimate goal and intent” and that “God values the seeker’s heart and benevolent mercy more than ritual” (p. 185). They will argue that 2 Chronicles 30:18-19 is teaching that the heart makes the difference, not ritualistic technicalities (p. 196). The application to baptism is this, “God will work toward the goal (of the transformed life) even when baptism is misunderstood and misapplied as long as the heart seeks God and does not neglect or rebel against what one believes God requires” (p. 191). “While Hicks and Taylor argue that they would gently teach a sprinkled person in their fellowship to be immersed, they admit that his ‘previous life of faith would not be delegitimized by baptism’ (p. 197). While they think the sprinkled person needs a fuller understanding, they do not regard the sprinkled infant who later believes as lost. They would not disfellowship a sprinkled person who sees no need to be immersed. Indeed, they scold brethren in churches of Christ for being sectarian, because we hold to the immersion of penitent believers only” (The Spiritual Sword, July 2004, p. 20).
Examining the Text
This above section of Scripture describes how Hezekiah gathered all Israel to celebrate the Passover. Chapters 29-31 describe the efforts on the part of this godly man to bring the nation back to God and His law. The Passover will be celebrated in the second month (30:13), and this is something that the Law of Moses allowed (Numbers 9:6-13). The text then says, “For a multitude of people….had not purified themselves, yet they ate the Passover otherwise than prescribed. For Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, ‘May the good Lord pardon’ everyone who prepares his heart to seek God, the Lord God of his fathers, though not according to the purification rules of the sanctuary’. So the Lord heard Hezekiah and healed the people” (2 Chronicles 30:18-20). First of all, we need to be clear about what Hezekiah is praying. “He is not taking for granted that their ‘seeker’ hearts allowed them to pervert their practice. He knew that it was sinful for them to partake while unclean and prayedfor forgiveness. Hicks and Taylor argue, ‘God values the seeker’s heart and benevolent mercy more than ritual’ (p. 185). If this is the case, why then does Hezekiah feel the need to ask for forgiveness and why did they need healing? Secondly, Hezekiah is not thinking that they could establish a new norm of eating the Passover while unclean” (The Spiritual Sword pp. 19-20). God’s willingness to forgive does not mean that one can continue in error (Romans 6:1-2). Hezekiah did not dismiss the error of these people; he knew it was a sin that needed forgiveness. “Hezekiah is not arguing that only the heart matters but not the ritual. He prayed that they would be atoned for their transgression” (p. 20). Finally, the Bible clearly teaches that in order to be forgiven the sinner himself must repent (1 John 1:8-10). The fact that the Lord healed the people in 2 Chronicles 30 infers that the people realized themselves the error of their ways.
Jesus’ and the apostles view of baptism
When people seek to make arguments against the necessity of baptism for the remission of sins, they tend to forget that Jesus Himself gave the command and clearly placed baptism, as well as faith, prior to salvation (Mark 16:16). Hicks and Taylor object that demanding baptism is “like drawing a line in the sand”, yet they forget that Jesus Himself drew this line and so did the apostles (Acts 2:38). God has every right in the world to draw lines. Note the following verses (John 3:5 “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God”; John 8:24; 14:6; Luke 13:3). To be consistent, such men need to reject the passages that also draw a line at faith or repentance, because Jesus inherently connected such conditions to baptism as well.
· Contrary to the terms that people use today, I never find Jesus or the apostles speaking of baptism as a “ritual”, rather Paul notes that submitting to baptism is when a man or woman is “obedient from the heart” (Romans 6:17). Observe that in this verse we have both the heart and doctrine. “Both heart and form enter into gospel obedience. He obeys the form, because he loves the one who fixed the form” (The Spiritual Sword p. 22). Paul also linked baptism with trust in God’s ability to save a person, “having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God” (Colossians 2:12). Peter then links baptism with the desire for clear conscience before God (1 Peter 3:21). Even when we consider John’s baptism, God considered it far more than mere ritual because those who rejected John’s baptism were rejecting God (Luke 7:30 “But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God’s purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John”).
· Neither Jesus nor the apostles viewed baptism as a technicality or some checklist requirement, rather Paul placed baptism right alongside such topics as there being one God, one Lord and one faith (Ephesians 4:3-6). If a person can be saved without being truly baptized, can a person be saved without believing that Jesus is Lord? What if he simply believes that Jesus lived or was a good man? If one can be saved while misunderstanding baptism then what about the person who misunderstands the nature of Christ, the existence of God, or the nature of God?
· The argument is made that there are certain contingencies that do not make baptism for the remission of sins necessary in all circumstances. Yet does not the great commission argue otherwise (Mark 16:16)? If the gospel is to be preached to everyone no matter where they are, and if all men and women are commanded to believe and be baptized to be saved, then what “circumstance” or “situation” is not converted by Mark 16:15-16? Yet remember, any argument against baptism would equally apply to hearing the gospel (16:15) and “faith” (16:16).
The transformed life
“God values a transformed life more than He values baptism. This does not render baptism unimportant, useless, or meaningless. Baptism is God’s transforming work, but God values the goal of baptism more than baptism itself. God will work toward the goal even when baptism is misunderstood and misapplied as along as the heart seeks God” (p. 27). There are a number of things wrong with the above sentence. First of all, where does God say that He values the goal of baptism more than baptism itself, especially when He places baptism next to the truth about Himself and His Son (Ephesians 4:4-6)? Secondly, it is contradictory to claim on the one hand that baptism is God’s transforming work and then on the other hand to claim that God will transform a person without baptism. The Scriptures teach that one cannot be born again until one is baptized (John 3:5). Baptism, like faith, stands squarely in the way of becoming a new creature. Saying that one can be transformed or become a new creature without baptism is like saying that one can grow spiritually without faith or repentance. In addition, one of the fundamental qualities of the new life in Christ is faithfulness (Galatians 5:22), and another is love for God(5:22). It is inconsistent to claim that one who is rejecting what God teaches about baptism is at the same time growing spiritually. Centuries ago, John admonished and warned us, “By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, ‘I have come to know Him’, and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected” (1 John 2:3-5); “But this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome” (5:2-3).
What is the standard of truth?
Remember, previously in the lesson it was pointed out that such men would not disfellowship a sprinkled person who sees no need to be immersed. So because such a person sees no need that means they are justified in ignoring a clear command? What if such a person sees no need to partake of the Lord’s Supper? The example of Hezekiah reminds us that what God wanted is what mattered to Hezekiah. Listen to this quote again, “as long as the heart seeks God and does not neglect or rebel against what one believes God requires” (p. 191). But the Bible makes it clear that what we believe, feel, or think is not the standard of truth (Proverbs 16:25). Saul of Tarsus was absolutely convinced that persecuting Christians was what God required, but this did not make his actions right (Acts 26:9 “So then, I thought to myself that I had to do many things hostile to the name of Jesus of Nazareth”). They also argued that God values the seekers heart more than ritual, but what they label as a ritual is a direct command from God (Acts 22:16), and a command that is placed in very impressive company (Ephesians 4:4-6). Therefore, what they are really saying is that God places more value of feelings than He does on obeying His commands. Long ago Jesus specifically addressed this false theory, “Why do you call Me, ‘Lord, Lord’, and do not do what I say?” (Luke 6:46); (Matthew 7:21-23). Men may argue that they (or others) are “seeking” God, while at the same time they are not obeying Him, but the Bible will not allow this argument to go unchallenged. Jesus plainly said, “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments” (John 14:15). Which reminds us that we are really only seeking God when we are seeking to obey Him.
Is the subject really that difficult?
Jack R. Reese from ACU wrote in the introduction of the booklet entitled At the Rivers Edge, Meeting Jesus in Baptism, by Jeff W. Childers and Frederick D. Aquino “Baptism is often at the center of controversy among believers”. May I ask a simple question? What aspect of baptism is difficult to understand? Over the years the only people that I find who have a problem with what the Bible says about baptism are people who are already committed to a denominational view of baptism rather than what Jesus says. The word baptism means immersion, the element is water (Acts 8:36), and the purpose is for salvation (Acts 2:38), for one who is old enough to believe so as to be baptized (Mark 16:16). Where does the Bible teach that baptism is sprinkling or pouring, that it applies to infants, or that it is not necessary for salvation? In fact, the same booklet states, “Discussing baptism’s essentially reveals little, but looking into its essence can open our eyes” (p. 5). Yet Jesus and the apostles discussed it’s essentially often, and it is silly to argue that discussing the essential nature of baptism is not at the same time discussing its essence. The “essence” of baptism is that it stands between one and salvation! Now your eyes are opened.
