Delaying Baptism

 As a Protestant who values both the declaration of 'sola Scriptura' and the wisdom accumulated by the church and often remembered through traditions, the usual delaying of baptism for those who confess faith in Jesus Christ has confused me for a long time.  As I'm reading through Acts again, I'm reminded of that confusion.

 For instance, in Acts 8, many Samarians believe and are baptized, and Simon (a former magician) was part of that, though later Peter seems to indicate that he was not really regenerate. In this place, no time between believing and being baptized is specifically indicated; they are described together without detail.  However, as far as I can find there are no clear examples in the Bible of delayed baptism. There's no let's-see-if-it's-real period. I'll list several possible ones at the end, and I'll freely acknowledge that churches stopped practicing immediate baptism very early in church history. Thus, the conundrum.

Here's the examples of baptism with a timeframe that I could find:

• Acts 2:37-41 - that day
• "So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls."
• Acts 8:12-14 - unspecified, but rapid
• They believed and were baptized, before the apostles heard and arrived.
• Acts 8:34-39 - immediately on profession of faith
• The request for baptism was his profession of faith.
• Acts 9:18; 22:12-16 - immediately
• Paul was baptized immediately, before even breaking his three-day fast.
• Acts 10:44-48 - immediately
• As soon as the gathering of Gentiles receives the Holy Spirit, Peter proclaims their right to baptism and then commands them to be baptized.  Then, they stayed together for further instruction for some days.
• Acts 16:14-15 - unspecified, but short time
• No timeframe is recorded for the gap between Lydia's profession and baptism; but it all most of happened within the 'some days' that Paul was at Philippi.
• Acts 16:30-34 - at once, that night
• The jailer took them from jail, washed their wounds, got baptized, then served food - all before morning.
• Acts 18:8, 11, 18 - unspecified
• The text here says 'believed and were baptized'; there is no clear gap between them. However, the time is unstated. (From 1 Corinthians 1, we know that Paul baptized some of the believers during the 18 months he was there. We can assume the rest were while Paul was there also; if it wasn't, surely the wording would be different.)
• Acts 19:3-4 - on hearing the Gospel of Jesus
• Former disciples of John who had been baptized into his baptism were baptized into Christ as soon as they accepted the full gospel.

 Below are the potential instances of delay, but none of them actually state a delay.  Why is church tradition and practice so radically different from the Scriptural examples?  Also, I would be interested to hear my strongly Reformed friends' views, since the reasons given for infant baptism should be consistent with my thoughts, I think.

Possible, but unclear, instances of delay:

Matthew 3:7-9 - John the Baptizer calls for the Pharisees and Sadducees to bring forth fruit demonstrating repentance instead of coming to be baptized.

Luke 3:3-16 - John says something similar to the crowds, but here he seems to be simply describing what true repentance leading to baptism should look like.

In Acts, there are stories of people believing whose baptism is not referenced or its timeframe is completely unreferenced.

1 Corinthians 1:14-17 - In this passage the time-relationship between the Corinthians belief and baptism are unstated.

Jesus was not baptized till the beginning of his public ministry, but that is a different matter entirely.

Apologetics for Lucy Pevensie of Narnia

  I recently started reading C. S. Lewis' Aslan, Cadı ve Dolap (The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, obviously in Turkish).

  When I came to the part where Lucy's older siblings go the Professor to find out what they should do about her Narnian imaginings.  I noticed that the Professor used the same argument that Lewis popularized regarding the deity of Jesus in order to convince Peter and Susan of Lucy's truthfulness.  In other words, Lucy was describing something true because they had never known her to be a liar and she had not seemed to be trying to lie convincingly.  Furthermore, she wasn't crazy.  So, therefore, the Professor concluded that she must be speaking the truth (which he obviously could have guessed much more easily with his extra information from Büyücünun Yeğeni.)

 As I confirmed on Google, this is not a new observation, but it was still a fun discovery.

a promise to the lonely

   This morning I saw this unexpected promise in my reading: God settles the alone and lonely in a home. We are more familiar with the surrounding promises to the fatherless, widows and prisoners, but this promise to the God-loving lonely is precious both for this life and the next. The character of God is to give the loner in community!

Father of the fatherless and protector of widows 

is God in his holy habitation.

God settles the solitary in a home; 

he leads out the prisoners to prosperity, 

but the rebellious dwell in a parched land. 

(Psalm 68:5-6 ESV)

Büyükada and Aya Yorgi (The Big Island and St. George's Greek Orthodox Monastery)

During the last two weeks, our family got to spend most of our time on Buyukada, the largest of Istanbul's Princes Islands.  They are something of a tourist attraction, definitely a vacation spot for us city dwellers, and also incidentally has a twice-a-year pilgrimage spot. 

It's beautiful here, even on a foggy day!

The monastery is Greek Orthodox; as mentioned, it is also a pilgrimage spot on the 23rd of April and the 24th of September.  Below are some images, first of the people walking and pulling strings up the hill, then of the monastery and its surroundings.

Walking up to the monastery

Strings and pilgrims

St. George's Monastery

  Paintings of Simeon and Anna, with the baby Jesus

St. George and the Dragon

The Legend of the Monastery (English)

The Legend of the Monastery (Greek)

a religion of JOY, reflecting its source

For every throb of joy in man’s heart, there is a wave of gladness in God’s. The notes of our praise are at once the echoes and the occasions of His. We are to be glad because He is glad: He is glad because we are so. We sing for joy, and He joys over us with singing because we do.

It is to be noticed that the former verse of our text is followed by the assurance: ‘The Lord is in the midst of thee’; and that the latter verse is preceded by the same assurance. So, then, intimate fellowship and communion between God and Israel lies at the root both of God’s joy in man and man’s joy in God.

[...]

It becomes us to see to it that our religion is a religion of joy. Our text is an authoritative command as well as a joyful exhortation, and we do not fairly represent the facts of Christian faith if we do not ‘rejoice in the Lord always.’ In all the sadness and troubles which necessarily accompany us, as they do all men, we ought by the effort of faith to set the Lord always before us that we be not moved. The secret of stable and perpetual joy still lies where Zephaniah found it-in the assurance that the Lord is with us, and in the vision of His love resting upon us, and rejoicing over us with singing. If thus our love clasps His, and His joy finds its way into our hearts, it will remain with us that our ‘joy may be full’; and being guarded by Him whilst still there is fear of stumbling, He will set us at last ‘before the presence of His glory without blemish in exceeding joy. 

(regarding Zephaniah 3:14, 17; from Alexander Maclaren's Expositions of Holy Scripture)

The entire exposition is well worth reading.

Oh, that will be Glory in Him!

No more division, no more separation, no more shame, no more haughtiness, no more injustice, no more lies or deceit, no more fear, no more condemnation, no more enemies, no more weakness, no more reproach, no more oppression, no more disabilities, no more ostracism, no more poverty... 

Instead unity, gathering, humility and lowliness, refuge, rest, joy and exultation, salvation, quietness, love and loud singing, a festival, praise and renown, restored fortunes...  

(Zephaniah 3:9-20)

  A simple summary of Zephaniah's promises of the future of the humble children of God. Of course God's people should rejoice, sing aloud, shout and exult at what God has promised!  That's not triumphalism, it's hope: we are trusting ourselves to the only One who could make this happen.  We do not expect to do this our own selves.  Humble waiting for joyful shouting.

Related posts: 
Honor, Shame and Slanting Theology
Zephaniah, Sultan Suleiman, and Mephibosheth

a Woman's Authority

More accurately, concerning an area of women's authority specified in the Bible...

Kevin Bauder wrote what I've posted below during a discussion on pastoral authority. Personally I found these thoughts more useful than the overall essay in stimulating my thoughts toward careful, biblical thinking.  Obviously, this is addressing a very particular slice of life, but it seems like one that should be given deeper thought, by men especially.

   [...] Significantly, 1 Timothy 5:14 does not present the wife exercising oikodespotein under her husband’s delegation, but under God’s. What this probably means is that a wife has a sphere of authority—actual, decision-making power—that comes directly from God and not by grant from her husband. Her responsibility is to govern the household. In a modern home, this responsibility would give her authority over such matters as meals, décor, and cleanliness. She can tell her husband to move the sofa. She can decide what color the walls will be, how to hang the drapes, and whether the home will have hardwood floors or wall-to-wall carpeting. She has the authority to order her husband to take out the garbage or to pick up his socks and put them in the hamper, and he needs to obey her.

Even though the text does not indicate that this household authority is mediated through the husband, a wise wife will exercise it deferentially rather than demandingly. Within his sphere of authority the husband will do the same. In any case, within a certain sphere the authority of the wife acts as a check upon and limitation of the patriarchal authority of the husband and father. [...]

 (The full essay: Bishops and Fathers.)

Visiting the city of Van

Several weeks ago, I got to visit a new city here in Turkey, which is actually a very old city.  It just happens to be the first I've visited there.  Because the girls were with me, I didn't get to explore in detail, and there's much more to see.  But at least we got to see the old castle, the site of the old city and Lake Van, which is pretty, though I didn't get a picture of it.

Van's old fortress can be seen at the end of the street

Van fortress with a restored mosque's minaret also visible

An ancient inscription from much earlier versions of the fortress

With the girls at the old city of Van, originally Tushpa capital of the Urartian kingdom

  There's lots of other stuff to see in the area.  Soon, a new museum should be finished with lots of ancient artifacts; there's an old cathedral on an island out in the lake, and Mount Ararat is not too far away.  It's a great place to visit, and I will hope to go back someday and keep seeing more.

The One-ness of God and Prejudice

  Earlier this week I watched a soccer game with one of my good friend who is atheistic; afterwards as we talked, he was surprised when I said that the duties of Jesus followers can be summarized in two commands: Love God; love your neighbors.  Coincidentally this week, I just read Jesus' expression of this truth in Mark 12, and I was struck by the fact that Jesus in this place quotes the entire command beginning with "Hear, O Israel," continuing through the expression of God's One-ness, His command to love Him with your whole wholeness and to love your neighbor as yourself.  Then, the entire sequence is repeated by the scribe to whom Jesus was talking.  Why is the One-ness of God so important to these commands?  

 I think this is related to the fact that there is only one God to worship, and so He must be worshipped supremely.  But regarding the second command particularly, the reflection of the One God in all of His created image-bearers is the cause for loving each of our neighbors as we love ourselves. In the first part of James 2, love of our neighbors is again given as a summary of the law; partiality and prejudice against any fellow human is a betrayal of divine law. (Interestingly, the unity of God is key to the argument in the second half of James 2.) 

 What's the point?  I think the point is that God's One-ness and supremacy creates the first command; His imparting of His image to people raises them to where they are each individually the object of the second command.  Any prejudice towards my neighbor is prejudice against the reflection of God in him or her. Obviously this does not address the fact that God's image in each of us has been marred, but prejudice suggests that I believe I was more worthy of God's restoring His image in me than such a restoration in my neighbor.  And that is not the Gospel. 

 If we believe in the greatness of the One God, if we love Him with all we are (by His grace), then we must love and embrace His reflection in all those around us! This truth is not simple: God's greatness and the honor that He has set upon each of us do not agree well with our natural self-righteousness, nor does it thrive in a secular mind. Yet no other way gives more than pragmatic honor to our neighbors: if we are each just working for our own good when we 'love our neighbor' this is no true love. The Lord God is one: love Him with all you are, and love those whom He has put around you as you love your own self.

(From a Trinitarian perspective, it is interesting that Jesus' next discussion in Mark 12 is about the divinity of the Messiah.)

Paul Bunyan: a new Tall Tale (by a young student)

 Paul Bunyan was America's greatest lumberjack. He was the biggest man in the whole world at that time. He was much more than 25 feet tall.

 When he was a baby, he would eat trees like broccoli. His crying used to make tornados that would make the rocks and trees fly into the air.

 At thirty years old, he was stronger an bigger than ever. But his shoes smelled like all the American garbage gathered in one place, but only when he took them off.  He could only make a bath in the sea. So Paul sometimes got lice as big as a blue whale.

 If he dropped his ax he would split apart America. Then Paul and Babe the Blue Ox would have to push on America's two sides and rejoin them. Twice he dropped the ax, and it made the Continental Divide and the Mississippi River.

 When he was 90 years old, he died. They buried him in Denver, with Pike's Peak as his headstone.

[This new tall tale was imagined with a bit of direction and a few place names by a young student; she'd never heard of Paul Bunyan till today.]