A collision is straight ahead, the sign flashes in neon yellow.
Will you keep driving?
It seems as you get on scene, it is a deliberate collision. Is it merely a side swipe, a kiss of bumpers or is this the kind of collision where you’re not sure if both vehicles have become one.
It seems to me this is no mere glance of the bumpers where a bit of the paint is transferred to the bumper of its respective counterpart. Instead, in Christ, the entire collision of OT expectation are fused into NT thrill and instead of an unrecognizable mangled mess we have a collision of beauty, wonder and fulfillment.
Buckle up, we’re headed into the collision.
Colossians 2:9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, 10 and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority; 11 and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; 12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.
So I failed to mention that the collision was a multi car pile up. Let’s identify the vehicles involved.
1- fullness of Deity crashes into bodily form.
2- you get entangled with completion.
3- He ( Christ ) completely overtakes all authority.
4- circumcision slams into baptism in a really unexpected way.
One big crash and one big wonderful outcome.
The last pair (baptism and circumcision) seems to be a complete mystery as to how these two vehicles collided. They were quite literally on different sides of the road. It seems a large and substantial median was between them but somehow Paul manages to collide them together with NO PROBLEM.
Maybe if there’s a problem with these two being
mashed together so easily that Paul isn’t the problem. Our expectation and understanding may need a tune up or an overhaul. You’ll have to be the judge of that recomended maintenance call.
So if it’s not completely clear, the rite of circumcision is very different from that of baptism. The one involves knives, blood and parts. The other, has no knives, no blood and includes all parts and water. So what is Paul doing. He’s colliding both into Christ.
Paul is bringing both together in a very special way. He’s not mixing them together in a mechanical way so that we should have knives and blood and water and voila a weird rite no one recognizes. No Paul is breaking down these rites into their Spiritual significance and promise is at the core of both.
So to be clear Paul is not REPLACING circumcision with Baptism, he’s saying that Baptism in Christ contains circumcision as fulfillment. Paul makes it clear in other places, to be circumcised but not in Christ was a real problem. I think Paul would also conclude that if baptism doesn’t include this idea of spiritual circumcision then all you’re doing is getting wet.
Paul intentionally collides these two rites, one of promise the other of fulfillment and of promise together. I think they should go together. I think, along with Paul, they MUST go together.
Getting wet in baptism, is not merely the next step after a decision to follow Christ. It is as circumcision always carried with it the idea of being KEPT for the promise/Messiah. To bear the mark of the promise. For the faithful Jew, this mark was applied on the 8th day of life. It also had connected to it this idea that Paul highlights, flesh being cut off – quite literally in OT circumcision.
So why not continue the bloody cutting rite? Because Christ already has. To continue to do it would be to testify that He had not done the work of the sign. But does this mean to forget circumcision altogether? Certainly not. For the cutting off of Christ, in His death, has delivered us onto the other side of the death into resurrection and life. Baptism is now the sign that promises resurrection on account of Christ being cut off in the flesh.
To practice Baptism alone and to NOT recognize its necessary collision with circumcision is to tell part of the story as if it were the whole story. Another way to say this is the NT needs the OT to stand as tall as it can. Without the OT, we have a slouching NT.
So if you see no reason to baptize babies you can tune out and get another coffee. If though, you recognize collisions have consequences and that both circumcision and baptism are signs of promise and both bring us to Christ in his death and resurrection then why would we not take God’s promise for our children.
It doesn’t mean we think we’re washing away sin. Only Christ does that by applying His life and death in the promised work of His Spirit. It doesn’t mean we think we know our children are the elect of God, but we do cling in promise to the promise that He is faithful to draw people unto Himself through the work of His Holy Spirit and His Word and we use the sign He’s given for that very purpose.
In the end, baptism points us to the faithful PROMISER. It may/can memorialize our step of faith but it shouldn’t principally be recognized as that. To put your eggs in the basket of your decision to follow Christ is to surely end up with a basket of broken eggs.
WE SUCK AT FAITHFULLNESS.
He although is everlastingly faithful and true. Cling to His faithfulness in Baptism and your babies can too.
Soli Deo Gloria
Leave a Reply