RESOLVING CONTROVERSY
A Lutheran Interpretation of 1Peter
By Gary Ray Branscome
“We
have not written anything to you, other than what you read” (1Corinthians
Although the Word of God is clear in
the sense that it means just what it says, because of the blindness of the
human heart men often read their own ideas into the text without even realizing
it.
One example can be found in 1Peter
On the surface these words of Peter seem perfectly
clear. However, a problem arises whenever people read an unscriptural meaning
into the word, “baptism”. Now at this point some readers are going to exclaim: “Baptism
is baptism, what else can the word mean other than the ceremony of baptism?” And,
to answer that question we need to look at what the Bible says.
The book of Acts tells us that on the day of
Pentecost, after the Holy Spirit was outpoured, and after Peter had proclaimed
the resurrection of Jesus, Peter said, “Let
all the house of Israel know with certainty, that God has made this Jesus, whom
you crucified, both Lord and Christ [Messiah]” (Acts 2:36). And, “When the people heard this, they were cut
to the heart, and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and
brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts
When Peter called on them to “Repent,” and “be baptized…
in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins,” they all knew
that to be, “Baptized in the name of
Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins” was to be baptized believing that there
was forgiveness in Christ.
Therefore, to Peter baptism was not an isolated act,
but an act that followed repentance and faith — faith that Jesus was the
Messiah (the Christ) and that there was forgiveness in Him. For that reason, when
Peter said, “Baptism doth also now save
us,” he was not speaking of baptism as an isolated act, but of baptism in its context of repentance and
faith in Christ. In other words, Peter was using the word, “baptism” as a
synonym for conversion. He was saying, “Conversion
(coming to faith in Christ) doth also
now save us”. That is why C. F. W. Walther said, “When Peter says, 1Pet.
[NOTE: A
synecdoche is a figure of speech in which part (in this case baptism) is given
for the whole (conversion).]
What C. F. W. Walther said in the preceding paragraph
was part of a lecture dealing with problems that he had encountered. On page
351 he said, “One would indeed think
it to be utterly impossible for a Christian minister to teach that the
Sacraments produce salutary effects ex opere operato; [i.e. simply by performing the
act]
still, that is what happens again and again. This awful error is taught
by the very men who wish to pass for genuinely strict Lutherans, every time
they discuss the Sacraments. When they have finished unfolding their
doctrine of Baptism, every hearer has received the unmistakable impression
that, in order to get to heaven, it is merely necessary to submit to the act of
being baptized.”
I have written this essay because I have encountered
the same error being taught. One reason that problem keeps appearing lies in
the fact that well intentioned men read infant baptism into passages like
1Peter 3:21. In saying this I am not speaking against infant baptism. I am
merely pointing out that infant baptism is neither explicitly
commanded nor explicitly mentioned in Scripture, and one important rule of
Bible interpretation is that no
statement of Scripture should ever be interpreted to teach something that is
not clearly and explicitly taught elsewhere in Scripture. Having said that,
let us look at some other quotes.
“Luther freely admitted that infant baptism is
neither explicitly commanded nor explicitly mentioned in Scripture. There are
no ‘specific passages’ referring to infant baptism. The direct witness of
Scripture is by itself not strong enough to provide an adequate basis for
beginning infant baptism were it not already practiced.” (“THE THEOLOGY OF MAR
“Scripture expressly points out that only such adults
are to be baptized as have previously come to faith in Christ. Of those
baptized on the First Pentecost we read: “Then they that gladly received his
word were baptized” (Acts
In order to understand the thinking behind the
Lutheran position on infant baptism, we need to begin with the words, “He
who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark
Therefore we need to realize that when God
told Abraham to circumcise the “flesh” of his “foreskin” as “a seal
of the righteousness of the faith,” [a token of the covenant Gen. 17:11],
he also commanded him saying, “He that is eight days old shall be
circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in
the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of your seed. He
who is born in your house, and he who is bought with your money, must be
circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting
covenant. And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not
circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my
covenant” (Genesis
[NOTE:
When the Bible tells us that the water of the flood “prefigured baptism”
(1Peter
Conclusion
Even though the words of Scripture
mean just what they say, I hope this essay helps you to understand how easily
our own sinful heart can deceive us if we assume something that is not in the
text.