Nick Batzig

The Household Baptist

The Apostle Paul made clear in 1 Corinthians 7:14 that the children of even one professing believer are covenantally set apart to God as members of the visible church. If we limit the covenant sign to the infants of believers, then we inadvertently limit the scope of the New Covenant and the inclusion of the family members of the household of new professing believers. 

I was baptized in the Reformed Episcopal church. I grew up in Reformed and Presbyterian churches. My father diligently taught my sister and I the distinctives of a Reformed covenant theology from our earliest days. He repeatedly reminded us that God had promised to be a covenant God to us and to our descendants after us. I believe those promises now for my own children. However, I have something of an aversion to the term paedobaptist (i.e. infant baptist). I don’t prefer the terminology because I believe it to be too restictive in nature. I much prefer the term oikobaptist (i.e. household baptist) for a number of biblical and theological reasons. In this post, I want to share a few of those reasons why I call myself a household baptist.
When God promised Abraham that He would be a God to him and to his descendants after him, he gave Abraham the covenant sign of circumcision. He then commanded Abraham to give the covenant sign to all the males in his house when they were just eight days old. There are a number of redemptive historical details about this arrangement.
First, the sign of circumcision went on the reproductive organ of the male child because it signified that the corruption of the sin nature that was passed on generationally by federal representation from our first father—Adam—could only be dealt with by an act of bloody judgment. This pointed to the bloody judgment of the cross which the Apostle Paul called the circumcision of Christ.
Second, God commanded Abraham to give the covenant sign of circumcision to his offspring on the eighth day. Contrary to the naturalistic explanations that many have sough to advance concerning a high rate  of blood clotting, the eight day represented the new creation. On a seven day week, the first and the eighth day are one and the same. Just as the first day represented creation, the eighth day—in the law—represented the new creation that would be secured by Christ crucified. When Jesus cleansed the hearts of his people by virtue of his bloody circumcision on the cross (an act also termed circumcision of the heart in Scripture) he brings about the new creation through their regeneration.
Third, the covenant sign of circumcision denoted the promise of blessing and cursing. Either the one who was circumcised would have the filth of his heart cut away (i.e. regeneration) or he would be cut off in judgment as a covenant breaker. The judgment that fell on Christ would fall on all who were not trusting in the coming Redeemer. This is the same thing represented by the waters of baptism. Just as Noah and those with him were typically saved as through water, and all those who did not believe were destroyed by the same water, so circumcision and baptism represent the promise of blessings and curses.
Read More
Related Posts:

When Pastors Water Down the Truth of God’s Word

It is important for ministers of the gospel to, at one and the same time, avoid that theological dilution by which we fail to bring up children “until they are farther advanced” while rejecting that ecclesiastical elitism that refuses to “accommodate to the capacity” of those we are instructing.

“We keep our preaching basic because we have so many new believers. If we give them too much doctrine, they won’t be able to understand it.” I can’t remember how many times I’ve heard church planters and pastors say such things. Sadly, as their ministries begin to grow numerically, mature believers in the congregation are left to languish in spiritual malnourishment and discouragement.
Ministers need to learn how to break down, rather than water down, the truth of God’s word.
On the other hand, there are those churches (though significantly fewer in number) in which ministers seem to wear their academic interests on their sleeve in the pulpit. They burden the congregation with highly nuanced theological subjects or phraseology in the name of faithfulness. Whether it is compromising ministers diluting God’s word to the spiritual malnourishment of the congregation or ivory tower pastors caring little about bringing along new believers, one of the great needs of our day is for preachers to learn how to break down, rather than water down, the truth of God’s word.
We find this important principle at work in the ministry of the sixteenth-century theologian John Calvin. On the whole, Calvin tended to reserve his more academic prowess for his work The Institutes of the Christian Religion and his commentaries rather than for his sermons. In his essay, “Calvin’s Sermons on Ephesians: Expounding and Applying Scripture, ” Randall C. Zachman helpfully observes,

[Calvin’s] sermons differed from the commentaries both in terms of their audience and their objective. The commentaries have, as their audience, the future pastors…with the goal of revealing the mind of the author with lucid brevity. The sermons have, as their audience, ordinary Christians within a specific congregation with the goal of expounding the intention or meaning of the author, and of applying that meaning to their use, so that they might retain that meaning in their minds and hearts, and put it into practice in their lives.

Calvin sought to adjust himself in different ways to his readers and hearers, distinguishing between what he wrote for the academy and what he proclaimed from the pulpit. A brief comparison of his commentary on Genesis and his sermons on Genesis serve to demonstrate this difference of approach. To be sure, it is a task of no small difficulty.
Ministers must be careful to neither deny the sovereign working of the Spirit nor intellectually insult the congregation.
In our day, when ministers water down God’s word they almost always do so from behind a missiological smokescreen. Insisting that a robustly theological ministry is a detriment to reaching the unchurched, they introduce a number of serious problems.
First, ministers—perhaps inadvertently—give the impression that the ability to impart spiritual understanding lies within the power of the messenger rather than in the working of the Spirit and word of God. In essence, they suggest that the outcome of their teaching is commensurate with the supposed intellectual ability of the hearers. This not only denies the sovereign working of the Spirit of God through the word of God—it levels an intellectual insult at the people to whom they minister.
Read More
Related Posts:

What Would Jesus Drink?

The Savior has drunk, to the full, the cup of God’s wrath so that we might drink, to the full, the cup of his blessings. We must learn again and again to remember what it is that we deserve from the hand of God and what our Savior took upon himself for our salvation. It is only as we do so that we are drawn into deeper communion with him.

If you were hoping to read a post about the temperance movement, wineries, microbrews or an illegitimate use of the Bible to fuel the health food revolution (or perhaps I should have said, “health food religion”), then you could be disappointed. If, however, you are looking for an explanation about what the Scriptures tell us that Jesus drank when he spoke of “this cup” (Matt. 26:39), then my hope is that you’ll find this to be one of the richest subjects for the well-being of your soul. How are we to know what Jesus meant when he spoke of “the cup” that he had to drink?
When he entered the garden of Gethsemane, Jesus went away by himself and prayed to his Father, “‘If it is possible, let this cup pass from me’” (Matt. 26:39). As he left the garden to head to the cross, our Lord said to his disciples, “‘Shall I not drink the cup that my Father has given me?’” (John 18:11). Simply put, “the cup” was nothing less than the full outpouring of the wrath of God against the sin of his people. We understand this both from what the Old Testament prophets foretold about that cup and from the impact that it had on the soul of our Lord when he made mention of it.
The Cup in the Old Testament
There are several places in the Old Testament that help us answer the question, “What would Jesus drink?” The cup that Jesus stared into in the garden is described in the Old Testament as the cup of judgment and wrath in the following places:

But it is God who executes judgment, putting down one and lifting up another. For in the hand of the Lord there is a cup with foaming wine, well mixed, and he pours out from it, and all the wicked of the earth shall drain it down to the dregs. (Psalm 75:7-8)

Wake yourself, wake yourself, stand up, O Jerusalem, you who have drunk from the hand of the Lord the cup of his wrath, who have drunk to the dregs the bowl, the cup of staggering. (Isaiah 51:17)

Thus the Lord, the God of Israel, said to me: “Take from my hand this cup of the wine of wrath, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. They shall drink and stagger and be crazed because of the sword that I am sending among them.” So I took the cup from the Lord’s hand, and made all the nations to whom the Lord sent me drink it. (Jeremiah 25:15-17)

Most interesting about these three passages is that both Israel and the nations are said to be deserving of the cup of God’s wrath. This parallels Paul’s declaration that both Jew and Gentile are both under sin (Rom. 3:9) and the curse of the Law by nature (Gal. 3:10-13). Jesus’ coming as the substitute Redeemer of his people means that what he did, he did in their place and for their good. He drank the cup that we should have drunk. He took up the cup that we should have taken up. He bore our sins in his own body on the tree. He who knew no sin was made sin for us. He was wounded for our transgressions.
Read More
Related Posts:

5 Essential Traits of Teachable People

A truly humble man or woman will have thoughtful formed opinions and strong convictions; however, he or she will always be ready to have those opinions and convictions challenged–first by God’s word and then by those whom God may bring across their paths.

One of the great goals, to which each of us should aspire in our short lives, is that of becoming a teachable person. That statement sounds, at one and the same time, both noble and straightforward. A careful consideration of this subject, however, leads us to conclude that it is commonly mischaracterized and misunderstood. Many have wrongly implied that teachability is antithetical to voicing convictions or formed opinions. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Teachability sweetly complies with thoughtful convictions and opinions. True teachability is actually one of the rarest of qualities in the hearts and lives of people. So, what is required in order for us to become teachable?
1. Teachability requires revelation.
The first mark of a truly teachable person is that he or she is eager to listen to God in his word. No matter what interest a person may have in science, mathematics, literature, art, music, linguistics, politics or athletics, if he or she does not have a deep and abiding interest in Scripture, then all the learning he or she has amassed is ultimately useless.
The great lie with which Satan tempted our first parents was the lie that they could interpret the word by means of their reasoning capacity as detached from the special revelation that God spoke to them concerning the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Solomon explained the futility of the quest for knowledge apart from the desire to know God through his word when he wrote,

Of the making of many books there is no end, and much learning is wearisome to the flesh. The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.”(Eccl. 12:13)

Jesus also drew this conclusion when he said,

“For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul? For what can a man give in return for his soul?”(Mark 8:36-37)

A teachable man or woman is one who gives himself or herself to a pervasive study of God’s word, in order to know him and live for him.
Read More
Related Posts:

“If Christ Is Not Risen…” — 8 Implications of Denying the Resurrection

Paul argues that if there is no resurrection, then he and the other apostles suffered for nothing. It was joy in the truth about the risen Christ—and the hope of the resurrection of believers—that drove the apostles forward to endure all of the persecution that they bore for the sake of the Gospel and the building up of the people of God. Paul reasons that, if there is no resurrection, we should give ourselves entire to hedonistic living because that would be all there is in which to find joy in this empty, futile and passing world. 

I’ve always had something of an aversion to the “if Christianity is not true what do you lose” sort of apologetical approach—precisely because Scripture is God’s word and because it is perfect in all that God reveals in it. To raise the question almost seems to inadvertently jeopardize the veracity of it. Nevertheless, that is precisely the kind of reasoning that the apostle Paul utilized in 1 Corinthians 15 after he appealed to the clear teaching of Scripture about Jesus’ death and resurrection (1 Cor. 15:1-3).
What is at stake if we deny the resurrection?
Writing to a church that was in danger of allowing false teaching to creep in, the apostle tackled the issue of what was at stake if we deny the resurrection. Beginning in verse 12, Paul raises eight “ifs” (following them up with some of the weightiest of all theology) in order to explain the significance of the resurrection for the life of the believers. Consider the following eight “ifs” about the implications of denying the resurrection:

Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? (1 Cor. 15:12)

But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised….For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. (1 Cor. 15:13, 16)

And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. (1 Cor. 15:14)

We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. (1 Cor. 15:15)

And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.  Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. (1 Cor. 15:17-18)

If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied. (1 Cor. 15:19)

If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf? (1 Cor. 15:29)

If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” (1 Cor. 15:32)

According to the apostle’s argument, if the resurrection never occurred one can categorize all that is lost under the following eight heads:
1. The Apostolic Message
The first thing that is lost, if we deny the resurrection, is the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus in the apostolic message. That is the central message of Christianity. How can some profess to be Christians and deny the central message of Christianity? The resurrection cannot be said to be a mythological or analogical story. It was an historical event that turned the world upside down. This, Paul, said—at the outset of the chapter—was an essential part of what was “of first importance.” In essence, Paul is saying, “If there is no resurrection, we have nothing left to preach because our message centers on Christ having been raised from the dead.”
2. A Living Redeemer
Next, the apostle heightens the argument by insinuating that if there is no resurrection from the dead, then “Christ is not risen.” We not only lose the central message of Christianity if there is no resurrection.
Read More
Related Posts:

Confessions and Worship

When Christians publicly confess the truths that the church has always confessed, God is distinguishing between the church and the world—as well as between true and false churches. Historic doctrinal standards help draw a sharp line between orthodox teaching and false teaching in the articulation of “the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).

Some of my earliest childhood memories center on being with my family in worship on the Lord’s Day. In the Reformed and Presbyterian churches that we attended, expository preaching, hymn-singing, and prayer were fixed elements of worship, as were the historic creeds and confessions of the Christian church. We regularly confessed the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed—or some particular doctrinal statement out of the Westminster Confession of Faith, Westminster Shorter Catechism, or Heidelberg Catechism. Our pastors cited doctrinal statements from the Westminster Shorter Catechism in their sermons. Though I was unaware of it at the time, these historic doctrinal formulations were shaping my young mind in regard to biblical doctrine, worship, and the Christian life. Over a decade ago, I had the privilege of planting a Reformed and Presbyterian church. I enthusiastically incorporated many of the historic creeds and confessions into our worship service for the express purpose of instruction—as well as for the preservation of the core truths of the Christian faith and the worship of God.

In his 1973 article “Towards a Confession for Tomorrow’s Church,” J.I. Packer insisted that historic creeds and confessions assist the church in carrying out four principal responsibilities—its doxological, declarative, didactic, and disciplinary tasks. Accordingly, churches should make use of these historical doctrinal statements in their worship (doxological), witness (declarative), teaching (didactic), and conservation (disciplinary). Packer proceeded to define how they function in each task:
Their doxological function is to glorify God by setting forth his works of love and putting into words a responsive commitment. Their declarative function is to announce what the communities that espouse them stand for, and so to identify those communities as belonging to Christ’s church, the worldwide fellowship of faith.

Read More
Related Posts:

7 Biblical Ways to Care for Your Wife

All of these things must, of course, be pursued in the context of our own relationship with Christ. It is only through union with Jesus—in his death and resurrection—that you will ever be able to begin to love and care for your wife in these ways. When we fail (and we will most certainly fail), we go back to the Lord in brokenness and contrition. We confess our sin to him and ask him for grace to grow in these areas.

In that extremely complex and, at times, hard to understand section of the apostle Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, we come across the comparison between the married and the unmarried (1 Cor. 7). In short, the apostle insists that marriage is good (and the norm), but that it brings with it a division of attention. Those who are married have a preoccupation with their spouse. Those who are unmarried are free to more fully “care about the things of the Lord” while “the married man cares about…how to please his wife” and “the married woman cares about…how to please her husband.”
This forces Christian husbands to ask the question, “What does it look like to biblically care about the needs of my wife?” This is a question that I feel as though I am just beginning to learn how to answer eleven years into marriage. While there is no silver bullet, there are many things that the Scriptures teach us in order to help guide the process of learning to love your spouse. Here are seven basic biblical ways that the married man can seek to please his wife:
1. Lead her in worship.
Whether this occurs one-on-one or in the context of family worship, a godly husband will seek to “wash his wife with the water of the word” and to lead her “to the throne of grace” that they might together receive grace and mercy to help in time of need. A man who truly loves his wife will want to sing God’s praises with his wife and to encourage her with God’s word.
This is the most foundational way that a godly husband can love and serve his wife. Everything else in the marriage is secondary to—and will necessary wax and wane commensurate with—this all-important calling. God has given a believing husband his wife so that he might shepherd her soul to glory.
2. Carry her burdens.
One of the apostolic words to husbands regarding the way in which they are to love their wives is that they are to “dwell with them with understanding” (1 Pet. 3:7). A loving husband will seek to be gentle toward his wife. A truly loving husband will seek to listen to his wife as she relays her burdens. He will be patient with her when she seems to be folding under the pressures of life. He will seek to understand why she is struggling even when he doesn’t have the same burdens.
3. Provide for her.
A man who truly loves his wife will be a man who labors diligently to provide for his wife. The loving husband will be a hard-working husband. This doesn’t mean that he will make lots of money; but it does mean that his priority is to “provide for his own” (1 Tim. 5:8). He will work as many jobs as might be necessary in order to provide for his wife. Being a provider is something to which a loving husband must be committed.
4. Serve her in the home.
I don’t know if it is possible for someone to hate folding laundry as much as I hate folding laundry.
Read More
Related Posts:

What is Presbyterianism?

The essential concept of Presbyterianism has to do with the biblical form of church government. Presbyterianism is founded on the idea of a plurality of elders and the connectivity of local churches for governance, accountability, and ministerial collaboration.

The highly esteemed eighteenth-century Scottish Presbyterian minister John “Rabbi” Duncan once famously stated: “I am first a Christian, next a catholic (i.e., a member of the universal church), then a Calvinist, fourth a paedobaptist, and fifth a Presbyterian. I cannot reverse this order.” Duncan was highlighting the fact that there is a basic order of priority regarding what value believers often place on a variety of biblical truths.
For most people, the word Presbyterian carries with it the idea of distinctive practices and teachings of churches that go by that name (e.g., Reformed theology, covenantal baptism, liturgical worship, a confession of faith, and a book of church order). Although these doctrinal matters certainly fit within the historical context of Presbyterianism, the biblical essence of Presbyterianism has little to nothing to do with any of these specifics. Rather, the essential concept of Presbyterianism has to do with the biblical form of church government. Presbyterianism is founded on the idea of a plurality of elders and the connectivity of local churches for governance, accountability, and ministerial collaboration.
Presbyterianism derives its name and idea from the Greek word presbyteros. This word is found in many places in the New Testament (Acts 11:30; Acts 14:23; Acts 15:2–6, Acts 22; Acts 20:17; 1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:5; 1 Peter 5:1; James 5:14). Translators of English versions of the New Testament have translated the word presbyteros as “elder.” This word presbyteros is synonymous with the Greek word episkopos, which is translated “overseer” (Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:1–2; Titus 1:7). The word presbyteros captures with it the idea of the dignity of the office of an elder, whereas the word episkopos expresses the function of the office.
There is a need for a plurality of elders on a local church level, as well as on a regional and national level. Each local congregation in the Apostolic age was overseen by elders. This is evident from Paul’s appeal to the elders in the church in Ephesus (Acts 20:17–38). It is also demonstrated by the way in which Paul charged Titus to “appoint elders in every town” (Titus 1:5).
Read More
Related Posts:

How to Keep “Short Accounts” When Confessing Sin

We must continually go to God and men in confession and contrition. We must resist the temptation to give into sin and stop confessing it. Confessing and seeking to forsake sin is one of the means of Christian growth in grace. When we stop doing so, we have begun the first step toward backsliding or apostasy. It doesn’t matter how many times we may fall into the same sin, we must go back to the Lord and back to those against whom we have sinned in order to seek our forgiveness.

My family moved to St. Simons Island, Georgia, in 1989 when I was twelve years old. One of the first things that I distinctly remember about that beautiful, little, secluded island was the fact that we could walk into a store, write our name on a ledger, and walk out with just about whatever we wanted in the store. I remember my dad and mom talking about needing to pay off their account at the hardware store every month. The owners and my parents both wanted to keep “short accounts.”
It was a peculiar and fascinating experience for a boy who moved there from a major city in which that would have never happened. The population of the island was small enough at that time for store owners to feel as if they could offer that service. Needless to say, it didn’t last long.
Within a year or two, you could no longer do so. It is somewhat tragic that this practice isn’t part of our culture anymore, because it serves as an illustration of an important aspect of our spiritual life. In the Christian life, we are—as the Puritans used to say—to “keep short accounts with God and men.” So, what do short accounts look like in the Christian life? Here are a few thoughts:
1. Confess your sins.
Believers are people who confess their sin. That is part and parcel of what it means to be a Christian. If a man or woman, boy or girl, never confesses their sin, they reveal that they do not believe that they are sinners in need of a Savior. A true believer is one who has learned, by the work of the Holy Spirit to say, “Will you please forgive me?” This is true in the vertical dimension of our relationship with God, first and foremost, and it is true in the horizontal relationships we have with others.
If we don’t confess our sin, we evidence that we are not sincere in our profession of faith in Christ. We must first confess our sins to the Lord. We learn this from Psalm 51 where David prays, “‘Against You and You only have I sinned’” (Ps. 51:4). Even though David had sinned against Uriah, Bathsheba, both of their families, his family and all of Israel, he viewed his sin, first and foremost, as that which he committed against the Lord. It was sin because he broke God’s law.
We too must first go to the Lord and then to others. When we go to others, but not to the Lord, we functionally act like the man or woman who goes to the priest in the confessional but not to God in heaven.
2. Confess your sins particularly.
The Westminster Confession of Faith has an intriguing statement about this in its chapter on repentance where we read,
Men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but it is every man’s duty to endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly. (WCF 15.5)
In short, we must never conclude that it is sufficient to confess that we are generally sinners or that we have generally sinned. When we confess our sin to God and men, we are to confess our sins specifically. We are to own the guilt of the particular sins that we have done. We are to examine our actions against the Law of God (i.e. the Ten Commandments) and confess the particular ways in which we have broken his law.
My wife and I try to teach our boys to do this when they have sinned against one another. We teach them not to say, “I’m sorry.” Instead, we seek to teach them to say, “Will you please forgive me for doing x, y or z?” We also try to do so in our marriage.
Read More
Related Posts:

Why Did Jesus Use Animal Metaphors to Prepare His Disciples for the Mission of God?

Jesus calls us to learn about our enemies and about ourselves—and to spread the aroma of Christ through the world by the ministry of the word for the salvation of the elect. To this end, he bids us understand that we are like sheep in the midst of wolves, so that we will seek to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves.

One of the remarkable features of Jesus’ teaching is the way in which he drew simple analogies and metaphors from the world around him in order to instruct his disciples about the most profound truths of the kingdom of God.
Jesus spent much time reading the book of nature. He could point to a simple flower in order to explain to his disciples the mystery of God’s providential care and provision for them (Luke 12:27). Some of Christ’s most impactful illustrations came from the agrarian culture in which he lived and traveled. He expended prolonged periods of mental energy meditating on the birds of the air and the livestock that flooded the Palestinian landscape. At the inauguration of his missionary enterprise, Jesus gathered the twelve to himself and said to them,

Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues,  and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them and the Gentiles. When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.(Matt. 10:16–20)

Jesus is preparing his disciples for spiritual warfare in Matthew 10:16-20.
In a day when Christians have all but lost the culture war in America—and the prospect of the persecution of true believers is imminent—it is incumbent on us to listen carefully to what the Savior told his disciples upon their first missionary journey. In the ancient wartime manual, The Art of War, Sun Tzu explained,

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

In Matthew 10:16-20, Jesus is essentially giving his disciples his manual of spiritual warfare for the mission of God. The danger of the task that lay before the disciples required a clear illustration from the Savior regarding the way in which they should prepare themselves for the opposition they would encounter.
Read More
Related Posts:

Scroll to top