Chapter 1
In the First Two Centuries
[p. 7]
The conquests of the gospel in the first century have been justly the wonder of all succeeding centuries. When Jesus was crucified, his followers numbered only a few hundred. During the remaining two-thirds of the century his cause made rapid conquests, and by the close of the century had extended its influence to all parts of the Roman Empire. Sharon Turner, quoted by the historian, Armitage, estimated that there were 500,000 believers at the close of the first century.
We do well to remember that these vast conquests were wrought under the leadership of the Apostles and under the special and mighty power of the Holy Spirit. The achievements resulted from the impetus and the momentum imparted by the earthly ministry of Jesus. When this impetus had in some measure spent itself, when the last of the Apostles was dead, when the peculiar miraculous inspiration of the Holy Spirit was no longer given, the phenomenal progress of Christ's cause slowed down. The counteracting influences were many; the counter-currents were strong. The new gospel of Christ, the new message of Christianity, encountered certain corrupt and corrupting influences. The pure stream of Christian truth was compelled to go against certain mighty evil currents. While it was to affect and influence these currents, it was destined to be measurably polluted by them.
The chiefest of these antagonistic influences were (1), the native and deeply-rooted instincts of the natural heart; (2) the perverted teachings of Judaism; (3) the prevailing Greek philosophies. The men of those days received the new revelation, and then naturally and
[p. 8]
inevitably modified it and adapted it in the light of their accepted philosophies.
When the new stream came, it cut its way against grave odds; indeed, the new stream was blended with certain old currents which were already running in the thinking of men. Much of the New Testament sets forth ideals rather than actual achievements. The drifts which we witness in the second and third centuries are therefore drifts from the ideals and teachings of the Apostles, rather than from the actual attainments of the believers of the first century.
1. The central principles of the New Testament gospel cut directly across the native instincts of the human heart. The natural heart instinctively protests the supremacy and competency of Jesus and, strangely enough, shrinks from accepting the competency of the soul to deal for itself with God.
The sufficiency of Jesus, with its inevitable correlative of the insufficiency of all human resource, is not palatable to human nature. No more does the competency of the individual make appeal to the natural man; men shrink from direct approach to God. In all ages men have sought by many ingenious devices to escape such direct approach. The timid deer in the wild mountains is not more shy or more determined in its efforts to escape the presence of man than the soul of man is shy and fixed in its purpose to avoid direct contact with God.
2. These essential principles in Christ's gospel ran equally counter to the corrupted Judaism of the time. The Jew could not accept the authority and competency of Jesus without sweeping away beliefs and traditions which had come to be a part of his very life. Witness the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, who declared that with him old things had passed away; behold, all things had become new.
The Jew could not accept the competency of the soul and its right and duty to come directly to God without casting aside the whole framework of priestly sacrifices
[p. 9]
and intercession which had through the ages grown up with the system into which he entered by birth. When Jews embraced Christianity, as they did in large numbers, they found it necessary to blend the new doctrines of the gospel with their inherited beliefs.
3. These outstanding principles ran squarely against the prevailing Greek philosophies which were so widely accepted in the early Christian centuries. Like the Jews, the Greeks were scattered throughout the Roman Empire, and their philosophies of life and religion largely permeated the thinking of the day.
Encountering these adverse influences and blending with these corrupting currents, the doctrines of the gospel were gradually obscured, and these great central truths went into almost complete eclipse.
We now trace in detail certain lapses and departures from New Testament teaching which marked the second and third centuries.
I. Salvation Came to be Regarded as the Gift of the Church Rather Than the Gift of God Salvation by grace without human merit was obscured, and the doctrine of a salvation dependent in part on good works was substituted. Jews, Greeks, and Romans alike stumbled over the New Testament teaching that salvation is by grace through faith without works of merit. Their point of departure was the gradual placing of emphasis on baptism as an effectual element in the saving process, and thus as necessary to salvation.
It may be said very frankly that there are certain passages of Scripture which, as isolated texts taken away from the great current of Scripture teaching, might seem to lend some support to this idea that baptism is necessary to salvation. Believers who were inclined to be literalists, and especially believers who studied and relied largely on isolated proof-texts rather than seeking the deeper and fuller current of Scripture teaching, might
[p. 10]
naturally be misled at this point, as indeed they have been misled in more modern times.
Thus Christianity was corrupted at its heart. The sufficiency of Christ's atonement was obscured, and his competency to save was practically denied. The right and duty of each individual to approach God directly for forgiveness and restoration went into eclipse, and a physical act of obedience came to be offered as the medium of approach to God. The New Testament had said Jesus only. Men had perverted this New Testament teaching, and were saying Jesus plus baptism. The addition thus unwarrantably made tacitly denied both the sufficiency of Jesus and the competency of the soul. It was the entrance of a leaven which was to spread with incredible rapidity, and was largely to annul the efficacy of Christ's gospel until in the Reformation days there came a renew emphasis on the doctrine of justification by faith.
II. Baptism Became A Saving Medium Christ meant that baptism should be declarative; men made it procurative. Christ meant that it should fulfil righteousness; men perverted it, and sought to make it procure salvation. Paul offered it as a symbol of grace bestowed, men turned it into a means of securing grace. At first the departure was all but imperceptible. By its very nature, the error was destined to grow until the essential meaning of the ordinance was lost and a new and distinctive meaning was attached to it.
Soon after the death of the last of the Apostles, or early in the second century, evidences appear that the doctrine of baptismal regeneration had become somewhat widely prevalent. Thus Justin Martyr, who suffered the death of a martyr in Rome, 166 A. D., says in his first Apology, Section 79: "They are conducted by us to a place where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were regenerated. For they are then washed in the name of God the Father and Lord of the Universe, and of our Saviour, Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit"
[p. 11]
III. Baptism was Changed in Form This step was easy and natural. Keen concern began to be felt lest men should die unbaptized. This concern would naturally be especially acute when there was sickness, and death was impending. The record is not full and clear, but, as a typical instance, one Novatian (250 a.d.) was ill. He had not been baptized, and in order that he might not pass into eternal death his friends decided that he must be baptized. It was not practicable to baptize him in the usual way by an immersion in water, and it was decided to do the next best thing. They poured water over him in such quantities as to approximate as nearly as possible the required immersion - Eusebius, The Church History, 289.
Once the precedent was set, the innovation soon became somewhat widely practiced, and in the closing of the third century we have clinic (couch) baptism commonly administered to those who were ill and in danger of death. It was simple and easy to pass from the use of a large quantity of water, simulating as nearly as possible the sacred burial, to the use of water in less and less quantities until the process was reduced to a mere pouring or sprinkling.
Thus pouring in lieu of baptism began to be practiced. So clear was Scripture teaching and practice in the matter, however, that only after the lapse of many centuries, about the sixteenth century, to be exact, did pouring generally supplant immersion in the Roman Catholic Church. Dr. W. T. Whitley, of London, England, eminent as a church historian, writes in a letter to the author: "The western church retained immersion till the sixteenth century, as is shown by many pictures and accounts of the baptism of Queen Elizabeth and James I. The use of any other mode of baptism is nearly always mentioned as an exception. The Greek Catholic Church has never departed from the New Testament practice at this point, but continues to immerse in all cases and under all circumstances."
[p. 12]
IV. Baptism was Extended to Irresponsible Infants Designed by its very genius for those who can make a credible profession of faith in Christ, men tore it from its original setting and offered it to those who could not know Jesus and whose later acceptance of Jesus could not be assured.
The story of the coming of infant baptism is well known. It was a next step from the original corruption of the gospel. Once the people came to believe that there was no salvation without baptism, tender parents began to feel a natural solicitude for their new-born children. If adults could not be saved without baptism, what of babes? Did not the taint of original sin rest upon infants? As they considered the frailty of their babes and the possibility of their death before they could receive the saving bath, they began to insist upon baptism for their children. Thus the ordinance was further perverted from its original purpose as a symbol of acceptance of Jesus as Saviour.
So clear was the departure from New Testament teaching and practice, that the innovation only slowly gained headway and was not generally observed until the sixth century. From its earliest beginning to the present time there have never been wanting those who with the New Testament in hand challenged the practice.
The earliest clear evidence of infant baptism, according to Dr. John T. Christian, is found in Tertullian, who opposed it (185 a.d.). Doctor Christian continues: 1 "The first direct evidence in favor of it is found in the writings of Cyprian, in the Council of Carthage, 253 A .D. In writing to one Fidus, Cyprian takes the ground that infants should be baptized as soon as they are born (Epistles of Cyprian, LVIII, 2). This opinion, however, was not based upon the Scriptures, and did not meet with the approval of the Christian world."
The introduction of infant baptism, so far from being an innocent and harmless digression from New Testament
-----------------------------------------------------
1 A History of the Baptists, I, page 31.
[p. 13]
practice, Has wrought evils beyond the ability of man to conceive. Speaking under most solemn circumstances in front of the Capitol building in Washington, D. C., Dr. George W. Truett entered a protest against this un-scriptural and anti-scriptural custom.
"If I have fellow Christians in this presence today who are the protagonists of infant baptism, they will allow me frankly to say, and certainly I would say it in the most fraternal Christian spirit, that to Baptists, infant baptism is unthinkable from every viewpoint. First of all, Baptists do not find the slightest sanction for infant baptism in the Word of God. That fact, to Baptists, makes infant baptism a most serious question for the consideration of the whole Christian world. Nor is that all. As Baptists see it, infant baptism tends to ritualize Christianity and reduce it to lifeless forms. It tends also and inevitably, as Baptists see it, to the secularizing of the church and to the blurring and blotting out of the line of demarcation between the church and the unsaved world."2
V. The Memorial Supper was Likewise perverted from its Original Intent While these lapses were developing in the ordinance of baptism, certain serious errors concerning the Lord's Supper were making their way in the churches. Here also the literalists were missing the meaning of the New Testament. Did not Jesus say, "This is my body . . . this is my blood"? Very early after the passing of the Apostles, the idea grew that the bread administered in the Supper was in some way the actual body of Jesus, and that the fruit of the vine was his actual blood. Thus the ordinance became invested with a mystical saving power. Along with its administration there grew up a round of ceremonial which further obscured the simple significance which attached to it. Thus the original memorial ordinance which Jesus gave was so far changed
----------------------------------------
2 God's Call to America.
[p. 14]
avid corrupted that it bore no resemblance to its former self.
The Lord's Supper, as Dr. A. H. Newman says, "ceased to be regarded as a memorial feast in which believers held communion with one another and with their risen Lord, and assumed the character of a mystic rite celebrated with elaborate ceremonial."3
In their shrinking from a direct approach to God, men were increasingly devising forms and ceremonies which might come between themselves and their Heavenly Father. Loath to accept the complete and final sufficiency of Jesus, men assiduously sought to devise works of obedience and merit which might supplement the merit of Jesus.
VI. New Testament Church Polity was Changed and Democracy in the Churches was Destroyed In the New Testament churches, the elder or pastor was an equal among equals, a brother among brothers. He possessed no authority save such as was conferred by his brethren. Jesus alone was master and lawgiver. Every man had access to the Father in his own right. Slowly but surely this simple but beautiful order was marred.
Gradually the elder or pastor ceased to be the servant, the minister, and imperceptibly grew to be a priest, separated from his people and lifted high above them. Dr. A. H. Newman well says: "The chairman of the elders gradually became the monarchical bishop."
We are not fully informed as to how the lapse came from New Testament simplicity and democracy to a sacerdotalism which was quite as destructive of spiritual religion as the priestcraft of Judaism. With such facts as we have, we may trace the probable development. The New Testament churches, especially those in the cities, often grew to considerable numbers. They had usually a plurality of elders or pastors. Several pastors
------------------------------------------------
3 A History of the Baptist Churches in the United State, page 11.
[p. 15]
were often required to administer the affairs of one church. Naturally some one of these grew into pre-eminence; his ability, his personality, lifted him to a plane above his fellow pastors. There was doubtless the age-old instinctive grasp after place and power. This chief pastor occupied an elevated seat above his fellow officers in the congregational meetings; he administered the Lord's Supper which, as we have seen, grew to be a sacrament; he held the church property - and this is to be especially marked - in his own name, subject to his own direction. This chief pastor began to assume the distinctive title of bishop. When "cavils" arose between the "bishop" and the "presbyters," the bishop asserted his own pre-eminence.
The bishops in large central churches extended their authority over neighboring sections. Thus bishops who came to rule over less influential bishops came to be called archbishops or metropolitans. "Five of these arch-bishops, those of Alexandria, Jerusalem, Antioch, Constantinople, and Rome, increased their authority still further and came to be known as patriarchs. The church in Rome had from early times wielded a wide influence. It grew in wealth and power so that in due time its bishop was made pope (papa, father). Thus by a natural evolution the Roman Catholic Church with its reigning pope and its vast frame of governmental machinery came into being."
Dr. H. C. Vedder tells us that4 "Clement of Rome was the first writer to draw a parallel between the Christian ministry and the Levitical priesthood, and is the first to speak of the 'laity' as distinct from the clergy." Doctor Vedder goes further to say that we may trace the completion of the process in Tertullian and Cyprian, and that around the end of the third century the clergy came to form a distinct sacerdotal order, a priestly caste entirely separate from the laity. The same instinct and tendency which had corrupted
---------------------------------------
4Short History of the Baptists, New Edition, page 63.
[p. 16]
Judaism and erected a priesthood which was to be a barrier between God and men had thus repeated past history and had corrupted the simplicity and spirituality of the New Testament churches.
The six lapses which we have thus traced are departures from six cardinal principles of the New Testament churches. These doctrines will be readily recognized as the peculiar and distinguishing doctrines of the Baptist people. If instead of tracing the simple historical record of these New Testament teachings and the lapses from them which came after the New Testament era, we had sought simply to state the beliefs of the Baptist people, we could not have stated them more clearly and accurately. Will the reader be good enough to look again through the six departures from New Testament teaching and determine for himself whether we are justified in this statement?
Assuming that we are so justified, we proceed to follow these principles across the centuries and to indicate their recovery and development in modern times.
By the end of the third century many churches were so changed and so perverted from the original model offered in the New Testament that only a scant resemblance can be discerned. Judaism and heathenism surrounded the churches, constantly influencing them. The people generally were illiterate, the Scriptures were not circulated save in narrow circles, the leaders were largely without culture and training. The great mass of Christians were known as Catholics, and among the Catholics was a general harmony and agreement as to teaching and practice. The agreement was rather the assent of indifference, and the harmony was largely the result of spiritual dearth.
Not all of the believers were in agreement with the Catholics. God did not leave himself without witness. Outside of "the church" and within "the church" as well, there were devout souls who, guided by an inner light
[p. 17]
and taught by the Scriptures, cried out against the drifts of the time.
If our hearts have thrilled with response to the achievements of the churches in the first century, if high hopes were aroused by their rapid spread throughout the Roman Empire, we must feel a corresponding depression as we come to the end of the third century. The ordinances are vitiated; vital godliness is declining; formality, ceremonialism and sacerdotalism are gradually increasing. There is a definite drift toward the dark ages in which religion is to sink to its lowest ebb.
The two centuries under discussion were marked by a continuance of the severe persecutions which harassed the churches in the preceding century. Upon the pains and sufferings visited on the followers of Jesus we need not now dwell at length.
While the believers were thus sorely tried by persecution, being called to suffer indignities which ranged from imprisonment to violent death, they were attacked during this period by literary critics of the keenest sort, who sought by argument and innuendo and every art which intelligent and determined men could devise to uproot and utterly destroy the Christian faith. Not before nor since was Christianity ever so shrewdly and relentlessly attacked. Practically every objection, every criticism, which has since been urged against the Christian system was brought forward and stated in the clearest and most vigorous fashion during these two hundred years.
The Bible as the inspired Word of God was of course the center of attack; if the forces of Satan can destroy the Bible, they know well that they thus remove the foundation of the Christian edifice. With peculiar and relentless fury, therefore, they made their assault on the Holy Scriptures. They attacked the history; they sought to show inconsistencies and contradictions; they utterly denied inspiration; they examined and summarily rejected the claims which the Book makes for itself; they declared miracles impossible; they went boldly into a
[p. 18]
discussion of the doctrines of God, of the Trinity, of the Virgin Birth, of the Atonement, of the Resurrection, and they sought either to annihilate these doctrines or to cover them with obloquy.
In their assaults upon the citadels of Christian truth, these astute and resourceful critics mustered every essential objection and stated every argument which the enemies of the cross of Christ have since brought forward. Jewish scholars, Greek philosophers, and pagan satirists, all did their utmost to overwhelm and sweep away the struggling churches. Happily, these enemies were promptly met by powerful defenders of the faith, men who with unsurpassed learning and rare ability proved themselves the equals of their critics. As every vital argument against the truth was brought forward, so every essential argument in its defense was stated with convincing fulness. So thoroughly were the central facts and doctrines of the Christian religion examined and discussed, that little was left either for its critics or its defenders in succeeding centuries but to review and re-hash and re-state the things which were then set forth.
It was well that it should be so. Once for all Satan did his worst. The believers were compelled to examine and defend every vital fact and every essential teaching in their system. They were forced to do this openly and before a somewhat hostile world. Their own faith and the faith of all succeeding ages was thus confirmed and strengthened. __________ Teaching Suggestions
Question-Answer Study
What is your own idea of Christian achievement at the end of the first century? Tell briefly of the three chief antagonistic influences which sought to destroy Christianity. Indicate with brief comment certain lapses which marked the second and third centuries.
[p. 19]
Tell of the persecutions which marked the second and third centuries. Discuss briefly the attacks made upon Christianity in the second and third centuries. Blackboard-Outline Discussion
The Gospel Ran Counter to 1. The natural heart 2. Corrupted Judaism 3. Greek philosophies I. Salvation Regarded as Gift of the Church
II. Baptism Became a Saving Medium
III. Baptism Was Changed in Form
IV. Baptism Was Extended to Infants
V. The "Supper" Was Perverted
VI. New Testament Polity Was ChangedAttacks On the Bible On all Christian truth ================== [From P. E. Burroughs, The Baptist People, SSB of SBC, 1934. This document provided by Pastor Tom Byrd. Scanned and formatted by Jim Duvall.]
Go to the Next Chapter
More on The Baptist People
Baptist History Homepage