Zwingli: When Baptism Means Drowning Part 2

Let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith. While Jesus prayed that all his disciples might be one, this was not the case as the Reformation developed in the Middle Ages. Luther had his take on things and Zwingli had his. The two had a great debate on what's what, and today we'll learn all about it.

Stay with us. From the Moody Church in Chicago, this is Running to Win with Dr. Erwin Lutzer, whose clear teaching helps us make it across the finish line. Pastor Lutzer, denominational distinctives developed quite rapidly as the Reformers broke with the Catholic Church. You know, Dave, it's very difficult for us to put ourselves into the shoes of the Reformers. They, of course, lived in the 1500s, and we must recognize that during those days there was no freedom of religion. When Lutheranism began, Charles V, who was the emperor, wanted to kill all the Lutherans. That's what you did in those days in order to stamp out heresy. But he had a problem, and the problem was that the Muslim Turks were encircling Vienna, where the Habsburgs were, and therefore he needed the support of the Lutherans in order to fight his war. So he held a convention in a place called Speyer, and at that convention he decided to make some kind of peace with the Protestants. Well, I don't want to get ahead of myself except to say that it is there during the second time that they met at Speyer that the word Protestant began, and at the end of this broadcast I'll tell you why. Meanwhile, my book entitled Rescuing the Gospel is available, and of course it discusses all of these matters and applies them to our present situation. For a gift of any amount it can be yours, here's what you do.

Go to rtwoffer.com or call us at 1-888-218-9337. Always remember the better we understand the past, the better we understand the present and the future. Let me talk about the nature of the Lord's Supper. You see, all the Reformers agree that transubstantiation as taught by the Catholic Church was false, the idea that this was literally the body and the blood of Christ and therefore could be worshipped. They didn't believe that that was the case, but then when they began to hone their own differences, they had disagreements, swingly believed that the Lord's Supper was simply a sign or a memorial as a channel, not as a channel of grace. Just as the Passover in the Old Testament was a feast of remembrance, just so the Lord's Supper was for believers. The church was therefore best described as the new Israel of God, as seen most clearly in Zurich.

That's the nationalism. So there was a young man by the name of Philip of Hesse. Philip of Hesse was a land grave. He owned a lot of land and he had a castle in a place called Marburg. Philip said, come to my castle and we're going to debate the Lord's Supper because if we can unite on a number of different points, we could have unity between the Swiss and the Germans and we could get on the same page and we'd be stronger against the coming Catholic onslaught.

That was the plan. And they met for days debating the Lord's Supper. But what was the debate? Luther said that these elements are literal.

They are not transformed. He rejected transubstantiation but, he says, this is literally Christ's body. Swingley wanted to say it was a memorial, that Christ was perhaps spiritually present but it was only symbolic. Now can you believe that they debated this? And I have the entire debate and I counted today and it covers 32 pages of debate on this issue. Now tonight I thought rather than give you 32 pages, could you take three quarters of a page? I just went and lifted out some of the things that were said just so that you know how the debate went.

Okay. Luther, he asks for a verse that says that the Lord's Supper is simply a sign of Christ's body and nothing more. Swingley, although we have no scriptural passage that says this is a sign of the body, we have proof that Christ dismissed the idea of a physical meal. Christ, when he instituted the Lord's Supper, did not give himself to us in a physical sense. Even in John 6 where it says, you know, that he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life. Even there it says in verse 63 that the Spirit gives life, the flesh is to no avail.

God does not lead us into darkness. He does not want us to interpret flesh in a literal sense. Luther, we are often asked to believe the incomprehensible. We must take God at his word. If he says this is my body, we should believe it even if we don't understand.

Swingley. Luther refuses to accept figures of speech when indeed many passages are not intended to be literal. Isaiah 9 14 says that the elder is the head and the prophet is the tail. Obviously the word is here means signifies. So Swingley is saying this signifies my body. We think it's impossible that God should command us to eat his flesh in a physical sense and that's not what God intended. Swingley says, Luther, I refuse to debate the meaning of the word is for I am satisfied that the Lord said it. The devil himself cannot make it otherwise. I do not require adherence to the words on my own authority, but the authority of the command of Christ, the physical body, is there in the word. If you interpret the Lord's Supper figuratively, why not do the same with these words? He was taken up to heaven.

Swingley. And we call upon you, Luther, to give glory to God and to quit begging the question. The issue at stake is this.

Where is proof of your position? I am willing to consider your words carefully. No harm meant. You are trying to outwit me. I stand by this passage in the sixth chapter of John, verse 63, and I will not be shaken from it.

You will have to sing another tune. Luther, you are being obnoxious. Swingley, I insist that the words are figurative. This is required as an article of faith.

Look at this. He is taken into heaven, seated at the right hand of God the Father. Obviously that is literal. Otherwise it would be absurd to look for him in the Lord's Supper. One and the same body cannot possibly be in different places. How can Jesus be in heaven and his body up there and at the same time in the bread and the wine? Says Swingley, Luther, I ask you, this is really good here. He says, I ask you, why not accept a figure of speech in the words he ascended into heaven and let the text of the Lord's Supper remain literal? A figure of speech certainly would be much easier to find in the word heaven since heaven, as you know, is used with different meanings in Holy Scripture.

Swingley, that word does not require a figure of speech. Now this goes on day after day. They break for meals and they come back and they go at it again. Finally, Luther writes with a piece of chalk on the table, this is my blood and covers it with a velvet cloth. Upshot of it is this. They agreed on many points, but they couldn't agree on this point. And Luther becomes quite conciliatory and actually says, well, I hope that we can resolve all of these things and Christ will resolve them. But Melanchthon, because each of them had a number of different assistants there, Melanchthon, Luther's assistant says, if we agree with the Swiss who are really radical, then it's going to cut off any possibility that we can be reconciled with the Catholics. Because remember, at that point, it was still believed that reconciliation might be possible.

So there is no accord that is reached. Well, in fact, Luther doesn't even shake Swingley's hand. You know, in those days, truth was important, love, you can take it or leave it today. Everybody's loving and people don't care about truth. Truth and love have to go hand in hand. You say, well, you know, to argue for days over that, these guys actually believed that the Bible was important and what it taught about such things as the Lord's supper was important. I mean, weren't they weird?

I'm speaking sarcastically, of course, because they understood that these issues are important. Well, anyway, Swingley went home and tensions between Catholics and Protestants began to escalate and he went into battle and died as a chaplain. 8,000 Catholic troops came against Zurich. The Protestants had only 1,500 and Swingley died and his body was quartered and in a very, very grotesque way.

Now, here's the point. Luther believed that one should never fight in order to defend the faith. You never fight in the name of Jesus.

You allow Jesus to defend his church. That's what Luther believed. He did believe that the standing armies of Europe could be used. This is why he believed the Crusades were so wrong. In principle, there was nothing wrong with the Crusades. The whole idea was to liberate the Holy Land because pilgrims were being killed there.

Christians were being massacred and therefore the Crusade was legitimate. But when the Pope called together all kinds of people and opened up the prisons and allowed all of these prisoners to go on these Crusades and then to fight in the name of Jesus, that was terrible for Luther. Swingley might have agreed, but Luther did not. So after Swingley died in the battle south of Zurich, Luther in effect said, you got what you deserved. You should have never fought in the name of Jesus to defend Protestantism. Let Jesus defend his own church.

Very interesting. Now, let me talk to you briefly about how the Reformers differed and then its relevance and then we shall be finished. For Luther, the starting point of theology is justification by faith. For Calvin, it was God's sovereignty. As for forms of worship, Luther believed that the church should be free to worship as long as it does not do anything that is expressly forbidden by scripture.

Now, I told you I talked to you about the organ. See, what Luther said is we can worship God in any way as long as it's not forbidden. So that's why he retained many Catholic elements in worship. Swingley and Calvin said, we will accept only that which is expressly stated in scripture and because the Bible does not say there were musical instruments in the early church, you can't find that anywhere on the pages of scripture, we will do away with all musical instruments.

They were destroyed. Today, you can go there and there are organs there and they even have concerts there but in those days, there was singing of Psalms but there was no instruments. What is the relevance of all of this? Well, the whole issue of what is the church today is important in America. The whole issue of civil religion is important in America. What should we as Christians be about?

Isn't it amazing that they had their own disputes but see the relevance for today? For example, the Ten Commandments. Should we go to the wall to say that the Ten Commandments should be on the walls of every schoolhouse in America? Should we want that kind of civil religion? You say, well, we want to have prayer in schools. Well, that's fine but you know that if we have prayer in schools today, it will not be in the name of Jesus. It'll just be a general prayer that will say something like whoever you are, whatever your name is, help us.

Thank you. Is that really what we're after? See the problem with the Christian coalition in America, which I don't think has much power anymore but the Christian coalition was not Christian. If it's Christian, it has to be Jesus Christ and him crucified.

It has to be Jesus Christ and the resurrection. It has to be gospel centered. If it's going to be Christian, it has to be that. The moral majority should have never been begun by a Christian minister under the banner of Jesus. I agree with Luther on that point. Confuse the issue so that people begin to think that you have to be a Republican in order to be a Christian. You say, well, shouldn't we be involved in those battles?

Absolutely. Form all the coalitions you like but don't call them Christian. Get other people who think like you, whether they are specifically Christian or not, and form coalitions in your schools and condemn some of the things that are taking place and so forth. But let's keep the cross of Jesus and the gospel distinct in such a way that we won't be known for all of the things that we have attached to the cross. The cross of Jesus today looks like a dilapidated bulletin board on which everyone has nailed an agenda. So in the name of Jesus, we've done many things that are not per se gospel.

They may have been good things, but they should be done in the name of a conservative coalition, in the name of morality, in the name of this and the name of that. We've dragged Jesus into too many things in the United States of America. The real question that we still have to ask is what should the church be about? The church is known today for boycotts.

Where are we going to end in all of these things? So these are the kinds of issues that we need to talk about when we speak about church state relations. Now Luther, of course, he wanted to keep the gospel clear of too many entanglements and we have to commend him for that. The whole business of freedom of religion. Calvin and Luther, Calvin and Swingley, I should say, they weren't really into freedom of religion. You don't attend church in Zurich, you get written up.

Same thing in Geneva. When the Puritans came here with the very same idea, they were Calvinists. They didn't believe in freedom of religion.

That's why they ran Roger Williams out of town. They came for their kind of religion because remember the Puritans were still operating on a reformation basis and understanding of the church. The Baptist bless them. They come and they began to say church and state have to be separate and we'd agreed that they have to be. Now mind you, they are being separated in a way today that is very, very unprofitable and wrong but the point is that church and state need to be separate to some degree.

So these are the kinds of battles. What is the gospel? How is the gospel received?

Is it received through the mass? What are the relationship of the sacraments to the gospel? All of these questions were debated and weighed and there were disagreements during the time of the reformation and we'll spend five minutes in answering questions if there are any. What kind of baptism is right? Baptism by the Holy Spirit or baptism by water? Thank you very much for making this a true or a false. The answer is baptism by the Holy Spirit and baptism by water.

Next question please. In the whole scheme of biblical prophecy were the issues surrounding the reformation foreseen or spoken of anywhere in the scriptures? What about today and all of these issues we face? Is this period addressed in the scriptures?

No, not specifically. Jesus just simply said that the gates of hell will not prevail against the church so in every era there have been those who have belonged to the true church by faith in Jesus Christ. After the time of Augustine fourth century so forth you have the Donatists. They didn't believe in infant baptism. They believed in baptism by immersion. They believed basically in justification by faith but they were rubbed out because of various reasons and there were some heretics among them. Then you have various groups carrying on the faith.

Sometimes it's referred to as the trail of blood. So Jesus has always had his people on planet earth but sometimes the church has gone through periods of unclarity. If you go to the reformation monument in Geneva you see a big sign and it says in Latin after darkness light and today we can stand and look at that sign and if you know anything about the religion in Geneva or throughout Europe you can continue it in saying and after light darkness because Europe has rejected the faith by and large but God has his people.

God has his people and the church is growing in other parts of the world greater than it is in America. Which reformer was the best interpreter of scripture? Well you know I think despite his mistakes on the whole when it comes to the doctrine of salvation we'd have to hand the award to John Calvin. Now he and Luther and Swingly agreed basically but Calvin saw things with a great deal of clarity.

Now we don't accept his view of the church because he also believed in infant baptism and his theocracy there in Geneva that we talked about I think was a grave mistake but Calvin understood the sovereignty of God in evangelism and whether you agree with everything that he wrote or not you have to look at it and you have to say it's breathtaking. The fact that God not only foresaw but God was actively involved in saving you. If you're here today as a Christian it's because God overcame the blindness of your heart. He showed you your sin.

You understood the beauty of Jesus and he granted you the ability to receive Christ as Savior. So in the end it really is all of God isn't it? Oh you say we're involved of course we're involved but we're involved because God prompts our hearts to be involved. Oh you say but what about my unsaved relatives should I pray for them?

Yes your prayers may be the way in which God eventually saves them. The invitation is to everybody whosoever will may come but like Jesus said all that the Father gives to me shall come to me and when they come I will not cast them out. So the invitation is to everybody but think it through.

Let's stand. Our Father we thank you today for the life of Swingley and Calvin and Luther and though we do not agree and though there are things that we do not understand we thank you that they they understood that salvation was through Jesus alone and on that they agreed and we pray today that in our quest for loving everyone and certainly we should we might not neglect some of these issues which your word would obviously teach are very important. Lead us in the everlasting way we ask and thank you for all who are here and if there's someone here tonight who's never received Christ as Savior would you convict him or her of sin and bring them to saving faith. May they read your word and be saved in Jesus name we pray.

Amen. You know when you study church history you soon discover that there have been many disputes oftentimes they have been reconciled frequently they have not been. I want you to come with me to Spire the year is 1529. Charles V is the Emperor the Holy Roman Emperor and he is meeting with the Lutherans. Lutheranism began to get a foothold in the country and he wanted to resolve the disputes but he also was anxious to put Lutherans to death.

That's what you did with heretics in those days but he needed their support because the Muslim Turks were encircling Vienna the Habsburg Empire and therefore he needed a unified empire. So there at that council he decided to give the Lutherans some freedom but not the same freedom that Catholics were given. Well guess what the Lutherans protested and that's where we get the word Protestant. What they affirmed was that we must protest and testify publicly that before God we will do nothing contrary to his word. Now my friend you must understand that at that point other kinds of religions and other branches of Christianity were not given freedom. That only came later at the peace of Westphalia in 1648. You say well Pastor Lutzer why do we have to know all that?

I want you to appreciate what has happened in the past because if we begin to understand these disputes we'll be able to understand what is happening in our contemporary society and we'll also be able to give thanks to God for the freedoms that we enjoy. Now all of this and more is in my book entitled Rescuing the Gospel the Story and the Significance of the Reformation. Perhaps you realize I have a great interest in the Reformation. It's been my privilege to be there in Europe to lead tours to the sites of the Reformation to lecture at the various places where history happened. Now for a gift of any amount this book can be yours. It's entitled Rescuing the Gospel the Story and the Significance of the Reformation and thanks in advance for helping us.

We desire to get God's word to as many as possible. I certainly hope that you have a pen or pencil. Here's what you can do. Go to rtwoffer.com. That's rtwoffer.com or you can call right now 1-888-218-9337. That's 1-888-218-9337.

You can write to us at Running to Win, 1635 North LaSalle Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60614. There were some tough times as the Reformation spread throughout Europe in the 1500s. The church got tangled in local politics and disputes arose about infant baptism. This led to a tragic practice. Next time, don't miss Christians Killing Christians, the story of the rebaptizers. Thanks for listening. For Pastor Erwin Lutzer, this is Dave McAllister. Running to Win is sponsored by the Moody Church.