Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
History and Religion
What Were the Baptized “Added” to? (Acts 2:41; vs. James White)

What Were the Baptized “Added” to? (Acts 2:41; vs. James White)

Last updated on: September 10, 2021 at 2:21 pm by Dave Armstrong

What Were the Baptized “Added” to? (Acts 2:41; vs. James White) 2021-09-10T14:21:31-04:00 Dave Armstrong

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

“Dr.” [???] White Rejects Catholic & Infant Baptism, Even Though the Church Fathers, Luther, & Calvin Do Not

Acts 2:37-42 (RSV) Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” [38] And Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. [39] For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him.” [40] And he testified with many other words and exhorted them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” [41] So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. [42] And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

Reformed Baptist anti-Catholic apologist Bishop “Dr.” [???] White wrote in his rant, Regarding “Christians” (10-1-04):

I’m very glad . . . that we do not simply dicker over using the term “Christian” in a way that is biblically meaningful or biblically bankrupt. . . . using the term “Christian” based upon an ex opere operato function of trinitarian baptism devoid of the gospel creates great confusion and does nothing to promote the evangelism of those who have been given a false gospel in Rome. . . .

[Y]ou cannot please God by denying His gospel; and without the gospel, all the baptizing in the world is not going to join anyone to the covenant in the blood of the Son of God.

Martin Luther (a fairly decent example of a Protestant, I would say, since he founded Protestantism), wrote:

We on our part confess that there is much that is Christian and good under the papacy; indeed everything that is Christian and good is to be found there and has come to us from this source. For instance we confess that in the papal church there are the true holy Scriptures, true baptism, the true sacrament of the altar, the true keys to the forgiveness of sins, the true office of the ministry, the true catechism in the form of the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and the articles of the creed . . . I speak of what the pope and we have in common . . . I contend that in the papacy there is true Christianity, even the right kind of Christianity and many great and devoted saints. . . . The Christendom that now is under the papacy is truly the body of Christ and a member of it. If it is his body, then it has the true spirit, gospel, faith, baptism, sacrament, keys, the office of the ministry, prayer, holy Scripture, and everything that pertains to Christendom. So we are all still under the papacy and therefrom have received our Christian treasures. . . . We do not rave as do the rebellious spirits, so as to reject everything that is found in the papal church. For then we would cast out even Christendom from the temple of God, and all that it contained of Christ. . . . They take a severe stand against the pope, but they miss their mark and murder the more terribly the Christendom under the pope. For if they would permit baptism and the sacrament of the altar to stand as they are, Christians under the pope might yet escape with their souls and be saved, as has been the case hitherto. But now when the sacraments are taken from them, they will most likely be lost, since even Christ himself is thereby taken away. (Concerning Rebaptism, written against the Anabaptists in January 1528; translated by Conrad Bergendoff; Luther’s Works, Vol. 40, pp. 229-262 [words above from pp. 231-233], from the original German in WA [Weimar Werke], Vol. 26:144-174)

Neither Luther nor John Calvin were rebaptized when they ceased being practicing Catholics: precisely because they recognized the validity of Catholic baptism. Here is proof that from Calvin:

Still, as in ancient times, there remained among the Jews certain special privileges of a Church, so in the present day we deny not to the Papists those vestiges of a Church which the Lord has allowed to remain among them amid the dissipation. When the Lord had once made his covenant with the Jews, it was preserved not so much by them as by its own strength, supported by which it withstood their impiety. Such, then, is the certainty and constancy of the divine goodness, that the covenant of the Lord continued there and his faith could not be obliterated by their perfidy; . . . baptism, which, consecrated by his lips, retains its power in spite of human depravity; secondly, He provided by his providence that there should be other remains also to prevent the Church from utterly perishing. But as in pulling down buildings the foundations and ruins are often permitted to remain, so he did not suffer Antichrist either to subvert his Church from its foundation, or to level it with the ground (though, to punish the ingratitude of men who had despised his word, he allowed a fearful shaking and dismembering to take place), but was pleased that amid the devastation the edifice should remain, though half in ruins. (Institutes of the Christian Religion, IV, 2:11)

Such in the present day are our Catabaptists, who deny that we are duly baptised, because we were baptised in the Papacy by wicked men and idolaters; hence they furiously insist on anabaptism. Against these absurdities we shall be sufficiently fortified if we reflect that by baptism we were initiated not into the name of any man, but into the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and, therefore, that baptism is not of man, but of God, by whomsoever it may have been administered. Be it that those who baptised us were most ignorant of God and all piety, or were despisers, still they did not baptise us into a fellowship with their ignorance or sacrilege, but into the faith of Jesus Christ, because the name which they invoked was not their own but God’s, nor did they baptise into any other name. But if baptism was of God, it certainly included in it the promise of forgiveness of sin, mortification of the flesh, quickening of the Spirit, and communion with Christ. Thus it did not harm the Jews that they were circumcised by impure and apostate priests. It did not nullify the symbol so as to make it necessary to repeat it. It was enough to return to its genuine origin. The objection that baptism ought to be celebrated in the assembly of the godly, does not prove that it loses its whole efficacy because it is partly defective. When we show what ought to be done to keep baptism pure and free from every taint, we do not abolish the institution of God though idolaters may corrupt it. Circumcision was anciently vitiated by many superstitions, and yet ceased not to be regarded as a symbol of grace; nor did Josiah and Hezekiah, when they assembled out of all Israel those who had revolted from God, call them to be circumcised anew. (Inst., IV, 15:16)

Calvin — following St. Paul — made an extended argument for infant baptism, based on the analogy of infant circumcision in the Old Testament. The Bible, the Fathers (see the evidence), Luther and Calvin all agree on the following four things (with the exception of Calvin’s rejection of baptismal regeneration):

Catholic baptism is valid.

Baptism is a sacrament.

Baptism regenerates.

Infants ought to be baptized, and are thereby made part of the covenant community; i.e., the Church; Christianity.

But alas, Bishop White comes along and denies all four of these things. We expect him to reject even his supposed master John Calvin (where he disagrees with him) and Luther, as well as the Church fathers, as Christian authorities to be respected and “listened” to. But it’s always a bit of a shock to observe the supposed quintessential “Bible people” / adherents to the false doctrine of sola Scriptura ignore wholesale so much clear Scripture.

In particular (per my title), I’d like to address this question of these baptized people in Acts 2 being “added” to something? What was it? What were they added to? I think it is clear that it is simultaneously the Church, the kingdom of God, and Christianity that they were “added” to. What else could it possibly be? White is forced to reject this understanding, based on how he has misdefined key things in the Christian faith. He flat-out stated that a person who is baptized without hearing and understanding the gospel is not baptized at all, and not worthy of the title of “Christian.”

This leads, of course, to the question of infant baptism. The Bible clearly teaches it (albeit by deduction) in these passages:

Acts 16:15 And when she was baptized, with her household, she besought us, saying, ‘If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay.’ And she prevailed upon us

Acts 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their wounds, and he was baptized at once, with all his family.

Acts 18:8 Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord, together with all his household; and many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.

1 Corinthians 1:16 I did baptize also the household of Stephanas.

Many biblical passages connect household and children (Gen 18:19; 31:41; 36:6; 47:12; Num 18:11; 1 Chr 10:6; Mt 19:29; 1 Tim 3:12). Elsewhere in the Bible, entire households are referred to as being saved (Lk 19:9; Acts 11:14; 16:31). It’s altogether reasonable to believe that this crowd described in Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost (at least 3000 people, based on how many were baptized), included children below the age of reason as well (i.e., too young to understand the nature of the gospel that St. Peter was preaching prior to the mass baptism, and too young to properly repent, in the full meaning of that word.

But back to the question of being “added” (Acts 2:41). . . many Protestant commentators (expressly contrary to James White) understand that they were added to the Church, and thus became “Christians” by virtue of this baptism:

Benson Commentary Let it be observed here, they who are joined to Christ, ought to join themselves to the disciples of Christ, and be united with them: when we take God for our God, we must take his people for our people.

Matthew Henry By God’s grace three thousand persons accepted the gospel invitation. There can be no doubt that the gift of the Holy Ghost, which they all received, and from which no true believer has ever been shut out, was that Spirit of adoption, that converting, guiding, sanctifying grace, which is bestowed upon all the members of the family of our heavenly Father.

Barnes’ Notes on the Bible There were added – To the company of disciples, or to the followers of Christ.

Meyer’s NT Commentary were added (Acts 2:47; Acts 5:14; Acts 11:24), namely, to the fellowship of the already existing followers of Jesus, as is self-evident from the context.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges And there were added on that day about three thousand souls, i.e. to the one hundred and twenty of whom the Church consisted when the day began.

Bengel’s Gnomen Previously there had been only one hundred and twenty names: and yd the souls about three thousand are said to have been added [to the 120, though so much smaller a number], because the former (the 120), few as they were, nevertheless constituted the original head and body of believers. So in Acts 2:47, “The Lord added to the Church.”

“Added” used three times elsewhere in the book of Acts (the first in the very same chapter) also applies to the “saved” or “believers” or those “added to the Lord” (again, obviously Christians):

Acts 2:41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. [Amplified: “added [to the body of believers]”; Geneva Bible [1587]: “added to the Church”; Phillips: “added to the number of disciples”; REB: “added to the number of believers”]

Acts 2:47 . . . And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.

Acts 5:14 And more than ever believers were added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women,

Acts 11:24 And a large company was added to the Lord.

Here’s another fascinating biblical parallel to circumcision:

Acts 2:37 Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, . . .

Deuteronomy 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no longer stubborn.

Deuteronomy 30:6 And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.

Jeremiah 4:4 Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, remove the foreskin of your hearts,

Romans 2:29 He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God.

Thus, the analogy again runs:

Circumcision brought infants into the covenant community.

Baptism does the same thing in the new covenant / Church age.

Baptism is directly analogized to circumcision in the New Testament.

“Cut to the heart” or “circumcise . . . your heart” is part of this extended analogy.

Since infants were circumcised, therefore, by analogy, infants ought to be baptized, lest infants are to be excluded from the new covenant, whereas they were not excluded in the old covenant (which state of affairs would be a retrogression rather than a progressive development).

Related Reading

The New Testament Openly Commands the Baptism of Children (Luke Welch, Kuyperian Commentary, 9-24-13)

Dialogue: Bible on Infant Baptism & Baptismal Regeneration [3-13-02]

Baptism of Entire Households in the NT (Infant Baptism) [2004]

Apostolic and Early Church Teaching on Baptism [3-8-06]

Old Testament Analogies & Precursors to Infant Baptism [3-8-06]

Dialogue with a Baptist: Infant Baptism in the New Testament? [4-29-15]

Reply to Protestant on Infant Baptism & Miscellany [6-23-18]
*

Baptismal Regeneration and Justification (vs. Jason Engwer) [6-4-20]

Baptismal Regeneration: Refutation of James White [8-27-21]

***

Photo credit: Angel Contreras: caricature of James White (who is a bicycling devotee).

***

Summary: James White rejects Catholic baptism; Luther & Calvin did not. I examine in particular, Acts 2:41 & the notion of the newly baptized being added to the Church / believers / the saved.

Baptism and Sacramentalism

baptism & justification

baptismal regeneration

James White & baptism

Previous Post

September 9, 2021

Archaeology: Biblical Maximalism vs. Minimalism

Next Post

September 13, 2021 Moses & Earth Swallowing Sinners: a Miracle?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category & Last Things About Me Anti-Catholicism Atheism & Agnosticism Baptism and Sacramentalism Bible and Tradition Blessed Virgin Mary Books by Dave Armstrong C. S. Lewis Calvinism & General Protestantism Catholic Apologetics Catholic Apologists Catholic conversion Catholic converts Christmas Church (Ecclesiology) Church History Conversion and Converts Development of Doctrine Eastern Orthodoxy Ecumenism & Christian Unity Eucharist & Liturgy Fathers of the Church French Translations G. K. Chesterton Hell Hell & Satan Hell & Satan & Last Things Heresies & Comparative Religion Holistic Health Inquisition & Crusades & Scandals James White Jews & Judaism & Old Testament John Calvin John Henry Newman Liberal / Modernist Theology Life Issues Literary Resume Lutheranism Mariology Martin Luther Music Orthodoxy Papacy & Infallibility Personal Page Philosophy & Science Political & Ethical & Moral Issues Protestant Persecution & Intolerance Protestantism Purgatory Purgatory & Penance Romantic & Imaginative Theology Saints & Purgatory & Penance Salvation Salvation & Justification Satan & Last Things Sexuality and Gender Issues Spanish Translations Traditionalism vs. Radical Catholic Reactionaries Traducciones al español / tradução para português Trinitarianism & Christology Uncategorized Videos

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 October 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 March 2009 February 2009 October 2008 September 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 October 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 July 2004 May 2004 April 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz