“Baptism evolved into an initiatory rite or sacrament that assimilated the idea of ritual washing and cleansing from sin, a concept not entirely the same as the original confirmation of discipleship manifested by a symbolic burial and resurrection” (292)

Jaenan denigrates baptism as a “mystical transformatory ritual” and blames the influence of Greek pagan religions for the “change” —> he says “mystical” like it’s a bad thing. He says “ritual” like it’s a bad thing. He says “evolved” like it’s a bad thing.

He likes to quote Tertullian when he thinks he supports his conclusions - can’t have it both ways

“It is important to note that the first Christians did not conceive baptism to be an initiation rite giving entrance to the ‘kingdom of God’. Instead, they saw it as a rite of confirmation that individuals had become disciples, that they had given evidence of conversion or a changed life-style, and were therefore ready to be accepted into the full fellowship of the ecclesia symbolized by figurative burial of the old life and nature and their ‘resurrection’ into a new life as ‘new creatures’.” (105)

J offers ZERO biblical evidence for this claim; elsewhere he seems to recognize that “the teaching of Jesus emphasized that man in his natural state required a transformation or renewal to become a spiritual being.” (148)

“While the early church taught baptism of believers, it did not make baptism an absolute requirement for salvation. Jesus was recorded as having said, ‘He who believes and is baptized shall be saved’, not ‘he who is not baptized will be condemned” (108)

Tertullian also said, “Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life!” (On Baptism, II). AND

“Well, but how great is the force of perversity for so shaking the faith or entirely preventing its reception, that it impugns it on the very principles of which the faith consists! There is absolutely nothing which makes men's minds more obdurate than the simplicity of the divine works which are visible in the act, when compared with the grandeur which is promised thereto in the effect….Oh, miserable incredulity, which quite denies to God His own properties, simplicity and power!” On Baptism, III

All waters, therefore, in virtue of the pristine privilege of their origin, do, after invocation of God, attain the sacramental power of sanctification; for the Spirit immediately supervenes from the heavens, and rests over the waters, sanctifying them from Himself; and being thus sanctified, they imbibe at the same time the power of sanctifying…Therefore, after the waters have been in a manner endued with medicinal virtue through the intervention of the angel, the spirit is corporeally washed in the waters, and the flesh is in the same spiritually cleansed. (On Baptism, IV)

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0321.htm. look also at Dave Armstrong’s patheos page https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2024/07/tertullian-on-baptismal-regeneration.html

another Tertullian quote “A treatise on our sacrament of water, by which the sins of our earlier blindness are washed away and we are released for eternal life will not be superfluous…. Taking away death by the washing away of sins. The guilt being removed, the penalty, of course, is also removed…. Baptism itself is a corporal act by which we are plunged into the water, while its effect is spiritual, in that we are freed from our sins” (On Baptism 1:1, 5:6, from https://www.catholic.com/tract/what-the-early-church-believed-baptismal-regeneration

J says “baptism originally had not required a preparatory course of doctrinal study, or catechism” (293) → this is because by now generations had gone by

Jaenan, C.J. The apostles’ doctrine and fellowship: a documentary history of the early church and restorationist movements. Legas Publishing. 2003.