Christian Baptism

Since the Protestant Reformation, the issue of baptism has been a source of much controversy. While arguments about doctrine have become less prevalent in recent years as such topics have become less in vogue, there continues to be disagreement over this subject – though it seems as though it ought to be a relatively straightforward and simple topic.

This piece is not a comprehensive study of all the various issues associated with baptism with a lengthy series of ‘proof texts’ – there are plenty of articles like that which have been written over the years. Instead, I am addressing this to an audience of believers who have heard confusingly competing teachings about this subject, and who may have ended up being not quite sure what to believe. Rather than seeking to present a series of logical, ‘air-tight arguments,’ I will simply present how I think about the issues associated with baptism, as well as address some of the most common questions.

Much of the controversy seems to me to be rooted in a battle between: 1) the Roman Catholic view of baptism; 2) the Sola Fide view of the Reformationists; 3) an Enlightenment-era (and Hellenistically-rooted) view that ‘spiritual things’ matter, whereas ‘physical things’ (with baptism being a physical act) are ultimately ‘of this world’ and therefore do not.

In keeping with the early creeds and writings of the Church Fathers, many Protestants continue to view baptism as a sacrament – a ‘means of grace,’ as opposed to a ceremonial symbol with no real spiritual significance.

Since the Reformation, however, for others the Sola Fide tenet often seems to have been used to create a false dichotomy that prevents any real significance from being assigned to this ritual at all. Some even seem to feel as though they are ‘doing the work of God’ by emphatically insisting that this biblical ritual is totally unnecessary and even superfluous.

Though it was a universal practice in the early church and is spoken of on numerous occasions within the New Testament (including Jesus’ direct instructions in the Great Commission), for whatever reason, many churches today don’t characterize baptism as being all that important, or even significant enough to include a mention of it in their Statement of Faith.

In looking at the various arguments, I do believe this very ‘low view’ of baptism emerged largely as a knee-jerk reaction against what they saw as attributing to the waters of baptism some sort of a mystical power (apart from faith), rather than an intentional desire to ignore the teachings of Scripture (and the example of Jesus) which paint baptism as a practice that was intended to be an integral element of the Christian faith.

While I understand and appreciate much of the thinking and motivation of the 16th-century Reformationists, I would nonetheless advocate for a return to classic Christianity rather than using a theological formula from the 16th century as the litmus test for doctrinal truth. Measuring one’s doctrine and theology against a 16th-century standard – or, for that matter, a 19th-century American revivalist view – is simply not as safe or as wise as relying on the Scriptures as the ultimate source of theological and doctrinal truth.

All that being said, believer baptism has actually become more prevalent in recent years, as fewer ‘exegetes’ have sought to define and defend a comprehensive systematic theology that seeks to excise the need for such a physical expression of faith.

In today’s less doctrinaire and more experiential world, new converts have increasingly chosen not only to take the passages pertaining to baptism at face value, but they have also found there to be much meaning found in a physical ritual that signifies the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ – and which emulates the way Christ himself began his own ministry.

Even members of denominations that historically have not practiced believers’ baptism increasingly have sought to identify both with Christ and the early Christians, and requested baptism as an adult.

Such an approach makes a good deal more sense than losing the importance of baptism in favor of a rationalistic debate over the question of the exact instant at which a person ‘crosses over from death to life’ – with the answer to which being one where I would simply defer to God. I would propose that we collectively quit ‘arguing about words’ (2 Timothy 2:14) and instead simply seek to do what God told us to do, and to practice this most ancient and significant of ceremonies as a part of our commitment to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Some have made the claim that to attach any real significance to baptism transforms it into a ‘meritorious work’ that one is performing in order to earn their salvation.

In Colossians 2:12, Paul notes that the active agent in baptism is God, not man, however – and that the person being baptized is actually a passive recipient:

…having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

Such language is not at all consistent with the argument that baptism is something the recipient is doing in an effort to ‘earn their salvation.’ Rather, it is a ritual where a covenant is sealed – not unlike a marriage ceremony – and it is clearly linked to “faith in the working of God.”

When it comes to religious controversies, the issue of erroneous ‘category assignment’ is the source of many problems. Many disputes are rooted in false conflicts between concepts that simply belong at different levels of a hierarchy of belief. This results in numerous controversies and endless arguments where the Bible is used against itself in often illogical and inherently irresolvable disputes as both sides just ceaselessly and unknowingly argue past one another.

In an effort to circumvent this problem here, I would always want to note that there is but one, single overarching element that alone accounts for our salvation – there is nothing else that belongs in this same category, or at this same level of the ‘hierarchy.’ That one thing is that Christ shed his blood and died on the cross on our behalf. At the most basic and fundamental level, this is the only thing that saves us – the one thing that atones for our sins and allows us to be reconciled with God.

I have often said that it would be important to remember – if you ever find yourself standing in front of God and he were to ask you why you should be allowed to enter heaven – that you most certainly should remember not to tell him it’s because you were baptized . . . or because you have faith . . . or because you ‘tried to live a good Christian life.’ However important these things may be, any one of them at this most fundamental of levels would be the wrong answer – because relying on any of them would be implying that your sins were ultimately being atoned for on the basis of something other than the blood of Christ.

Going down a level from Christ’s death on the cross, whether a person comes to have faith in Christ is the pivotal element as to whether or not that person will respond in such a way as to be reconciled as a result of what Christ did on the cross. We come to God in faith – we come to believe that Jesus was who he said he was, and we acknowledge in faith that it is by virtue of his death on the Cross that we are able to be reconciled with him.

As an element of this, however, once we believe we still have to make a decision as to whether we wish to align ourselves with him or to continue to live a life of rebellion. If we choose to submit our lives to him and his will, in faith, we will repent. This will certainly result in a change in our behavior, but the fundamental element is the surrendering of our will to God – not the improved behavior.

Once a decision has been made to turn in faith and repentance to God, the practice we read about in the book of Acts in the early church was to go through a religious ritual – a ceremonial washing. This is what baptism is, and I think of it as being quite analogous to a wedding – a physical ceremony where our covenant with God is sealed.

Some have sought to turn the covenant we have with a personal God into something more akin to a legal contract, the benefits of which are obtained seemingly by perfect adherence to a very explicit and exacting set of terms & conditions. This seems a lot like a formula (“Say these magic words in precisely this way!”) by which one becomes legally entitled to forgiveness from God. On its face, this seems to resemble very little that God ever modeled for us in the Scriptures.

Such a mentality often causes its adherents to become consumed by the question, “But, we must establish the point at which someone crosses the threshold from death to life; at what exact moment does an individual become saved?!” – with some even concluding that any misunderstanding regarding the answer to that question renders one’s conversion invalid.

Let’s look at another passage – not related to baptism – but one that could have at least something to say in response to this question. In speaking of the old covenant, in Romans 4:9-11:

We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised.

Though this is a reference to the Old Testament covenant, it seems to indicate that, at least under the old covenant, God considered coming to faith as the pivotal moment when one ‘crossed from death to life’ – even though that was prior to the point when that covenant was actually sealed. Not only was Paul illustrating the continuity between the Old and the New Covenants, but such thinking would also seem to be consistent with what we read in John 5:24:

“I tell you the truth; whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.”

On the flip side, disappointingly and inexplicably, many would-be logicians have pointed to this and other Scriptures to absolve everyone of any need to be baptized at all.

Such an approach to the Bible in general and baptism in particular seems very puzzling. Why would any believer exhibit a refusal to submit to a clear biblical practice such as baptism as some sort of a ‘badge of honor’ – seemingly, I suppose, as proof of what a ‘high view of faith’ they hold – and ascribe some sort of nobility to refusing to acknowledge and submit to the clear words of numerous passages from the Scriptures?

While ultimately we’re saved only by virtue of Christ’s atoning death on the cross, unless you believe everyone has been reconciled with God, one does need to become a Christian.

When we read in the Bible about people becoming Christians, they believed, repented, confessed Christ Jesus as Lord – and they were baptized. This causes me to say that a person isn’t really finished becoming a Christian – they haven’t ‘sealed the covenant’ – until they’ve been baptized.

If someone is trying to find a way to justify not being baptized (perhaps finding a ‘loophole’ by pointing to other passages that state that we are ‘saved by faith’) and subsequently decides not to be baptized, I don’t think they – to use the word in a slightly different way – are acting in ‘good faith.’ For whatever reason, they are looking for something that is analogous to a legal loophole.

In the Great Commission, Christ himself instructs us to be baptized – so why would motivate we even look for such a loophole? Insofar as possible, shouldn’t each of us just desire to do what Christ told us to do?

Once someone asserts that baptism is ‘necessary’ or important, however, others quickly pose a mystifying array of theoretical questions about whether it is being asserted that a person isn’t saved until ‘their nose breaks the surface’ on their way up out of the water, about what this means for the (apparently, scores of) people who presumably have been killed in car wrecks on their way to be baptized, or about the fate of someone who comes to faith in Christ while they’re stuck in the middle of the Sahara Desert and dies without being able to be baptized.

I am not seeking to address such extraordinary circumstances here (though I would refer back to the aforementioned passage in Romans 4), but again would simply say that if a person has come to faith in Christ they ought to be baptized, if at all possible.

I find an obsession with questions about extraordinary circumstances or exceptions to the rule to be somewhat distracting, and the motivation for raising them a bit puzzling. I am also reminded of the legal maxim, “Hard cases make bad law” – which highlights the fact that basing normative practices on exceptional, out of the ordinary circumstances is not generally a wise approach. Is simply doing what we were told to do in the face of ordinary circumstances really such a controversial notion?

For a number of years, I attended a church where the minister spoke in his sermons of what Christ did on the cross, about the need to come to a saving faith in Christ, to commit your life to him, and to be baptized. When someone was baptized, the person performing the ceremony typically read a number of Bible passages about what baptism means, and everyone just did what God said they were supposed to do upon coming to faith in Christ.

Afterwards, everyone was happy that the person had become a Christian. I saw a lot of baptisms, and there were no ‘doctrinal watchdogs’ lurking about, attempting to pin down any of those who were being baptized as to what instant they thought they had ‘crossed over from death to life.’

And that was as far as anyone took it . . . no parsing of words, no trying to bind or reduce God to a set of legal statutes or doctrinal systems – and no derisive observations about any other group’s doctrinal assertions or misconceptions.

This is exactly how I believe God would have us approach this subject. The pivotal element toward which we are working is to bring a person to faith, but they’re not really done becoming a Christian until they’ve been baptized, because that is the ceremony where the covenant is sealed . . . but we need always to keep in mind that the ultimate basis for anyone having their sins forgiven is solely a result of the shed blood of Christ.

I saw a Statement of Faith on one church’s Web site – they said they would “baptize anyone by immersion upon a credible statement of faith” – such an approach seems to make perfect sense. As I said earlier, I’m often troubled and mystified to see how many churches’ Statements of Faith make no mention of baptism at all.

A presentation of the gospel is intended to bring people to where they understand, believe, and commit their lives to Christ – to come to a saving faith in Christ and the power of his blood. Once they’ve come to faith, however, the Scriptures say they are to be baptized. I don’t understand why such a biblical instruction would not even be mentioned in a Statement of Faith – what is the thinking behind such a glaring omission?

So, for anyone who is waiting for an incriminating word to pounce upon, I do believe baptism is ‘required’ – but I do think the use of that word sometimes reflects a skewed way of thinking about Christianity. It can easily be construed so as to reduce salvation to a formulaic set of ‘legal requirements,’ making some sort of a ‘lawyerly’ argument that involves a parsing of words similar to debating the definition of the word “is” – but that is most certainly not what I am doing here.

In everyone’s defense, I think a good bit of the reason that so many who are at different points on the doctrinal spectrum end up taking such skewed positions is in reaction to excesses associated with someone else’s position . . . with that other side’s position, in turn, being distorted as a result of a distortion they were (correctly) perceiving in the first (or some other) party’s doctrinal assertions. I think this has caused people on all sides of this particular doctrinal divide to inadvertently distort their own positions as a reaction to what they perceive as a wrong perception or level of emphasis on the part of another.

I think this can best be corrected by refusing to formulate our own theology in response to what we perceive as someone else’s misconceptions. Instead, let’s just look at what we were told in a very straightforward manner to do – and then do our best to do it.

One additional note . . . while I am not horrified when I hear of a church that offers baptismal services only 2-4 times per year, this practice does seem to me to be out of sync with the spirit of the commands and examples we see in the Bible. Those examples clearly indicate that the normative practice in the early church was to be baptized as soon as one came to faith in Christ. This practice is not difficult to understand, as it seems logical that one would wish to seal the covenant they were entering into with God in the way He had ordained as soon as they were able.

Certainly the waters of baptism possess no magical power – we are saved solely by the power and as a result of the grace of God – but baptism was clearly regarded in the 1st-century church as a normative part of a Christian conversion, and I can find no reason not to regard it in that same way today.

Below is a cataloguing of many passages that pertain to and illustrate examples of New Testament baptism. Though some will respond that some of these passages are referring to a ‘spiritual baptism’ that has nothing to do with a baptism in water, I have never been able to come to any conclusion other than that the sum total of all these passages clearly indicate that the early church practiced baptism in water.

I have seen some of these verses elicit a very hostile reaction on the part of some, but am providing no additional commentary here as to what any of these passages mean – I am simply cataloguing them to be read, meditated upon, and harmonized by the reader – hopefully, with an eye toward coming to understand them in the way the original authors intended that they be understood.

• Romans 6:3-6 – Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

If we have been united with him in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be rendered powerless, that we should no longer be slaves to sin - because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.

• Matthew 28:18-20 – Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

• Mark 16:16 – [Then Jesus] said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”

• Acts 2:38-39, 41 – Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. This promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off - for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

• Acts 22:16 – “And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.”

• I Peter 3:21-22 – And this water [of Noah’s flood] symbolizes baptism that now saves you also – not the removal of dirt from the body, but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand – with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.

• Galatians 3:26-27 – You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

• Colossians 2:11-12 – In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men, but with the circumcision done by Christ; having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

• Titus 3:5 – . . . he saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior.

• John 3:5 – Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, unless a man is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

• Matthew 3:13-17 – Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”

Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.

As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. A voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

• Hebrews 10:22 – . . . let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience, and having our bodies washed with pure water.

• Acts 2:41 – Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about 3,000 were added to their number that day.

• Acts 8:12-13 – But when they believed Philip as he preached the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Simon himself believed and was baptized.

• Acts 8:35-38 – Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.

As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. Why shouldn’t I be baptized?” And he ordered the chariot to stop. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.

• Acts 10:46-48 – Then Peter said, “Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

• Acts 16:14-15 – One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home.

• Acts 16:25-33 – About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the other prisoners were listening to them. Suddenly there was such a violent earthquake that the foundations of the prison were shaken. At once all the prison doors flew open, and everybody’s chains came loose. The jailer woke up, and when he saw the prison doors open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself because he thought the prisoners had escaped. But Paul shouted, “Don’t harm yourself! We are all here!”

The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas. He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved - you and your household.” Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house. At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his family were baptized.

• Acts 18:8 – Crispus, the synagogue ruler, and his entire household believed in the Lord; and many of the Corinthians who heard him believed and were baptized.

• Acts 19:1-5 – While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”

Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

• Acts 22:14-16 – “The God of our fathers has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. You will be his witness to all men of what you have seen and heard. And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on His name.”

Roots in Paradise (RIP)
That’s what I want on my tombstone – Roots in Paradise. I will die – I know that. But that is not what I’m thinking about now. My thoughts, plans, and actions are built on living.
I have been immersed in a study of David and of the Revelation of John as of late, and this has helped focus my vision. David never “worked” to get the throne – God had said it would happen so David could wait, endure, and forego all thoughts or vengeance. And in Revelation we get to “see” God in total control, all things working toward His plan – and the vengeance is, indeed, His alone. As I work on these enduring principles – God is in control and I can wait – I find myself being rooted more and more in the life to come – in Paradise. Now don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with living in this life – I really love it! But putting down roots – now that’s another thing all together. Because I have learned that I am changed by the soil from which I pull my sustenance. The soil of this earth turns my heart towards apathy, restlessness, envy, anger, revenge, and self. It really cannot be helped. We are what nourishes’ us. So as long as I am nourished by the soil of this earth, I am fighting a losing battle – a battle I cannot win.
But put those roots in the soil of Paradise – and these things simple begin to fade away. This soil yields compassion, peace, contentment, love, patience, and – yes – Joy! Now this is a foundation upon which I can truly build my thoughts, plans, and actions for living. Not because this world does not matter – but because it matters so much that I don’t have to concern myself with outcomes – that is Heavens’ concern. I just concern myself with today.
Sounds like a cop-out, doesn’t it? I can have it all now AND in the life to come? But that is just what we are promised. “I have come that you may have life, and have it to the full”. These are not my words, but His. I’m just trying to figure out how that happens. And it all has to do with roots – and the soil they are planted in.
So how does this “transplant” happen? It starts with Baptism. In Baptism I die (am uprooted) to take root (am transplanted) into Paradise – my new home. But as soon as the service is over, I start putting down roots once again in the earth. It’s the way of the world – how can I avoid it? David did (for most of his life) and John saw it. It’s the assurance of things hoped for, the promise of things to come. And this must be my vision – my focus – my future. As long as I can maintain this, my roots stay firmly in place. Then, and only then, can I truly live the life I was given to live in this world.
It all starts with a simple principle – one guaranteed to work every time – keeping my Roots in Paradise! – That’s what I want on my tombstone.

The article above suggesta that a better definition of the baptism of "converts" in Christendom is needed. But the account is sort of meandering and at times inconclusive. Here is a shorter, more precise, and Scripturally well-suupported definiyion, from the "Happy Heralds" site:

VI. BAPTISM OF DISCIPLES OR WATER BAPTISM

(click on the above to view the entire article)

*********beginning of excerpt*************

Now consider the seven factors of Baptism of Disciples.

I. A PARTICULAR MESSAGE PROCLAIMED.

The particular message proclaimed in connection with the Baptism of Disciples is The Gospel of The Lord Jesus Christ (Mk.16:15), but also to “make disciples” of people of all nations and “keep ALL things watchfully secure whatsoever I have commanded you&” Mt.28:19,20 APT). This message includes: His Creatorship; His Deity; His virgin birth; His perfection; His agonizing, vicarious death enduring the Wrath of The God in darkness; His burial; His resurrection-ascension and high priestly ministry; His exaltation; the coming again of our Lord Jesus Christ; His Saviorhood (Acts 5:31) and the basis on which Salvation including forgiveness of sins is appropriated (Acts 20:21); and His Lordship including the true meaning of Disciples’ Baptism, that the disciple together with Christ is crucified to Sin, self, and the world and lives the victorious, resurrected life as an overcomer (Mt. 7:21; Acts 10:36; Lk. 6:46-48; Rom. 12:1,2: Gal. 2:20; 1 Jn. 4:1,4,5; 5:4,5; Rev. 21:7,8).

When Peter first preached The Gospel and opened the Kingdom to the Jews with the keys The Lord Jesus Christ had given to him, he preached The Gospel of Christ and the necessity of repentance for Salvation followed by the command to be baptized at once. A few days later Peter had a little better understanding of The Gospel. He did not tell the hearers to be baptized, but he told them to repent and be converted (Acts 3:19). So he moved away from the preaching the act of baptism in connection with Salvation. But in the beginning he preached it because of the understanding from the fact that The Lord Jesus baptized and His disciples baptized and prior to that John baptized. There was a primitive understanding about baptism, but as The Holy Spirit revealed The Truth more clearly, the contents of the message became more precise and the act of baptism was not retained in the message of The Gospel of The Lord Jesus Christ. As one reads through the Book of Acts, at first one finds the Deity of Christ (3:13) is emphasized, then the perfection of Christ (3:14) and His death, burial and His resurrection-ascension (3:15). Also included in The Gospel is the exaltation of Christ (His ascension to the right hand of The God) and His coming again was alluded to (3:19) and then the emphasis on The Saviorhood and The Lordship of Christ, not in word but in deed (the ones who actually do his will, making Him The Lord of their lives (Acts 10:36). “He is Lord of all!” Thus The Saviorhood (Acts 5:31; 13:23) and The Lordship of Christ (Acts 2:36; 10:36; Rom. 10:9) were also involved in the particular message that was proclaimed.

II. A FAITH PROVEN (EXERCISED).

The faith that is exercised is saving faith in The Lord Jesus Christ that is proven by means of the Baptism by The Holy Spirit. The fact that one has been truly baptized by The Holy Spirit and therefore regenerated is proof that the faith committed to The Lord Jesus Christ has been accompanied by repentance and acknowledged by The Father. The change in lifestyle and persistent obedience to all Scripture is evidence that such repentance and saving faith has been committed. Additionally, the candidate for disciples’ baptism demonstrates that he or she has indeed been crucified to Sin, self, and the world together with Christ and therefore needs to be buried with Christ in the likeness of His burial and resurrection to walk in newness of life (Acts 8:12, 37; 9:18; 10:47, 48; 16:15, 33, 34; 18:8; 19:4, 5).

"But when they committed trust to the evangelizing[pronouncing glad tidings] by Philip with reference to the~ things concerning the Kingdom of The God and the name of /Jesus Christ, both men and women were being baptized" (Acts 8:12 APT*).

Notice who were the ones being baptized by Philip in Samaria: men (husbands) and women (wives), but not children! Remember now this is disciples’ baptism. It is difficult for young children to become disciples. They can learn about The Lord Jesus Christ, but they have great difficulty in making disciples by themselves and greater difficulty denying the self life and being dead to Sin, self, and the world. It becomes a problem with them, mainly because they have not matured and their bodies have not fully developed.

The Ethiopian eunuch proved his faith by vocally identifying himself with The Lord Jesus Christ and requesting of himself to be baptized (Acts 8:37). It is essential that the candidate for Disciples’ Baptism of oneself request baptism when that one meets the qualifications for baptism even as the Ethiopian eunuch did. The apostle Paul’s faith was proven in a deeper way. He had given evidence that he was a changed man. As a matter of fact, unless Saul was a changed man, Ahnahnéeahs did not even want to go near him (Acts 9:13-17).

In Philippi, Ludéeah attended unto the things which were spoken of by Paul and she was baptized and her household (Acts 16:14,15). Now the household in this particular case, if you go back to verses 12,13 all were women. The household of Lydia was a household of women servants, neither children nor husband nor men were involved. So Paul and Lydia proved their faith. Also in Philippi there was the Philippian jailer who gave evidence that he believed as he came and took Paul and Séelahs and washed their stripes (Acts 16:32-34). The jailor saw the evidence of their faith in Jesus Christ by the fact that these men were not going to escape and run away but stayed there in the prison after the earthquake opened the doors. He took them into his home and showed by his life of caring for their stripes that he meant business with The God, and straightway he and all his were baptized. Again the household is referring to servants as it usually does, and does not include children, because God usually tells us when children are meant. But in every case along the way it has been men and women and the household. It is reading into Scripture what is not there if one makes the ‘house’ mean little children. Finally reference is made to many Corinthians being baptized but not all by Paul (Acts 18:8). Kréespohs believed with all his house. It does not say that his whole house was baptized. In Paul’s Epistle to the Corinthians he indicates who he baptized (1 Cor. 1:14-16).

III. AN ACTION PERFORMED.

There must be an action performed on the part of the participant to be baptized by The Holy Spirit. Here with disciples’ baptism the action is death to Sin, self, and the world and yielding to The Holy Spirit’s work to be a bondslave to Righteousness and to The God and thus demonstrating that Sin is not reigning in one’s mortal body and fruit is being borne unto sanctification (Rom. 6:11,22,4-6; Col. 2:11,12). But one cannot be buried by baptism into death if one has not reckoned oneself to be dead. So the action performed is a reckoning to be dead, the act of burial and planting in the waters of baptism and rising to new life. There has to be the reckoning to be dead before there can be the burial. The burial takes place simultaneously with the planting. For what reason is a fruit tree planted? To bear fruit. (Jesus said, “By their fruits ye shall know them.” He also said that the good soil is that which bears fruit, some thirty, some sixty, and some an hundredfold.

The purpose of the baptism is that discipleship has progressed to the fruit-bearing stage (Jn. 15:8). The evidence in the life is that there has been (the reckoning of death to self, sin, and the world) and now the burial takes place and the planting in order that after this there should be fruit bearing and walking in newness of life (rising out of the water unto new life in Christ).

IV. A CONFESSION PRONOUNCED.

The confession that must be pronounced at the baptism of a disciple is as follows, "The Lord Jesus Christ, The Son of God is my Savior and Lord. I am now dead to Sin, self, and the world. Christ now lives in me and through me" (Gal. 2:20; 1 Pet. 4:1, 2).

The eunuch said, "I am committing trust that Jesus Christ is The Son of The God." Further confession includes, He is my Savior and Lord, because in The Gospel that Peter preached recorded in The Book of Acts he emphasized the Lordship (Acts 2:36; 10:36) and the Saviorhood (Acts 5:31) of The Christ. If He is The Son of The God, and He is, then He is my Savior (1 Tim. 4:10; Tit. 2:13,14) and my Lord (Rom. 10:9,10). This is the confession that must be pronounced. Also I must confess that I am dead to Sin, self, and the world and The Lord Jesus Christ liveth in me and through me (Gal. 2:20). I live this new life in Christ by His faith so that it is His life living through me.

V. THE MEANING PROJECTED -- Resurrection.

The meaning of the Baptism of a disciple is that the participant is spiritually passing through death, burial and planting, Resurrection, and living a new, victorious, resurrection life in the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 6:4,5; Gal. 2:20; 5:24; 6:14). It also means that the disciple has been clothed with Christ (Gal. 3:27) and has been circumcised by means of circumcision not made with hands through the operation and effectual working of The God (Col. 2:10-12)

VI. AN INDICATION PRODUCED -- Funeral.

The indication that is produced by Baptism of a Disciple is that he or she is going to one’s own white funeral and is no longer living unto self, Sin, and the world, but unto Him Who died for that one and rose again. It indicates to the world that that disciple belongs to The Lord Jesus Christ and no longer lives unto himself or herself as a bondslave to sin and unrighteousness, but unto Him Who died in that one’s stead and rose again to give that one new and absolute life. It also indicates that he or she has a beneficially good and clear conscience with regard to God (1 Pet. 3:18-21).

VII. AN IDENTIFICATION PROFESSED.

The Baptism of a disciple identifies him or her as a committed disciple and bondslave of The Lord Jesus Christ. It also identifies him or her as one that is buried and planted with The Lord Jesus Christ to begin producing fruit for His glory.

***********end of excerpt*************

By Dr. Fred Wittman

* APT = from "A Precise Translation" of which the volume "The Gospels: A precise Translation" is freely available at the above we site

This issue has often being an issue of extensive debate by both sides, and with texts which need to be reconciled.

The Lord commanded baptism, and said that

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Mark 16:16)

Peter both tells souls that if they will be baptized then they will receive the Spirit, (Acts 2:38) and that if souls will believe then they will be forgiven of their sins. (Acts 10:43)

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38)

To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. (Acts 10:43)

And receiving this word, they were forgiven/born again by God's grace, and then baptized:

Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? (Acts 10:47)

And referring to which, Peter states,

And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (Acts 15:7-9)

Here we see that it was the faith that was expressed in baptism that appropriated the "washing of regeneration," purifying their hearts by faith. Which Titus 3:5 says is "not of works."

Rome herself at least allows as an exception this prebaptismal regeneration:

If the contrition be perfect (contritio caritate perfecta), then active justification results, that is, the soul is immediately placed in the state of grace even before the reception of the sacrament of baptism or penance, though not without the desire for the sacrament (votum sacramenti) — Catholic Encyclopedia> Sanctifying Grace

Yet Peter does not treat this as an exception, but as the basis for NT salvation, and is his theological explanation of conversion, and which interprets Mk. 16:16 and Acts 2:38.

For as the Lord said in John,

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24)

Which is that purification of hearts is by faith, the faith that confesses the Lord Jesus baptism, and which confession confirms one is a believer, as faith is manifest by what/who it obeys. It can even be the occasion for conversion, as a catalyst used by God to induce one to believe, with the faith true baptism both requires and expresses.

And as this confession testifies to faith, thus the promise, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." (Mark 16:16) As well as that of Acts 2:38.

To which the words of Paul conflate:

That if thou shalt with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man unto righteousness; and with the mouth is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.(Romans 10:9-11)

For whosoever shall

For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:13) Yet confession by moving one's neurons and tongue is no less a work then moving one'' legs to be baptized, though both are motivated and enabled by God. Baptism is a "sinner's prayer" in body language, and is far more substantial than mere words.

But while any volitional response by man is a work, the "not of works" exclusion does not mean that man is a passive party in conversion, as if he were comatose or morally incognizant (though in election itself man essentially may be said to be), but that man choosing (under Divine motivation and enablement) is not a work of merit, but even the assent of faith is a work of God,

Who draws souls, (Jn. 6:44; 12:32) , opens hearts, (Acts 16:14) and grants repentance, (Acts 11:18) and gives faith, (Eph. 2:8,9) so that in conversion man does what he otherwise would not and could not do.

Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (Romans 3:27-28) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. (Romans 4:5)

But going back to Rm. 10:9,10, does believing in the heart justify one or the confession of that faith? The word for "unto," "eis" is the same one used in "believeth righteousness," and " confession is made salvation," as well "the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him," (v. 12) and can mean everything from "into" and "toward" to "concerning" (such as Rm. 16:19) and "against."

The sense of "concerning" that seems to best fit in this case, as we see that hearts are purified by faith in the washing of the regenerative event before baptism, and that "with the heart that man believeth unto righteousness," and that the same apostle states, "what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (Romans 4:3; cf. Gn. 15:6)

Moreover, if manifest confession is essential then it disallows death bed conversions.

Thus, since souls realized the washing of regeneration by faith, (Acts 10:43; 15:9) passing from death unto life by believing, (Jn. 5:24) and the heart-faith is counted for righteousness, (Rm. 4:3-6), "believing unto justification, (Rm. 10:9) then the most warranted conclusion that reconciles the texts is that it is the kind of faith that confesses the Lord Jesus in trusting Him to save the contrite damned + destitute sinner by His blood and righteousness, is that which appropriates justification. And at this point the person is in Christ, baptized by the Spirit into the body, (1Cor. 12:13) having been washed, sanctified and justified. (1Cor. 6:11)

Yet "confession is made unto salvation," as concerns salvation, since it is by the manifest effects of faith that we know it exists and that one is saved. A believer is known by who he obeys. And thus while Abraham was justified by faith being counted for righteousness, he is also said to be justified by the working out of that faith, in the sense of justification which justifies him as having salvific faith. And which kind of faith is what James refers to, as the only definition of saving faith is the faith that effects obedience = "works."

What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? (James 2:14) Paul is dealing with the positional, in which faith is counted for righteousness in Gn. 15:6, not the good works of faith which Abraham had already accomplished, by which one is made accepted in the Beloved.

James is dealing with the practical, in which the faith that is salvific is the one that does works, in arguing against inert faith that does not effect the obedience of faith. If he is referring to justification in the same sense as Genesis and Paul, then we have a contradiction, since the latter two clearly state that Abraham was justified in Gn. 15 by faith being counted for righteousness, while James states,

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?..Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. (James 2:21,24)

A key word here is "how," in the sense of justification as regards being a true believers versus false, which is what Jame arguing against. As true faith in the risen Lord Jesus effects obedience toward its Object by the regenerated who has a relationship with Him, thus to believe is to obey, and thus how a believer is justified as being saved is by works of faith, as faith testifies to him being a true believer.

But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. (Hebrews 6:9)

And thus "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned," (Mark 16:16) "For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." (Romans 2:13) For while "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness," the one who confesses the Lord Jesus on obedience testifies that he has faith, and will be saved, thus with the mouth [and baptism, etc,.] confession is made unto salvation. (Romans 10:10)

And which faith is thus judged by its works, which manifests the believer is fit to be rewarded, (Mt. 25:31-40; Rv. 2:7,11, 17,26; 3:5,11,21; 21:7)) even being called "worthy" (Rv. 3:4), which is under the rubric of God's covenantal grace and faithfulness to souls who apart from justification by faith on Christ's account, really deserve eternal damnation for their sins. (Rm. 6:23)

This i see as best reconciling both sides of the texts. See here and here for similar recent examinations by God's grace.

Note also it was not due to Abraham's own inner holiness that Abraham was counted for righteousness, as per Roman regeneration, but "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (Romans 4:3)

Note also that contrary to the RC strawman of sola fide, it neither leaves the sinner merely white washed with only a legal holiness, for indeed justification is part of the event of the washing of regeneration, nor does it refer to a faith being salvific which does not effect works (given opportunity). But neither regeneration or works that flow from it are what justifies one in conversion, by faith is imputed for righteousness, for indeed, "to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the unGodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." (Romans 4:5)

But as the faith in the Lord Jesus that saves is one that characteristically follows the Lord, (Jn. 1:27,28) thus, like James, Reformers preached the inseparable nature of faith and works:

>This is what I have often said, if faith be true, it will break forth and bear fruit. If the tree is green and good, it will not cease to blossom forth in leaves and fruit. It does this by nature. I need not first command it and say: Look here, tree, bear apples. For if the tree is there and is good, the fruit will follow unbidden. If faith is present works must follow.” [Sermons of Martin Luther 2.2:340-341]

>“We must therefore most certainly maintain that where there is no faith there also can be no good works; and conversely, that there is no faith where there are no good works. Therefore faith and good works should be so closely joined together that the essence of the entire Christian life consists in both.” [Martin Luther, as cited by Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963], 246, footnote 99]

More .

According to your position Jesus command to go into the world and make disciples, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was an error on His part.

Not at all the thought. Your imaginative assumption is that water baptism has anything at all to do with The Father's decision to save an individual from eternal death and, on the basis alone of The Father's acceptance of the placement by Jesus, as The Eternal High Priest, of His Life-giving Incorruptible Shed Blood upon the Mercy Seat of Heaven by which alone The Father's righteous demands for the damages caused by Sin were completely satisfied, and by which The Father was unilaterally and righteously able to offer reconciliation and recommencing fellowship as with Adam to the otherwise worthless product of Adam's flesh, thus giving him/her the gift of eternal life.

Do you understand that, although the water baptism has a great significance when correctly demonstrating the agreement of the confirmed and permanently committed bondslave disciple of King Jesus Christ as to publicly recognizing his new eternally valid status as disciple-follower unto death, the act of submitting to baptism has nothing to do with imparting or conferring eternal life?

The ordinance announced by Jesus just prior to His Ascension was that of perpetually delegating authority to the members of His Company to signify their acceptance into that Company to such already-regenerated and sufficiently trained diligent students by the public rite figuratively demonstrating and literally sealing the recruitment of a permanent member of that Company, that Body.

That method of enlistment/induction had already been practiced from the initiation of Jesus' public ministry. This ordinance was not a procedure of recognition and commitment foreign to the selected members gathered for their final orders. Its only novelty was that, going forward, it was to be a continuing element in recruiting and training not only Jews (primarily), but also responsible men and women drawn from all the Gentile cultures by actively going out and seeking candidates from the whole world. The common denominator in acceptance into the Body was by public recognition, by immersion baptism, of individuals confirming their irreversible addition to the company of the committed.

I hope this puts a clear and well-defined boundary on what water baptism is in the course of the development of a disciple, according to the Scriptures cited, and what it is not (without mentioning a plethora of irrelevant practices and assumptions).

Let me suggest there are two parts to one baptism, one part the sinner does by faith, and the second is completed with God giving the Holy Spirit by grace.

That is an interesting concept regarding interpretation of Ephesians 4:4-7 and how it comprehends two baptisms, one spiritual and one temporal. I believe (and it is fairly clear from Pauline writings) that they are not, and not likely to be, concurrent.

That the process of water baptism is a rehearsal of that regeneration which has already taken place. These are one in thought and concept, but not one in time. One baptism can be practiced upon many individuals, at widely spaced occasions; yet it is still one baptism in kind, though not in time. It would be rudely pedestrian to presume otherwise.

For example:

"For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor. 1:17-18 AV)

Many Corinthians were doubtless regenerated as a result of conviction and personal commitment apart from the moment of Paul's delivery of God's answer to sin and depravity; and their incorporation into the local assembly by water baptism through satisfying local recognized elders of their knowledge of, and sincerity in adhering to, The Faith of The Christ was yet again apart from both the moment of preaching and the personal moment of decision. Paul was aware of this, and spoke of not even being instrumental on the baptism of many who trusted in the Spoken Word of The Gospel that he announced as a herald.

I think Paul would agree that making salvation contingent on the application of water baptism would be an utterly asinine presumptuous humanly devised connection amounting to the foolishness he mentioned. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the ρηματος, The Spoken Words, of The God, not by a one-time immersion nor (God forbid!) a wet thumb or sprinkled drops of water on one's forehead.

In Peter's Pentecostal Day response to the convicted believers' cry for further instruction:

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38 AV).

The correct interpretation of this is that Peter was strongly urging them to receive the gift by the Holy Ghost, the spiritual gift of acceptance into the Body of Christ(the newly birthed local church which the 120 had received just that day) as His committed disciples, on the basis of the forgiveness of their sins, reconciliation through the shed Blood of Christ, and entry into fellowship offered to the former enemy by The Father.

This is a construction by implementing the word "for" (Greek εις) as it is used in the foundational sense of Mt. 12:41:

". . . they repented (having been convicted) at (= on the basis of) the preaching (as a herald) of Jonah . . .".

Another verse causing contention is incorrectly used in attempting to prove that water baptism is a cause of salvation, rather than salvation is a prerequisite for water baptism:

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mk. 16:16 AV). The issue here is "Is baptism of an intellectually and/or emotionally assenting, behaviorally convincing subject into the Company an act that forces God to withhold His judgment on an secretly unrepentant heart?" The answer must be "No" (Judas to those first receiving this account).

Is baptism into discipleship a condition of salvation invoked by assuming that this is an exclusive Bible truth? No, because it would be inconsistent with the greater context, which declares through all time that faith is the essential ingredient, not baptism. And it is really an unmoveable, rock-solid, persistent faith in God's faithfulness that counts; not just a faith in one's own reliability, which is just a false undependable fideism.

In the above passage, the individual who has publicly delared his/her allegiance to God, Christ, and the Holy Ghost, been baptized into the Company as a disciple, and then apostasizes (in that verse the Greek for "unbeliever is απιστησας = "unbelieving one"), like Judas, never had a saving faith to begin with.

So, taking Mk. 16:16 as a prop for the "baptismal regeneration" theory is just a pit of sharp stakes for one's New Testament theology of "salvation by works."

******

Jesus was not wrong in setting up a perennial, self-renewing induction rite for use to get adherents and practitioners to physically identify themselves as loyal to Him, til He comes.

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.(Romans 10:9-11)

Asking your pardon, the passage quoted in your comment is corrected by adding the bolded words above, if it is from the KJV.

Here again is a situation in which the presence of the multifunctional preposition εις invites us to a use infrequent, but not unusual which both doctrine and context demand. That use is the foundational use, meaning "on the basis of" and put to work in Rom. 10:10, makes perfect sense.

"For with the heart He/she is constantly/persistently believing with a view toward becoming righteous (?)"

No, this is not possible. Though saved, one is still very capable of unrighteous activity, and does so. This is not a correct exegesis.

"For with the heart He/she is constantly/persistently believing on the basis of righteousness (?)"

Whose righteousness? His? or mine? (Not mine, I hope.) Having heard of, seen, and experienced the Righteousness of Christ, thus we can persistently commit trust in Him on the basis of His Righteousness; and as a consequence of our belief, His Righteousness is imputed to us, as it was to Abraham.

By this belief we can then rely on the truth that He was raised from the dead ones for our justification; i. e., be declared free of guilt.

Yes! That sounds contextually correct and experientially acceptable!

=========

". . . and with the mouth outwardly confession is made with a view toward gaining one's salvation (?)"

Now, that interpretation seems to say that God will eventually save me if I lustily proclaim Jesus as Lord. That sort of sounds like I my just echoing what God says about Jesus will earn a final positive reward. Hmmmm. Well, some do think this, but that does not sound like good hermeneutics to me. But:

". . . and with the mouth outwardly agreeing with God is made in the basis of the salvation already received (?)"

Well, yes. In other words, how can I say that Jesus is Lord if He hasn't already freed me to choose Him, rather than Satan, as my Lord and Redeemer, and am "working out my salvation with fear and trembling"?

That foundational use of eis puts things in the correct perspective.

Of course, I cannot be ashamed of Christ if I did all the sinning and He did all the saving --- eh?

=========

Furthermore, one should not contemplate explaining verses 9 and 10 without first thoroughly accounting for the doctrine embodied in verse 8, whose thought is preliminary to, and inseparably connected with, the verses 9 and 10 (but verse 8 negligently omitted by most preachers):

"But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; . . ." (Rom 10:8 AV) Now, what is the "it" in this verse? "It" is the righteousness which is of faith that speaketh. It says:

The Spoken Word (of God) is at hand, even in thy mouth (ready to be spoken by you, you regenerated disciple of The Christ), and in your heart (through hearing, reading, memorization, meditation, and studious fidelity)"; that is, The Sayings of The Faith (the basic universally held articles known and able to be articulated by the disciple who has made his/her commitment to Christ after counting the cost), which we (Paul and his fellow evangelists) proclaim as heralds; that if you knowledgeably in utter faith agree Jesus! Lord! and believe in your heart that God roused him from the dead ones, you shall be saved.

(When? Now? Later? As I was? or -- all of those?) Clearly, it is a continuation into the future of the standing which we have in our current state as correctible children of God.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.