Baptism is not only a command, but it is also a symbol proclaiming and painting a union with Christ. “It is a powerful form of proclamation of the truth of what Christ has done; it is a “word in water” testifying to the believer’s participation in the death and resurrection of Christ (Rom. 6:3-5).”[4] In the life of the believer baptism paints the picture of the old life being buried and the new life rising up for the glory of God that believers may walk in the newness of Christ.
Furthermore, it is a declaration of the believer testifying that he will stand with the people who belong to Christ Jesus. These testimonies happen time and time again in Scripture, for example with Peter and the Eunuch in Acts 8 or in Acts 2 when the people received the word and they were immediately baptized. These were believers testifying that they belonged to the church known as followers of Christ. Baptism was and still is a mark of the believer.
Even though baptism is a command from Christ which proclaims union with Him as well as with the church, many today still question if it is necessary. The answer is a resounding “Yes!” Although it is not required for salvation, it is necessary to obey all that Christ commanded which includes baptism.
Are you a person who has repented and claims to be a follower of Christ Jesus, yet you have not been baptized? Do not delay any longer and follow through with obedience to Christ.
“Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not do what I say?” Luke 6:46
Deanna
[1] Matthew 28:19-20
[2] Acts 2:37
[3] Norman, Stanton R., The Baptist Way, Distinctives of the Church, Broadman & Holman, Nashville, TN, 2004.
[4] Erikson, Millard J., Christian Theology, Baker Academics, Grand Rapids, MI, 1998.
Since when has one of the Lord’s commands become optional for salvation, why must I do the work of believing in Jesus Christ to be saved but not the work of baptism?
Cory,
Thanks for the comment. Where in the Scripture do you find that baptism is stated to be a requirement for salvation? In Galatians 2:16, Paul says, “So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.” (I am not comparing the law to baptism…just using the “justified by faith” saying here.)
Gal. 3:14 – “He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.”
Gal. 3:22 – “…so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.”
Gal. 3:26 – “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.”
Although, I am only using Galatians, he clearly mentions over and over that justification is by faith. Baptism is not the mechanism of salvation. The focus in Galatians is on the faith aspect of believing in Jesus for salvation.
If you can find some passages that you think prove baptism is a requirement of salvation, post them here and I’ll check them out.
Thanks,
MJ
Saved by God’s grace,
Washed by jesus’s blood,
Baptised by the holy spirit!
3 steps that are not the same action but related.
Baptism an act of purification by water…Admission of membership or fullness of membership of Christianity.
Key word: fullness!
as if to= complete the actions
I do not know if I am making sense here but thank you for giving me some deep thoughts!
@MJ
Although I agree to the fact that salvation is not dependent upon baptism I think we need to honestly wrestle with 1 Peter 3:21 which has not been referenced in the posts of baptism (that I saw). Here Peter states very boldly, “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you…” What are your thoughts on this verse?
@Cory,
If I may say so, you aren’t dealing with the nature of salvation properly. Belief is not a work on our part. Unfortunately our generation has lost an understanding of this. Salvation is not an act which is dependent upon the will, you cannot will yourself into a belief of the Truth. Salvation is a revelation, God revealing himself to a sinner as Redeemer. Humans respond to this revelation but this is hardly a work of salvation for the response comes only secondary to salvation. Belief is only the result and fruit of our salvation (c.f. Matthew 16:17, 1 Corinthians 1)
Roger says….
Regarding: 1 Peter 3:21
“Peter says that Noah’s salvation through water symbolized baptism, a ceremony involving water. In baptism we identify with Jesus Christ, who separates us from the lost and gives us new life. It is not the ceremony that saves us, but faith in Christ’s death and resurrection. Baptism is the symbol of the transformation that happens in the hearts of those who believe (Romans 6:3-5; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 2:12). By identifying themselves with Christ through baptism, Peter’s readers could resist turning back, even under the pressure of persecution. Public baptism would keep them from the temptation to renounce their faith.” (NIV Life Application Study Bible, p.2263 – Zondervan)
Roger,
Thanks for posting that quote! I wonder if I might press the issue a little more. The NIV, if I am reading this right, seems to say that baptism is only effectual as a symbol. Yet, I do not think it properly deals with the text at hand, Peter seems to clearly indicate, “Baptism saves” just like the ark which *literally* brought Noah and his family safely through the waters. It seems to me that Peter is making a much closer association between baptism and salvation then the NIV commentators want to admit to.
Any thoughts?
Roger said….
Deanna or MJ thoughts on this?
Kyle,
This is a great passage and one of the most recognized passages in which people will claim baptism is connected to salvation. However, the first thing to consider is that the Bible does not contradict itself, so it must be examined in light of all the other passages that claim salvation is by faith. Now, let’s take a closer look at 1 Peter 3:20b and 3:21. This passage is not referring to a wet baptism, but instead a dry baptism. Peter used Noah and God’s judgment as an analogy. God granted grace before the flood while Noah was building the ark, the ark was a vivid object to unbelievers and God’s judgment was sure to come. “In verse 21, notice that Peter uses “corresponding to that”, a phrase containing the word antitupon, which means “copy,” “counterpart,” or “figure pointing to” to make the transition to the salvation in Christ. That word yielded the theological term antitype, which in the New Testament describes an earthly expression of a heavenly reality-a symbol or analogy of a spiritual truth (cf. Jn 3:14-16, Heb. 4:1-10; 8:2, 5). The preservation in the ark of those who believed God is analogous to the salvation believers have in Christ” (1 Peter MacArthur Commentary). In the area regarding “baptism now saves you” is not referring to a wet baptism, but an immersion in Christ which saves the sinner. Baptism which is baptizo in the Greek simply means to “immerse”, not necessarily in water. Here Peter is using it as a symbol of those who are saved are immersed in Christ Jesus and are now saved. God has preserved those in Christ, just as He preserved those in the Ark. Lastly, note that Peter stated that baptism “was not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience” “through Jesus”. So, for those who call on the Lord Jesus, there is a “spiritual ark of salvation safety” (MacArthur).
Press on in the faith,
Deanna
How is faith not a work?
Then they said to him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.”
Seems to me that faith is a work. To say that a man is not saved by the work of faith is simply unscriptural. Now, how does that coincide with Eph. 2:8-9? Simple, we are saved by works of obedience, faith, repentence, confession, baptism. Not by how much we put into the collection plate on sunday, or by how many good deeds we do.
I’m truly enjoying this, hope ya’ll don’t mind my continued responses.
@Cory
Granted, at face value it seems that faith is a work which man must render. But when we compare this one thought with the rest of Johannine literature something doesn’t equal up. The Fourth Gospel always asserts that salvation is by grace alone (1:3, 17, 29; 3:3, 5, 16; 4:10, 14,36,42; 5:21, 6:27, 33, 37,39, 44, 51, 55, 65; 8:12, 36; 10:7-9, 28, 29; 11:25, 51,52; 14:2, 3, 6; 15:5; 17:2, 6, 9 12, 24; and 18:9). So what is meant by the work of faith? Doubtless it is not that salvation rests on our faith. Notice this what Christ says when he says the work of faith is trusting in him. This kind of faith, the kind of faith which receives Christ as Saviour is the first work God requires of a sinner.
As an illustration consider a man is near death of thirst in the desert. A bucket is brought to him filled with water. The man drinks the water from the bucket and is saved. Now it is not the bucket that saved this dying man it was the water. The bucket served as an instrument to receive the water. So it is with our faith. Our faith only receives Christ and rests in Christ as our Lord and Saviour, but faith is a necessary instrument and faith is a gift of God. One cannot respond in faith until God first reveals himself to that person (John 6:44, Matthew 16:16-17).
Augustine once said it nicely (something like this). God requires men to lift their heads and look to him but they do so only because of the grace of God.
@ Deanna,
Thanks for your response, I tend to agree with you on most of your points. I am interested that you said βαπτιζο means to immerse. When (βαπτω)is used in the LXX it translates to the same Hebrew word βαπτιζο does and in some instances means immersion (Leviticus 11:32) but in others it means to dip or be moist (2 Kings 5:14) and in another means to smite through (Psalm 68:23). The point is, dipping is not equivalent to immersion (c.f. Leviticus 14:6, 51; Ruth 2:14; 1 Samuel 14:27).
The only reason I bring it up is because I have been studying baptism for the past two years (I’ve recently changed my tune from baptistic to covenant) and it seems that Baptist theology is read too much into the word βαπτιζο, at least that’s the impression I get.
Grace.
Whoa wait a second, why does Jesus say “Unless you believe that I am He, you shall die in your sins” John 8:24
See it seems to me that not one thing alone saves a man. Grace alone does not, for then we wouldn’t even need to believe to be saved. Faith alone certainly cannot, because we are all sinners and need God’s grace. And we have to of course repent because “Unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3). We have to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling (Phil 2:12). And these are just a few examples, I haven’t even mentioned the blood of the Lamb yet. Certainly we are not saved by one thing alone!
I don’t feel that God picks the identity of those that will be saved. In other words, I am not a calvanist that believes in “Unconditional Election” or the notion that we are prepicked or elected to eternal life. We are referred to as God’s elect, but is that by God’s choosing us, or our choice to trust in God by faith, repentance, ect. Well, I see that God shows no partiality (Acts 10:34). Now, how can Peter make such a claim if Peter knows that himself and others were picked by God to have eternal life, and others weren’t, that sounds like partiality to me. No, I say that we choose life (Deut. 30:19). Now how does God call us? Is it by a magically zapping of our minds by the Holy Spirit? How silly, instead, God calls us through the Word (Acts 13:26, Phil. 2:16, Col. 1:5, Col. 3:16, 2 Thess. 3:14, Js. 1:21-22 (Please read these)). Does God call us? Yessir, by His gospel we are called and given the opportunity of life. Now, we believe the word, right? We believe that if we believe (Jn. 8:24) we repent (Luke 13:3) we confess Jesus as the son of God (Romans 10:9-10) we are baptized in water for the forgiveness of our sins (Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:21, Mark 16:16) and we remain faithful to the Lord until our death (Rev. 2:10) we will be given that glorious gift of eternal life with the Father and the Son in Heaven.
kyle, you live in wisconsin too? what part? I live in Oshkosh, and would love to chat with you sometime.
Anyways, lets look at some key things, God put the salvation before those in Deuteronomy just as he does for us. Now to look at Romans 8. We have to read this slowly, or we will get lost in Paul’s writing. Predestined means to forknow or forappoint. To know beforehand. God predestined us, not to eternal life no, the scripture say He predestined us (the saved of the earth) to conform to the image of his Son. God knows beforehand, that those who will be saved will be those and only those who conform to his Son. Does God conform us to his Son? Does he make us? Absolutely not. Show me a Scripture whereas God forces us to accept his salvation. In fact, if we are prepicked to be saved, why does Jesus speak in Revelation to Churches (and I’m assuming that being in the churches mentioned there that these were the Lord’s churches) why does he tell these churches that he will come quickly and remove their lampstand (salvation). IF they were prepicked to live eternal, there would be no threat to losing that salvation!
Kyle, Yessir, I am at UW-O.
I’m sorry about not responding to the John texts, I hope that through our discussion those texts are made clear that I do not, and will not, downplay the importance of Grace, if I sinned only once in my entire life, I would still need grace to be saved. I would, in short, reply to those verses to say that the word alone doesn’t appear in a single one of them.
Of course! You got it Kyle! God knew, before the foundation of the world, that the Christ would one day walk. Old and New Testament, people needed and still need Christ’s blood to forgive their sins. Animal sacrifices didn’t forgive sins “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (Heb 10:4). So even those in the Old Testament needed Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins. Now, God before the foundation of the world, new of this Son of his, and knew that those that would live would conform to his image (Rom. 8:29-30)
I guess let me ask this, why oh why, does God reveal salvation to some but not all? Certainly you wouldn’t say that because “God shows no partiality” (Acts. 10:34). God is no respecter of persons. But how can someone call God impartial, while then in the same breath say that he picked Kyle to live and Cory to die? I cannot fathom such foolishness. Grace alone does not save us, for we need Jesus to save us (Matt. 18:11). We need the Word to save us (Js. 1:21). How can one thing alone possibly be listed as the sole thing that saves, it simply cannot.
No, am I am not a Catholic, just a mere Christian
Anyways, I don’t put much stock in refuting Protestant doctrine, I only search for the Doctrine of Christ (2 John 9). Please please re read your last statement, and tell me, how can we be saved by grace alone through faith alone by Christ alone, that just doesn’t make sense. There is too many alones!! More then one alone makes something no longer alone!
Show me where you have authority in the Scripture to undertake in church traditions.
Now, are we saved if we don’t repent? Luke 13:3
Don’t tell me repentance comes before faith. Because why would we repent if we don’t believe any of the things we read? No, repentance must come AFTER faith, so I ask, are we saved if we don’t repent
you speak of “the church” as something that can be tinkered with by traditions. Fact of the matter is that the church belongs to Christ, and we aren’t to meddle with the organization set forth in the new testament of the new testament church. I need Scripture that authorizes man made traditions that do not contradict scripture, until then, I can’t say it’s right to do. I also need scripture that states repentance is a natural consequence of faith. Unless we prove our facts with God breathed words, we cannot safely say we are in the doctrine of Christ (2 John 9)
Cory,
Again your reaction before reading. Take time to consider what I wrote before you go off the handle about my “low” thoughts on the Church. I never said that Church can be tinkered with by traditions. In fact, if you pause a moment and go back to what I wrote you will notice that I stated very clearly tradition is only as authoritative as it is Biblical. I am sure you consider yourself someone who is ardently sticking up and contending for the faith with all your might. But before you do so it may behoove you to actually consider what you are fighting for you have created the great fallacy of straw man; try to understand what I am writing. Your failure to do so has led you to respond irrationally and in a very reactionary manner. Neither of which are productive for a decent conversation or the propagation of truth in the defense of the Holy Scriptures.
Now, if you can read this without reacting in your common way then I encourage you to continue. I never said Christ wasn’t the head of the Church. All we do, all we say, all we think, the way our Churches are structured and governed, the worship we engage in on Sunday mornings, must be in the way that Christ and the Apostles mandated. And I seriously fail to see how anything has been “meddled” with. I don’t even know what you mean when you say, “I need Scripture that authorizes man made traditions that do not contradict scripture.” Clearly, if they do not contradict Scripture then they are Scriptural meaning they are true and not, as you would put it, “man made.” If tradition is as “bad” as you say it is I suggest you put down your English Bible and read the original Greek and Hebrew (they really are stimulating).
Now, I will state this again so you can get it right, tradition is not authoritative in the Church but it is very useful. I fail to see how this goes beyond what Scripture itself teaches, can you level Scriptural support that damns all tradition and historical understanding?
I have spent far too much time on this topic and I find that what is written here is probably not beneficial or edifying to anyone that is reading (and as Scripture mandates we are to always be building up the Church). Because of that I am no longer going to continue in this discussion.
Grace.
I hope you don’t Kyle, we’re all here to learn 🙂
Well, I think that it simply comes down to a matter of whether or not God’s silence authorizes us to make provisions for ourselves. You say “Clearly, if they do not contradict Scripture then they are Scriptural,” well let’s look to God’s word for the answer to that.
In Leviticus Chapter 10, Nadab and Abihu are said to have “each took his censer (scriptural), and put fire in it (scriptural), put incense on it (scriptural), and offered profane fire before the Lord.” (Lev. 10:1)
Now the only thing wrong we can see here is “profane fire.” This simply means that they got the fire from the wrong place. Lev. 16:12 states they were to get the fire “from the alter before the Lord.” Nadab and Abihu did not get the fire from the alter, they got it from another source. Of course, the Scriptures don’t indicate that getting fire from any other source then the alter is wrong. However, since they had made a decision where God had not spoken, they “died before the Lord” (Lev 10:2)
Now I would venture a guess to say, that if we could put Nadab and Abihu before us today, they would testify to the strictness of God’s word, and warn us of the dangers of speaking where God has not spoken.