Water baptism

[Amos]

The following is part of an exchange that took place on page 14 of the Once Saved Always Saved thread. In order to maintain the integrity of that thread, I’m starting a new one about water baptism. Is it essential to salvation (being in a right relationship with God) or not? I believe that it is.

Confession and faith are indeed two different things. However, faith brings about confession, does it not? Surely one would not confess Christ, if they do not believe in Him.

That is correct. And that is the argument I would make regarding Mark 16:16. Surely one would not be baptized if they don’t believe. That’s why Jesus didn’t have to say “he that believeth not and is baptized not shall be damned.� It’s redundant. I’ll discuss this more later.

As for the rulers, this instance in John 12 simply strengthens the non-Calvinists' argument of resistible grace. They had faith, but resisted salvation based on their overruling self-interest. Of course, a Calvinist would contend that anyone who's been "given" faith would naturally confess Christ, since the regenerate person cannot resist grace.

To word it properly, what I should have said, and thank you for correcting this, is that confession cannot occur without faith, but faith can occur without confession. This is simply because grace can be resisted.

So yes, confession can be seen as a separate condition for salvation, but in another sense it isn't separate, because it is intertwined with faith.

This is exactly what I believe about baptism. It can be seen as a separate condition for salvation (1 Peter 3:21, Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16) but in another sense it isn’t separate, because it is intertwined with faith. It takes place after faith, just like repentance and confession do, but it is a response by faith to the command of God (Colossians 2:11-14).

In Acts 2:41, those who gladly received Peter’s sermon were baptized. Those who didn’t resisted the grace of God that had appeared to them, instructing them what to do to save themselves from that untoward generation (Acts 2:40, Luke 7:30, Titus 2:11-12a).

If baptism is essential but doesn’t precede salvation, to what is it essential? What is the purpose of baptism (Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 22:16, Acts 2:38)?

It is essential #1, because it is commanded, not of sinners, but of Christians.

Notice in Mark 16:16 it says, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

Isn't it interesting that it doesn't say "he that believeth and is not baptized shall be damned? I think the answer is clear. Baptism is not what initially saves us. Ephesians 2 tell us it is by grace through faith.

Again, to what is baptism essential? I agree that it is essential because God commands us to do it. I don’t believe that a person can refuse to be baptized and expect to get into heaven. It is essential, but to what?

What is the purpose of baptism? For the remission of sins (Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16). For salvation (1 Peter 3:21, Mark 16:16). To put us in the proper relationship to God (Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27, Ephesians 1:3).

If baptism is a command for those who are already Christians, these Christians have not had their sins washed away, are not yet sons of God by faith and are outside of Christ.

John 3:18 tells us that if you don’t believe in the Son, you are condemned already. Jesus doesn’t have to say, “and is baptized not� in Mark 16:16 because it is redundant.

Absolutely, salvation is by grace through faith. But we have already established that it’s not by grace through faith alone. There are other conditions (repentance and confession) on which we agree. It would be wrong for me to argue that salvation by grace through faith excludes repentance or confession. Even so, it is wrong to argue that salvation by grace through faith excludes water baptism.

We agree that baptism is not to precede faith and repentance. But I would contend that confession and baptism are every bit as essential to salvation as faith and repentance based on the Scriptures I cited.

I agree, but slightly in a different light. Baptism is essential for Christians. Confession is essential, but only after one has exercised faith. I do not believe a sinner can blindly confess Christ, whom they do not believe in.

Why is baptism essential, and where is the command to be baptized issued to those who are already Christians?

Just as confession is essential after we have faith, baptism is essential after we have faith and after we have confessed (Acts 8:26-39). It is interesting in this passage that we are told that Philip “preached Jesus� to the eunuch (v. 35), and the first thing the eunuch wants to know when he comes across water is what hinders him from being baptized (v. 36). Notice also that the eunuch didn’t rejoice until after they had come up out of the water.

Faith and repentance are conditions of salvation. We agree. But since we must DO them, they are works. However, they are not works of merit. They are works of obedience to God, which we agree are essential to salvation. That’s why I cited John 6:29. Faith is a work, but it is a work of God – not that God does for us, but that He decided we had to do – a work commanded by God.

Hmm... I suppose I follow you on this one. Still, I find in scripture that faith is not works at all, but simply a condition, or a lifting of an empty hand towards God to receive the free gift of salvation. Here's a clear distinction made in scripture between faith and works...

Romans 4:4-5 – “Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.�

The distinction between faith and works is being made in Romans 4, but between faith and what kind of works? We have established that the Scriptures discuss different kinds of works – works of the law of Moses, meritorious works of man’s devising, works of obedience to God. Which kind of works are under consideration in the passage? Romans 3:28 tells us:

Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.

Paul is contrasting the law of Moses with the law of faith, showing that we are all, both Jew and gentile, justified by faith, not the Law of Moses (3:21-31).

Faith does not exclude works of obedience to God. Faith itself is a work of obedience to God (John 6:29). When we have done what God tells us to do, our salvation is not counted as debt owed us. We haven’t earned anything.

Once Saved Always Saved is false and bad (2 Peter 2:20-22).

The same thing is true of repentance. The same thing is true of everything God has commanded us to do, including confession, baptism, living a righteous life, etc.

I don't want you to think I do not believe in holy living and obedience to Christ, after we're saved. I whole-heartedly do. But let's not get off the topic, which is the conditions that must be met to initially receive salvation. To my knowledge, unless our discussion has shifted, we're not talking about the conditions in order to keep salvation.

I believe we must hear God’s word (Romans 10:17), believe that Jesus is the Christ and that God raised Him from the dead (John 8:24, Romans 10:9-10), confess Jesus before men (Matthew 10:32-33, Romans 10:9-10), and be baptized into Christ for the remission of our sins (Galatians 3:26-27, Acts 2:38, 22:16) in order to be in a right relationship with God.

I haven't though much about good works being in two separate categories, as you seem to suggest, but I suppose it makes sense. It's just hard to hear it said in that way, and not hear the Calvinist yelling at you in your head.. lol

Stil, I wouldn't call it good works, I would simply call it obedience.

Obedience is a good enough term, I suppose.

The works of the law of Moses won’t save us (Romans 3,4). Meritorious works won’t save us (Ephesians 2:8-9). But works of obedience to God do save us (James 2:24). That’s what Paul advocates in Philippians 2:12, working out our salvation by being obedient to God.

I agree totally. Still, I think we need to be cautious, when we explain this to others, and tell them that we don't believe good works is what saves us. We must point them to verses such as James 4:17 which tells us we sin if we refuse to do good. Of course this doesn't really mean just doing good, but obeying Christ. This can give others a clear perspective as to why we must obey God's commands. Because, It's sin if we don't. Isaiah 59:2 still says that sin separates us from God. So, and I'm probably repeating myself, but it's not that we keep our salvation by doing good every day, but we keep it by obeying Him, which is not sinning, every day.

Amen. We are back to once saved always saved being false and bad (Luke 9:62, 1 Peter 4:1-5).

[Esoteric_Illuminati]

Agreed. IMO, they can be thrown out on the basis that baptism by immersion, despite its Greek definition, emulates the ritual baths in Judaism. Jesus, as a practicing Jew, and converts from Judaism into very early Judeo-Christianity who worshiped to the God of the Abrahamic faiths, would have understood and participated in that Jewish custom. This knowledge apparently renders the practice of water baptism valid for Jewish Christians, both ancient and modern, but not for Gentile Christians either then or now.

I can see your point, but given the fact there is no mention of those Jewish rituals in any context or relation with the sacrament of baptism taught in Scripture, along with the host of Scripture that when ALL of it compiled, describes exactly what the significance of baptism by immersion represented. None of it is linked to previous Jewish practice. I mean the fact that there are similarities adds no validity to what you're saying, its just speculation.

I think the question here is ultimately, based on how it is taught in the Bible and practiced, why wouldn't a believer want to be baptized in the same way as Jesus or others in Scripture?

As to why they'd want to be baptized in that manner, especially since the belief that Jesus did it is conjectural at best; well, why indeed? I see it as significant that Luke 8:17, if indeed based on the writings of Mark, Q, and/or Proto-Luke, makes no reference to water baptism.
Speaking of Q, a translation of the Aramaic version of John 3:22 reads, in part:

... Jesus ... came to Judea, ... where he visited ... and baptized.

While this does seem to indicate that Jesus personally performed baptisms, the method or type of baptism is not indicated and, therefore, assumed or presupposed by practicing Christians to be baptism in water. I don't have a Coptic version, but I'd be curious to read JN 3:22 and ACTS 8:17 in that language, which I haven't studied.
Also, Acts 8:17 in the Aramaic reads:

Then they consecrated the hand over them, and they received the holy Spirit [emp. mine].

Again, no mention of water baptism.

The passages I previously shared:
As defined in Scripture on immersed water baptism...
Explicit passages:
Matthew 3:16As 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.

(Since Christ “went up out of the water�, the logical conclusion is that He went into the water, was immersed.)

Acts 8: 38And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. 39When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.

(Philip baptized the eunuch in a manner through which he “went down into the water� and “came up out of the water.�)

Implicit passages:
Romans 6:3Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4We 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.

Colossians 2:11In 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, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

(The symbolism of baptism indicates immersion as it speaks of being “buried� with Christ and risen into a new life with Him; “sprinkling� does not maintain this significant symbolism)

John 3: 22After this, Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean countryside, where he spent some time with them, and baptized. 23Now John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because there was plenty of water, and people were constantly coming to be baptized.

(Since John the Baptist sought places to baptize where there was “plenty of water�, we may logically conclude that he was immersing people)

My conclusion: Baptism is done by immersion.

Granted there are some passages on baptism that are too vague given the context as to how it was done, but as you see there are some passages that are quite explicit in how baptism was done. I've been chided before for saying I let Scripture interpret Scripture, but in cases like this, you have to do it.

Given the obvious symbolism of burial described in Scripture, water immersion I believe becomes a NECESSARY condition in order to practice that sacrament consistent with ALL of Scripture.

I've studied it many times. I also, for many years, preached and performed what is sequaciously regarded as "Jesus-style" baptism by full immersion. So, please, don't presume that I'm ignorant on the subject.

I apologize if it seemed like I was coming across presumptuous, I'm not. I think I may have interjected a bit of emotion there based on how significant I personally understand this doctrine and what it represents to me.

Actually, albeit they don't practice full immersion in the tradition of the Jewish ritual baths, it was--as both Bible and Church histories confirm--the Catholic Church's word as to what they said "God's Word" was that made this and other Christian beliefs seem powerful in the minds of the uninformed Catholic and Protestant masses.

I hold the sacrament of baptism as a very critical part of faith and truth taught in Scripture. Certainly upon knowing that about me, you then wouldn't then assume I have this belief due to the Catholic church would you?

[flavi0]

John the baptist baptized with water and said that Jesus would come and baptize us with the Holy Spirit.

The water baptism was only a symbol of the real baptism. You don't need to be baptized in water, you need the Holy Spirit!

but water batism is stil important because God commands us to be baptized by water, it is not reguired for salvation but its a step of obedience and God honors those who obeys him.