WHAT THE BIBLE
TEACHES ABOUT BAPTISM
The churches of
Christ Greet You (Romans 16:16)
Introduction
The
subject of baptism has long been one of controversy, especially in
respect to
its purpose and its action. We suppose that uninspired men have written
at least
hundreds of books and millions of words about baptism. Many of these
things we
could read to our profit, but those works will not be the subject of
this
study. Rather, we are going to study the only book (with the only
words) on
this subject that really matters—the Word of God. We will not quote
from the
Bible encyclopedias or dictionaries, the commentaries, the Greek
Lexicons, or
other books of that kind. We are simply going to examine what the Bible
teaches
about baptism.
Before we
can study the subject of baptism we must narrow the field of study,
however.
Those who are familiar with the Bible know that it identifies several
“baptisms.”
1. Jesus
referred to the suffering He would undergo in His death as a “baptism” (Mark 10:38–39).
2. John
the Baptizer preached and administered a baptism in water (Matt. 3:1–5,
11;
Mark 1:3).
3. Jesus,
during His earthly ministry, also administered a baptism through His
apostles
(John 4:1–2).
4. The New
Testament speaks of baptism in the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:12).
5. The New
Testament speaks of baptism in fire (Matt. 3:12).
6. Paul
called Israel’s passing through the Red Sea when they left Egypt a “baptism” (1 Cor. 10:1–2).
7.
Finally, after His death Jesus commanded His apostles to begin
preaching and
administering a baptism in what we call the “Great Commission” (Matt.
28:18–20;
Mark 16:15–16).
Of the
foregoing baptisms, which one is relevant to those living almost two
thousand
years since the time the New Testament discussed the subject?
The
baptism with which we are concerned is the one of which we read in Acts
8:36,
where the man from Ethiopia said to Philip the Evangelist, “Behold,
here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?” The
baptism of this study is the one Peter commanded at the household of
Cornelius:
“Can any man forbid the water, that these
should not be baptized…? And he commanded them to be baptized in the
name of
Jesus Christ” (10:47–48). The baptism now under consideration is
the one that
same Apostle Peter wrote about in 1 Peter 3:20–21 when he referred to
the eight
souls that were saved through water in the ark in Noah’s day, and then
said: “Which also after a true likeness doth now
save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh,
but the
interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection
of
Jesus Christ.”
In about
A.D. 62, the Apostle Paul wrote his letter to the Ephesians, in which
he said, “There is one Lord, one faith, and one
baptism” (4:5). Now he did not mean that he was unaware of the
several
other kinds of baptisms mentioned above. Rather, he meant that at the
time that
he wrote only one of those baptisms was in force. He meant either that
all of
the other baptisms had fulfilled their function and had passed from the
scene
into obsolescence, or that they were not yet in effect.
Obviously,
only one baptism was in force at the time that he wrote. Now which
baptism was
that? It was the one of which we have already read in Acts 8, Acts 10,
and 1
Peter 3. It is also the very same one (number 7 in the list above) of
which
Jesus spoke in Matthew 28:19: “Go ye
therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into
the name
of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to
observe
all things whatsoever I have commanded you: [now note carefully
His
words] and lo, I am with you always,
even unto the end of the world.”
The
foregoing statement tells us the reason this baptism is relevant. If
the world
stands another two thousand or ten thousand years, it will be just as
relevant
to those people then as it was when Jesus uttered those words—and as it
is now.
As long as the world endures—until Jesus comes—Jesus ordered His
followers to
preach and administer this baptism. Mere men did not “invent” the New
Testament
act/doctrine of baptism. Jesus is its author, and as such, He alone has
the
right to determine—and he has determined —every facet of it, including
its element,
its purpose, those who are eligible for it, its antecedents, and every
other
matter pertaining to it. The only source of that information is the New
Testament portion of our Bibles.
We assume
that those reading these words accept the Bible as the inspired Word of
God,
and therefore believe that it is not a message from fallible,
opinionated men,
but one from God to man. We therefore turn to the New Testament to see
what it
teaches about baptism. We will pursue this study by asking questions
about the
subject and seeking their answers in God’s Word.
Should
Everyone Be Baptized?
To begin
with, let us ask this question: “Is baptism for everyone, or should
everyone be
baptized?” (We are referring to those who are accountable and
responsible
creatures before God, thus excluding innocent children and those who
are
mentally incompetent). Should all of those who are capable of hearing,
understanding, and responding to the will of God be baptized?
Actually,
there are two correct answers to this question. The first correct
answer is
“Yes,” in God’s “ideal will” they should all be baptized. Jesus’ words
in
Matthew 28:19, as noted above, demonstrate the fact that He desires all
nations
to hear and obey His Gospel message, which includes baptism. The
parallel
account in Mark 16:15–16 has the same force: “And he said
unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel
to the whole creation. He that believeth and is baptized shall be
saved; but he
that disbelieveth shall be condemned.”
However,
the second correct answer to that question is “No, baptism is not for
everyone.” God’s “realistic will” as revealed in the New Testament
leads to the
foregoing conclusion, specifically:
Baptism
is not for unbelievers. It
would do an unbeliever no good
whatsoever to be baptized, except to bathe his body. Jesus said in John
8:24: “For except ye believe that I am he, ye shall
die in your sins.” Regardless of how many times an unbeliever might
go
through a religious act called “baptism,” this act would not benefit
his soul
in any way. Therefore, unbelievers should not be baptized (including
infants,
the mentally handicapped, and those who deny the evidence and remain
infidels).
Baptism
is not for unconfessing believers. Even if one
believes in Christ, if he is unwilling for any reason to confess his
faith in
Him in the presence of others, baptism will not profit him spiritually.
According
to Scripture, such a believer is not ready to be baptized. When the
Ethiopian
(mentioned earlier) asked, “What doth
hinder me to be baptized?” Phillip answered, “If thou
believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” The man
responded: “I believe that Jesus Christ
is the Son of God” (Acts 8:36–37). Philip’s words imply that he
would not
have baptized the Ethiopian had he not confessed his faith in Jesus as
the
Christ, the Son of God. The same verse that teaches that one must
believe with
his heart unto righteousness also states, “and
with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Rom. 10:10).
Baptism
is not for those who refuse to repent, even if they have confessed
their faith
in the Christ. A person
might even believe in Christ
and willingly confess his faith in Him, but if he is unwilling to
repent
of his sins, then such a one is not yet a Scriptural candidate for
baptism.
Baptism would be premature for him. To repent means to change
one’s mind
about his sinful behavior and then change one’s life to conform
to that
change of mind. Thus, the murderer must decide it is wrong to murder,
and he
must cease murdering. Likewise, the thief, the liar, the adulterer and
all
others who behave contrary to the will of God, must cease those
practices. Repentance requires those who believe and practice religious
error to depart from it, as well.
On the Day
of Pentecost, Peter commanded (to people who had implicitly confessed
their
faith in Christ by asking, “What shall we
do” [Acts 2:37]): “Repent ye, and be
baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the
remission of
your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (v.
38).
Turning away from sin (in repentance) precedes forgiveness of sin (in
baptism)
in the New Testament plan.
Baptism
is not for those who wish to be baptized for a motive other than to
obey Jesus Christ.
It is right for parents, a
husband or wife, or
a boyfriend or girlfriend to strongly desire one to be baptized
into
Christ. However, if one goes through the act merely in order to please
another
human being, rather than in order to submit his will to Christ’s
will, his
baptism avails nothing.
When the
people on Pentecost were told to repent and be baptized in order to
receive
forgives of their sins (Acts 2:38), about three thousand of
them were
baptized (v. 41b). They did so, not to please men, but because
they “gladly received his word” (v. 41a).
(Note: When a person who has not been baptized gladly receives
God’s
Word, he will never argue about what the Bible teaches about baptism.
Conversely, when one argues with the Bible about baptism, he proves
thereby
that he has not gladly received the Word of God.)
Paul
reminded the saints in Rome of the time when they became Christians,
and he
thanked God that whereas they once were the servants of sin,
they no
longer were: “Ye became obedient from
the
heart to that form of teaching whereunto ye were delivered; and
being
made free from sin, ye became servants of righteousness” (Rom.
6:17–18).
That “form of teaching” which they had
obeyed from the heart involved baptism (vv. 3–4). They obeyed “from the heart” Jesus’ command to be
baptized. They decided themselves to do this, and they likely would
have done
it with or without the approval of their loved ones. They knew exactly why
they
were doing it. The motivation was correct—obedient response to the will
of God.
If one is not yet convinced in his own mind to be baptized in
order to
please God, then he is not ready to be baptized.
Baptism
is not for those who do not know its Scriptural purpose, or who knowing
it,
deny or reject its purpose. Some
teach that
as long as one is baptized “in order to obey God,” this is all that
the
candidate needs to understand or believe about the purpose of the act.
This
statement contains a glaring fallacy: In order to obey God is
not
a statement of purpose, but of motive. We have
already
shown at some length that obedience to God, Christ, or the Scriptures
should be
the primary Scriptural motive. However, we must not
confuse the purpose
of baptism with the motive for baptism. In order to
obey God does
not relate to the purpose of baptism.
Some also
teach that “as long as one is baptized for a Scriptural purpose,” his
baptism
is Scriptural. Here we have another fallacy: For a Scriptural
purpose very
clearly implies the existence of more than one Scriptural purpose of
baptism.
The New Testament does not so teach. There is one—and only
one—Scriptural
purpose of baptism. The New Testament states the purpose of baptism
in a
variety of ways, but they all equal one purpose, nonetheless.
For
example, baptism is in order to (1) be saved (Mark 16:16), (2) enter
the kingdom
(John 3:5), (3) receive the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), (4) wash
away sins
(22:16), and like expressions, but they all equal the same purpose.
Baptism
distinguishes between those who have not and those who have entered the
kingdom/church of Christ (John 3:5). It differentiates between those
who are
still in the world in their alien sins and those who have had their
sins
forgiven and have been added to the Lord’s church (Acts 2:38, 41, 47).
It sets
apart those who are in the condemnation of their sins from those who
have had
their sins washed away (22:16). Baptism is therefore the line that the
Lord has
drawn between those who are still under “the
power of darkness” and those who have been “translated
into the kingdom of the Son of his love” (Col. 1:13;
2:12).
Several
other statements in the Bible present additional illustrations of the
purpose
of baptism, but they all end up saying the same thing—setting forth the
single
purpose of baptism. Peter summed all of these up in his simple
statement on
Pentecost: The purpose of baptism is for/unto (in order to receive)
remission
(forgiveness) of one’s sins (Acts 2:38).
In spite
of the plainness of the Scriptural testimony, men continue to claim
that the
sinner need not know or understand the purpose of baptism the Bible
sets forth.
Besides the comments cited above to this effect, a man wrote an entire
book a
few years ago, arguing the foregoing thesis. If this claim is correct
(i.e.,
that one can be baptized scripturally without belief in or knowledge of
its
Biblical purpose), then there are tens of millions of people in the
religious
world whom we should embrace in fellowship. These are folk whom we need
to
acknowledge as brethren, who have been baptized without their having
any idea
what the scriptural purpose of baptism is, or if they do, denying what
the Scriptures
say about it.
Baptism is
one of those Biblical requirements, with which its purpose is so
innately
entwined, that to negate its purpose is to render the act itself vain.
There
are other such things in the New Testament. Could a stranger come into
a
worship assembly of the church on the Lord’s Day, knowing nothing about
the meaning
of Lord’s Supper, and eat of the unleavened bread and drink of the
fruit of the
vine and it be an acceptable observance of the Lord’s Supper for that
person?
Surely, none will affirm that it could. Even a Christian, who
understands the
symbolism of the bread and the fruit of the vine and the purpose of
observing
the supper, partakes to his own judgment if he fails to remember its
purpose in
partaking (1 Cor. 11:29). To remove or ignore the purpose of the act
renders
the act itself totally vain and void, yea abominable. Praying and
singing
spiritual songs are additional illustrations of this principle: “What is it then? I will pray with the
spirit, and I will pray with the understanding
also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also” (1 Cor.
14:15). One must pray and sing with “understanding”—involving their
purpose—or
these acts are vain. It is the same with baptism.
One cannot
be taught incorrectly on baptism and be baptized scripturally. Millions
of
people, sincerely believing they were obeying God, have been taught by
someone
who denies the Scriptural purpose of baptism. Some of these, upon
learning the
Scriptural purpose of baptism, then convince themselves that they were
baptized
for the Scriptural purpose, in spite of the fact that they were not
thus taught
before they were baptized. A letter was written to a denominational
preacher,
commending his strong Scriptural stand on moral issues in a sermon he
had preached.
He was asked if he could see those things so clearly, why he could not
see just
as clearly what Acts 2:38 and other passages teach about baptism and
its
purpose. He responded that he would receive letters anytime about
anything,
except one—what he called the “heresy” of baptism in order to receive
the
remission or forgiveness of sins. In spite of being taught and baptized
by such
preachers, some become convinced that they were scripturally baptized.
However,
this is impossible. Again, one cannot be taught incorrectly and
baptized scripturally.
It would
be helpful if we had a case in the Bible in which some were “baptized”
on the
basis of incorrect teaching and in which an apostolic reaction is
recorded to
such. The New Testament provides just such an occurrence. Acts 19:1–7
tells us
of Paul’s return to Ephesus. The first two verses tell us that he found
there
certain ones who had been baptized. Paul’s assumption, it is apparent,
was that
they had been taught and baptized scripturally. But upon some
conversation with
them, he perceived that they were ignorant of certain things they would
have
learned had they been scripturally taught and baptized. His reaction is
instructive. Did he say, “Well, that’s all right? You did it ‘in order
to obey
God.’ That’s all that’s necessary.” Did he say, “You did it ‘for a
Scriptural purpose?’
God will take care of assigning the right purpose whether or not you
knew it.”
Most preachers of today would have thus reacted. However, the Apostle
Paul
immediately taught these men correctly and then baptized them
scripturally (vv.
3–5). We must react in the same way to any similar circumstance. This
occurrence demonstrates beyond the shadow of a doubt that one cannot be
taught
incorrectly and baptized scripturally. One who does not understand the
Scriptural purpose of baptism, or if he understands it and denies it,
is not
ready to be baptized.
Will
There Be Anyone in Heaven Who Has Not Been Baptized?
Let us now
explore another question: “Will there be anyone in Heaven who has not
been baptized?”
Members of the Lord’s church who have studied the Bible with their
non-member denominational
friends have likely been asked a question similar to this at some time.
This
question does not pertain to infants or to those who are mentally
incompetent.
Rather, this question relates to those who have sufficient mental
faculties to
make them accountable and responsible beings before God. Will there be
any such
in Heaven who was not baptized? We have been asked this question a few
times
when we believed the querist was more interested in appealing to
emotions than
in seeking the Truth. However, it is a good question and it deserves a
Biblical
answer.
As before,
there are two correct answers to this question, also. The first correct
answer
is “Yes, there will be many, many people in Heaven who were never
baptized.” If
the Bible teaches anything clearly, it teaches this, calling many of
them by
name. The Lord named some of them: “And I
say unto you, that many shall come from the east and the west and shall
sit
down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt.
8:11). Kingdom of heaven in the book of Matthew most of the
time refers
to the church (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; 10:7; 16:18–19, 28; et al.). However,
there are
a few passages in which it could not refer to the church, but must
refer to the
eternal Heaven, and this is one of them. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were
and
will never be in the church, but the Lord said they would be in the
eternal
state of the kingdom—Heaven. They never heard of baptism, but Jesus
said they
will be in Heaven.
Hebrews 11
records a long list of great heroes and heroines of the faith. Starting
just
outside the Garden of Eden with Abel, the writer names many Old
Testament
saints to the time of the prophets, finally saying that time failed him
to list
others (11:32). The writer acclaims each one as living “by faith.” The
implication is unmistakable that each one named will be saved in Heaven
at
last, but not a one of them ever heard of baptism.
The Bible
contains numerous other illustrations of the same fact. So, yes, there
will be
many people in Heaven who were never baptized. However, it is
imperative that
we understand the following principle concerning everyone of whom the
Bible
speaks as being saved or in Heaven who was not baptized: They all
lived
before Christ died on the cross. If those who have lived
since our
Lord’s death and since the Gospel began to be preached in its fullness
on the
day of Pentecost, then the Bible answer to our questions is, “No, there
will be
none in Heaven who were not baptized.”
We know
that many, even most, people have great difficulty accepting this
statement. In
our age of great permissiveness, tolerance, and non-judgmentalism, they
simply cannot
comprehend such a statement of “exclusiveness,” as they view it. Most
who
profess faith in the Bible and in Jesus as the Christ have been taught
that all
is necessary for one to be saved is to believe in Christ—“faith only
salvation.” We invite the reader to reason with us briefly. Do not
those who advocate
salvation by faith alone draw a very exclusive line against all
unbelievers of
every kind? Does not their “line” exclude all Muslims, Hindus,
Buddhists,
Confucianists, Atheists, and every other kind of unbeliever?
The Bible
certainly excludes unbelievers from being saved. Jesus said, “For except ye believe that I am he, ye
shall die in your sins” (John 8:24b). However, as we will
demonstrate, the
Bible just as certainly excludes those who are not baptized for the
forgiveness
of their sins from being saved. No one has the right to draw the line
of
inclusion or exclusion where the Lord has not drawn it. We would not be
the
friend of anyone if we taught them otherwise.
Several
New Testament statements link baptism and salvation (or its equivalent
–
forgiveness of sins) in a very concise statement. In every case,
baptism
precedes salvation, and salvation is related to baptism as cause is to
effect.
We will notice only eight of these, for indeed, if one will not accept
the
teaching of Scripture in these, he would not accept it in fifty such
statements. We will take them in the order of their appearance in the
New
Testament.
Mark
16:16: Jesus said: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he
that disbelieveth
shall be condemned.” Notice the order: Believe, be baptized, and be
saved.
It is not: Believe, be saved, and then be baptized if one wants to, or
if one
wants to join a denomination, which is the doctrine of most Protestant
denominations. The Lord’s version places baptism before and makes it
(along
with believing) a condition of salvation. But some object: “Jesus did
not say,
“He that disbelieveth and is not baptized shall be condemned.”
No, He
did not. It would have been redundant and superfluous had he done so.
If one
does not believe, he is certainly not going to be baptized. The Lord
did not
need to say, “He that is not baptized,” because when He said, “He that disbelieveth” He implicitly
took care of baptism in the last half His statement.
John
3:5: The Lord said to
Nicodemus: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except one
be born of the water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom
of God!” Nothing
else in all of the Bible besides baptism can explain the figurative
expression,
born of water. Please notice: If being in the kingdom of God
requires
that we be saved (and it most certainly does), and if being born of
water is baptism
in water (which it most certainly is), then being baptized in water is
absolutely necessary to being saved. The word except has the
force of if
and only if or apart from baptism. This statement
powerfully and
clearly teaches the necessity of baptism for salvation.
Acts
2:38: When those on
Pentecost who believed on the
Lord, having been convicted of their sins, asked what they should do to
be
forgiven of their sins, especially the sin of crucifying the Christ,
Peter
replied: “Repent ye, and be baptized
every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your
sins;
and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Notice the order
here: Repentance
and baptism both precede the desired result—remission (forgiveness) of
sins,
the equivalent of salvation.
Acts
22:16: Jesus sent a
Christian named Ananias to Saul
of Tarsus in the city of Damascus. Ananias said to him: “And
now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy
sins, calling on his name.” Notice that Saul’s sins were still upon
him
before he was baptized and they would be forgiven (“washed away”) when,
and not until, he was baptized. If this is not the meaning of
the words
of Ananias, words have no meaning.
Romans
6:3: Paul asked a rhetorical
question in this
passage: “Or are ye ignorant that all we
who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?”
Surely
all who believe in Jesus as the Christ understand that salvation is to
be found
only in Him—only through the merits of the blood He shed in His death
on the
cross. Now, how does one gain access to that blood and enter into
Christ? Paul
says in this passage we are baptized into Him. The New
Testament never
gives any other means of coming into Christ and into the merits of His
death.
Romans
6:4: This verse is also
relevant to this subject. “We were buried therefore with
him through
baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead
through the
glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life.”
When does
the newness of life begin? It is after baptism; it is when one
has been
raised from baptism that we have a new life in which to walk, having
put to
death the old “man of sin” in repentance and having buried him in
baptism.
Galatians
3:27: Paul here wrote: “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on
Christ.”
Consider the following two columns, with their respective headings, in
which
the names of people might be scripturally entered on the basis of the
foregoing
passage:
Column
A
Column
B
Those
Baptized
Those
“In Christ”
1.
Joe Brown
1.
Joe Brown
2.
Jim White
2.
Jim White
3.
3.
X Bob Green X
Now,
according to the teaching of this passage, I could not list any person
under
Column “B” unless his name first appeared under Column “A.” Notice the
explicit
language of the passage again: “For as
many of you as…”—the very same number —not one more, not one less,
no
exceptions: “For as many of you as were
baptized into Christ did put on Christ.”
1
Peter 3:21: The heart of
Peter’s simple statement, earlier
quoted, is clear: “Which also after a true
likeness doth now save you, even baptism…” (“The like figure whereunto
even
baptism doth also now save us…” [KJV]). If we were going to concoct
some
“plan of salvation” that involved only a single act, promising
salvation to
people upon that single act apart from all others, it would not be a
“faith-only” plan, which is what most of the Protestant world
advocates. The
book of Acts records more than one case of conversion in which faith is
not
mentioned in the conversion process. Of course, it is always implied,
and it is
obviously always there, but it still remains that it is not mentioned
in every
case.
Our
one-act plan would not be “confession-of-faith only,” because the book
of Acts
seldom specifically mentions this condition of pardon, though its
presence is
implied in every conversion. Nor would our “plan of salvation” be
“repentance-only,” because repentance is seldom explicitly mentioned in
the
records of the cases of conversion in Acts, although it is likewise
always
implied.
Were we
inventing a one-act “plan of salvation,” we would advocate
“baptism-only.” In
doing so we would be on much firmer Scriptural ground than those who
are
teaching “faith only,” “confession only,” or “repentance only.” In every
case
of conversion the book of Acts records, where any details whatsoever
are given,
baptism is always present, always mentioned,
and is always
the consummating act. (Is it not exceedingly ironic that
the one act
[baptism] that the New Testament invariably mentions in the detailed
cases of
conversion is also the one act that Protestant preachers almost
invariably
reject as part of the Lord’s plan of salvation?)
But the
truth of the matter is that even as the New Testament knows of no such
thing as
“baptism-only,” neither does it teach salvation by faith alone,
confession of
faith alone, or repentance alone. Rather, the Bible teaches that all of
these are
necessary parts of and make up the whole of the Lord’s conversion
process
whereby He forgives the sinner and delivers him out of darkness and
translates
him into His kingdom, the church (Acts 2:37–47; Col. 1:13–14). Men have
as much
right to remove faith as a condition of salvation as they do to remove
baptism—which
is no right at all.
What
Is the Action Involved in Baptism?
The New
Testament explicitly tells us the action involved in baptism. Paul
described
baptism as follows: “We were buried
therefore with him through baptism into
death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory
of the
Father, so we also might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). He
repeats
this definition later: “Having been buried
with him in baptism, wherein ye
were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who
raised him
from the dead” (Col. 2:12). The fullest description of a baptism in
the New
Testament is in Acts 8:38–39: “And he
commanded the chariot to stand still: and
they both went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch,
and he baptized him. And when they
came up out of the water, the Spirit of
the Lord caught
away Philip; and the eunuch saw him no more, for he went on his way
rejoicing.”
Now, what did Philip do to this Ethiopian when the New Testament says “he baptized him”? Did he pour some
water on him? Did he sprinkle some water on him? He did neither. If we
let the
Bible answer this question, it tells us he buried him in the water
(Rom.
6:4; Col. 2:12).
One does
not have to know the first letter of the Greek alphabet (the original
language
of the New Testament) to know beyond doubt or question that Bible
baptism is
immersion and never any other action. However, it might be
helpful
to know that there are three separate words in the Greek language for
sprinkling, pouring, and immersion, just as there are in the English
language.
The Greek word meaning “immersion” is always the word that appears
behind our
English word, baptism. The action involved in baptism is an
overwhelming, a dipping, a plunging, an immersion—a burial—in whatever
element
is involved in the various baptisms the New Testament mentions (as
enumerated earlier).
The
baptism pertaining to us (i.e., the one that is to be preached and
administered
until “the end of the world” [Mat.
28:19–20]) is baptism in water in order to be saved from our sins, thus
requiring
immersion in water to meet the demands of Scripture. If the action of
baptism is unimportant (as millions allege), one might argue
consistently that
the act itself is unimportant and unnecessary (which millions
also
allege). The New Testament teaches, however, that the act of
baptism is
necessary and that only one action—immersion—constitutes
baptism.
Does
the New Testament Say What Baptism Is For?
The King
James Version in Acts 2:38 states: “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.” While Peter’s
words
appear plain and easily understandable (i.e., that men must repent and
be
baptized in order to receive remission of sins), many reject this
conclusion.
As a basis for doing so they explain that the preposition for is
capable
of more than one meaning, which fact could affect the meaning of
Peter’s
statement. We freely admit this to be the case. One of the
peculiarities of the
English language is that the same word may have almost opposite
meanings, depending
on its usage.
So it is
with this preposition. We use for in two different senses in
our daily conversation,
and we “automatically,” depending on context, interpret which meaning
is
intended. For example, if one goes into a supermarket for a loaf of
bread,
he does so in order to get a loaf of bread. If, however, one
has been
arrested and jailed for robbing a bank, he is not there in
order to
rob a bank, but because he has robbed a bank. In the
first case, for
refers to something one seeks to accomplish, but which he has
not yet
attained (i.e., buy a loaf of bread). This usage therefore looks forward
to a future desired result. In the second case, for looks backward
to action already completed. The man was arrested and jailed because
of something
he had already “accomplished”—bank robbery. Those who reject
the
Scriptural purpose of baptism have long argued for the latter meaning
of for
remission of sins in Peter’s words on Pentecost— that is, he meant
(and
means) that men must repent and be baptized because they have already
received remission of their sins. This averment has deceived
millions of
people for several centuries, but it is impossible for this to be
Peter’s
meaning for several reasons.
First,
the immediate context of Acts
2:38 does not
allow or support a retrospective meaning of for. The acts of
repentance
and baptism are inseparably joined by the coordinate conjunction, and,
which means that they are equally related to their common object,
remission of
sins. They are spiritual “Siamese twins.” Where one goes in relation to
remission of sins, the other must go, also. Therefore, if baptism is because
of remission of sins, then so is repentance. However, one will
search the
Bible in vain to find a single instance in which God or His Son ever
promised
or pronounced forgiveness of a single sin prior to repentance.
Moreover,
the New Testament explicitly states the necessity of repentance for
salvation.
Jesus said: “I tell you, Nay: but, except
ye repent, ye shall all in like manner perish” (Luke 13:3, 5). Paul
wrote
that God “commandeth men that they should
all everywhere repent” (Acts 17:30b). Since forgiveness of sins cannot
precede
repentance, neither can it precede baptism. Likewise, since
repentance must
precede forgiveness of sins, so also must baptism. To argue
otherwise
creates the following absurdity of Peter’s statement: “Repent for [in
order to
receive] remission of sins, and be baptized every one of you in the
name of
Jesus Christ for [because you have already received] the remission of
sins.”
Second,
the Bible is its own best
commentary or
interpreter. The serious Bible student consistently finds that other
passages
shed light on the passage he may be studying. Acts 2:38 is not the only
passage
that contains the phrase, for remission of sins. Its identical
twin
appears elsewhere in the New Testament. Before consulting it, we do
well to
observe that the meaning of this prepositional phrase relating to the
direction
of the action involved must be understood as the same in both cases. In
other words
if for means “because of” in one passage, it must mean that in
both.
Likewise, if for means “in order to” in one, it must carry
that meaning
in both.
Now let us
consider the parallel: “And he took the
cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
for this
is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for
the remission of sins” (Matt.
26:27–28). Did Jesus shed His blood because
men had already received remission of sins, or in order that men
might do so? To ask this question is to answer it.
Those
living in the Patriarchal and Mosaic eras had poured out millions of
barrels of
animal blood over thousands of years to atone for sin, but to no final
and
permanent avail: “For it is impossible
that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins” (Heb.
10:4).
However, a blood offering from some source or of some sort was
necessary to
procure forgiveness of sins, for “apart from
shedding of blood there is no remission” (9:22a). Only of the blood
of
Christ, does the New Testament writer state: “nor yet
through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own
blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained
eternal
redemption” (9:12). These statements of Holy Writ (with many
others)
explicitly set forth the Truth that Jesus shed His blood in order that
we might
be redeemed, and only through His blood may any person receive
forgiveness of
sins.
If this
great blessing could have been accomplished by some other means, the
Second
Person of the Godhead could have stayed in Heaven, thus avoiding all of
the
trials and temptations of the human frame and the agony of the cross.
Unarguably, for remission of sins in Matthew 26:27–28 means “in
order
to obtain remission of sins.” This being so, it can mean nothing
else in
Acts 2:38, namely, that men must repent and be baptized in order to
receive remission
of sins. To be consistent, those who argue that baptism is because
remission
of sins has already been received must also accept the heresy that
the
Christ poured out His blood on Calvary because the redemption of
men from
sins had already been accomplished.
Third,
the Greek preposition
translated “for” in the
King James Version points forward rather than backward.
The
American Standard Version correctly reflects this linguistic fact in
its
rendering of Acts 2:38: “And Peter said
unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of
Jesus Christ
unto the remission of your sins;
and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,” thus destroying
the
unjustified quibble based on the preposition, for.
Fourth,
the remote context in
numerous passages, some
of which we have earlier cited and quoted (e.g., Mark 16:16; John 3:5;
Acts
22:16; Rom. 6:3–4; Gal. 3:27; 1 Pet. 3:21; et al.) teach that baptism
is a
condition of salvation or forgiveness of sins. To allege that Peter, in
Acts
2:38, teaches that remission of sins precedes baptism places
Peter in
conflict with all of these passages, including one which he later wrote
himself.
Is
Baptism a Work of Man’s Own Merit or Righteousness?
Most
Protestant churches aver that baptism is a “work” which men perform,
and that
since we are not saved by our own “works” of righteousness (Eph.
2:8–9);
baptism is therefore not a condition of salvation. To put it another
way, some
argue that to teach that baptism is necessary in order to be saved, is
to teach
that one can be saved by one’s own works. What does the Bible teach on
this matter?
Clearly, it teaches that we cannot be saved by “works”: “For by grace have ye been saved through
faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, that no man should
glory” (Eph. 2:8–9). Just as clearly, however, the Bible also
teaches that
we are saved by “works”: “Ye see that
by works a man is justified and
not only by faith… For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even
so faith
apart from works is dead” (James 2:24–26).
Since the
Bible does not contradict itself, we must conclude that Paul wrote of
one kind
of “works,” while James wrote of another kind. Paul identified the
works of
which he wrote as those which are “of yourselves” in which men could
“glory” or
“boast” (KJV). In a similar passage he further stated the futility of
seeking
salvation by such works: “Not by works
done in righteousness, which we did ourselves,
but according
to his mercy he saved us…” (Tit. 3:5a). It is obvious that no one
can be
morally good enough himself or do enough good works to boastfully say,
“I have
saved myself from sin and condemnation.”
When James
wrote that we are saved by works, what sort of “works” did he
mean?
The context indicates that his reference is to works of obedience
to the
will of God, which one’s faith causes him to perform. He cites the
cases of
Abraham and Rahab in the context as examples of those who were
justified before
God by such obedient faith (James 2:21, 25). The Scriptures everywhere,
in both
the Old and New Testaments, enjoin faith-actuated obedience. Such
obedience is
the means through which we are saved: “And
having been made perfect, he [Christ] became unto all
them that obey him the author of eternal
salvation” (Heb. 5:9; cf. Matt. 7:21; et al.).
The
pertinent question now is to which class of “works” does baptism
belong? Is it
a work of man, of which he can boast, because it is something he does
himself,
or is it simply an act of obedience to Christ, based upon one’s faith?
The
Bible teaches that it is the latter. After stating that we are not saved by “works of righteousness”
which we do ourselves, but through the
mercy of God (as noted above), Paul then wrote that God saves us “according to His mercy” “through the washing
of regeneration and renewing
of the Holy Spirit” (Tit. 3:5b). The only thing in the New
Testament to
which the washing of regeneration can refer is baptism. Please
notice
where Paul placed it. He excluded it from being a “work
of righteousness” of man’s own accomplishment, but rather
identified it with God’s merciful plan of salvation.
Another
statement from Paul reinforces the foregoing truth: “Having
been buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised
with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the
dead”
(Col. 2:12). Note that Paul is discussing baptism, stating that it is a
burial,
as we earlier emphasized. However, now notice in the latter part of his
statement that he says that in being baptized, if one is properly
taught, one’s
faith is not in himself, but in “the
working of God,” Who has proved we can depend upon His promise and
His
power by raising Jesus from the dead. God has promised to forgive our
sins
when, upon believing in His Son, repenting of our sins, and confessing
our
faith in the Christ, we are baptized into Him. When we are baptized, we
trust,
not in ourselves, but in the “working of
God” to fulfill His promise of forgiveness and salvation.
Thus, when
Peter commanded the people on Pentecost to repent and be baptized unto
the remission
of their sins (Acts 2:38), and when Ananias commanded Saul to be
baptized and
wash away his sins (22:16), they did not command these various ones to
submit
to a work of their own righteousness or merit, but to God’s plan of
salvation.
Nor were they already Christians at the time these men commanded them
to be baptized.
Rather, they were to be baptized in order to have their sins forgiven
and to
thereby become Christians. By no means is New Testament baptism a work
of man’s
own righteousness or human merit.
Does
the Bible Tell Us the Relationship Between Baptism and the Blood of
Christ?
For
failure to grasp the connection between baptism and the blood of
Christ, many
people woefully misunderstand the role of baptism in God’s plan. We are
convinced that if they understood this relationship they would no
longer question
the necessity of baptism. Those who deny that baptism in water is
necessary for
one to be forgiven of sins and saved sometimes accuse those who thus
believe of
teaching “water salvation.” This accusation is often made when we
emphasize the
unmistakable language of Acts 22:16: “And
now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,
calling
on his name.” The accuser may say, “You believe that if you just
get the
sinner in the water, it will wash away his sins.” We certainly do not
believe
any such thing, nor have we ever met anyone who believed or taught such
an
obviously absurd and erroneous doctrine.
Neither
Acts 22:16 nor any other passage of Scripture even remotely teaches
that water
can wash away sins. There is not enough water in all of the oceans,
lakes, and
rivers of the world to wash away even one sin. Had it been possible for
water
to wash away sins, the incarnate Word could have remained in Heaven.
Acts 22:16
does not tell the reader what element washes away or removes sins. We
must look elsewhere in the New Testament for this information. Jesus
spoke on
this subject when He instituted the Lord’s Supper: “For
this is my blood of
the covenant, which is poured out for many unto
remission of sins”
(Matt. 26:28).
Peter
wrote on the same subject: “Knowing that ye
were redeemed, not with corruptible
things, with silver or gold, from your vain manner of life handed down
from
your fathers; but with precious blood, as of a lamb without spot, even the blood of Christ” (1 Pet.
1:18–19). The principle stated in Hebrews 9:22 reaches all the way back
to the
offerings of Cain and Abel and culminates especially in the sacrifice
of Jesus
on the cross: “Apart from shedding of blood
there is no remission.” After
speaking of the Christ, John explicitly
identified the cleansing agent for sin: “Unto
him that loved us, and washed us from
our sins in his own blood” (Rev. 1:5). The old hymn has had
it
exactly right all along: “What can wash away my sin? Nothing but the
blood of
Jesus.”
The
question then arises, “If Ananias was not telling Saul of Tarsus (Acts
22:16)
what would wash away his (and our) sins, what was he telling him?” He
was
telling Saul when his sins would be washed away in the
blood of
Christ. The conclusions are irresistible: No baptism—no blood; No
blood—no forgiveness
of sins; No forgiveness of sins—no salvation. Paul tied baptism and the
blood
of Christ together in one grand statement: “Or
are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were
baptized
into his death?” (Rom. 6:4). This rhetorical question teaches us
that when
one is baptized according to the teaching of Scripture, he is not only
baptized
“into Christ” (i.e., into fellowship with
Christ), but also “into his death”
(i.e., into the benefits of Jesus’ death, wherein He shed His cleansing
blood).
This passage teaches us that Scriptural baptism is the sinner’s avenue
of
access to the blood of the Savior. Jesus is the only avenue of
salvation: “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, and the
truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me”
(John 14:6).
The
foregoing demonstration of the Biblical relationship between baptism
and Jesus’
blood explains the numerous statements of the inspired writers, earlier
noted,
to the effect that baptism is a necessary condition for
remission of
sins or salvation (Mark 16:16; John 3:5; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom.
6:4; Gal.
3:27; 1 Pet. 3:20–21; et al.). The reason baptism is necessary for
salvation is
evident: Baptism, with its Scriptural precedents, is the consummating
act of obedience
by which sinners gain access to the cleansing power of the blood of
Jesus the
Christ.
Does
the Bible Tell Us When One Should Be Baptized?
The Bible
tells us, by implication, when one should be baptized. When the
multitudes on
the day of Pentecost heard the first Gospel sermon (preached in its
fullness),
Luke records the response as follows: “They
then that gladly received his word were baptized: and there were added
unto
them in that day about three thousand souls” (Acts 2:41). It is
highly
unlikely that any of these had come to this remarkable occasion with a
change
of clothes and a towel tucked under their arms, yet they obeyed the
apostolic
command immediately.
When
Philip “preached Jesus” to the
Ethiopian on the road to Gaza, the man did not want to wait until they
came to
the next town, but besought the evangelist to stop at the first body of
water
sufficient to immerse him: “And as they
went on the way, they came unto a certain water; and the eunuch saith,
Behold,
here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?” (Acts 8:36).
Philip immediately
complied with the man’s request (vv. 38–39).
When the
jailor at Philippi asked Paul and Silas what he should do to be saved,
it was
already past midnight (Acts 16:25). Yet, upon being told what he should
do,
they did not wait for the dawning of the day. The jailor and his
household were
baptized “the same hour of the night”
(vv. 30–34). When Ananias came to Saul of Tarsus, he urged the sinner
seeking
salvation to wait no longer to secure it: “And
now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,
calling
on his name” (22:16). The narrative implies that Saul did this very
thing.
The
immediacy and urgency of these baptismal responses in each case are
unmistakable. The preachers did not suggest any delay and the subjects
did not
request any delay for even an hour, much less a few days or until a
“special
baptismal service” a week later. The reason for such instant response
should be
equally evident. The faithful men who delivered the Gospel made it
clear to
these sinners that until they were baptized they were still in the
guilt and
condemnation of their sins, which would cause them to be lost
eternally. The
Bible therefore teaches when one should be baptized—at the earliest
moment one
learns that he is a sinner in need of salvation and that he must be
baptized in
order to receive forgiveness of his sins.
Conclusion
Baptism is
more than a ritualistic exercise. It is more than a mere point of
theological
curiosity or discussion. It is more than an optional religious act. It
is more
than a means of gaining admission to a humanly conceived and
established
religious organization. It is not an act of human merit or
righteousness.
Rather, the Bible teaches us that baptism is the very act in which the
Lord Jesus
cleanses and saves the sinner from his sins by His own blood, whereupon
He adds
him to His church, which is His depository of those who are saved (Acts
2:27–47).
Baptism,
incidentally, also serves as a test of one’s allegiance to the
authority of the
Son of God and His New Testament. It is sad beyond description that
multiplied
millions of people have stumbled and continue to stumble to their own
eternal destruction
at this simple test. I pray that none of those who read these words
will be
among those millions.
At the
beginning of this treatise, we indicated that this study would involve
what the
Bible teaches, rather than what men have taught and teach,
concerning
baptism. We will let the reader be the judge of the fulfillment of this
aim.