The Relationship of Baptism to Salvation

I have learned much since my first writing on this subject. I still believe that the content herein, while certainly not inspired, captures the truth closely. However, I reserve the right to change my view based upon further enlightenment.

I made an effort to lend a hand to those arguments that are used in disagreement. After all, the goal is to uncover the Truth, and not to invest oneself in a particular position or idea.

I would like to elaborate further on the “Thief on the Cross” argument often used to dispel the notion of baptism as requisite for salvation.

Taking the position that the thief on the cross demonstrates that baptism is unnecessary for salvation necessitates Jesus’ granting the good thief’s salvation. This is sometimes called “special dispensation”. Jesus – so the argument goes – being the God-man, granted a special, one-time dispensation to the good thief as a result of his having placed his faith in Him.

Those who reject this view do so for the following reasons. First, the Bible is clear that God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34). The idea that He allowed an exception for any individual from His stated requirements violates His word, and therefore cannot be a valid argument.

Also, basic logic requires that if God exists He must be perfect… perfectly legal and perfectly just. Suspending the rules for any person in any instant is both illegal and unjust, thus God could not have done so.

The argument of special dispensation for the good thief can be argued to violate both scripture and logic, and therefore can be argued as invalid.

A better position begins with understanding that the thief was under the Old Covenant; Jesus had not yet died for our sins. Because of this, he was required to seek forgiveness through the established sacrificial system. The Old Covenant was still intact. This is evidenced biblically by the fact that at the moment of His death, the sky grew dark, the earth shook, graves opened, and the veil of the Holy of Holy was rent from top to bottom (Mat 27:51-52; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45). All this signified the completion of Jesus’ work, and His fulfillment of the Old Covenant.

Given that it was the Passover season - the annual time when sacrifices are made for the atonement of one’s sins - the thief was required to seek atonement through the slaughter of an unblemished lamb.

Jesus was God’s own perfect sacrifice, chosen to make atonement for sin, once for all. Jesus’ sacrifice fulfilled perfectly and forever the requirement of the Law.

By believing on Jesus, the thief was in full compliance with the Law. He placed his faith in God’s chosen Lamb at the time of the sacrifice. The thief’s action was in accordance with the Law, and perfectly legal according to the Old Covenant which still retained authority at the time of his death.

The basis of Christian belief starts and ends with God’s Word: The written revelation given by God in Scripture holds ultimate authority. Every doctrinal question must be answered on the basis of Scripture. Consideration of a topic must be independent of (a) the quantity of people holding a like view; (b) the weight given to any individual’s views due to that person’s reputation or stature; (c) the length of time a particular belief has been held.

All that matters is what Scripture teaches. Just as the Bereans in Acts 17:11, we are to be “fair-minded” and “search the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so”. Our responsibility as disciples is to remain humble, thereby teachable, thus allowing the Holy Spirit to change our hearts and minds to conform to the truth of His revelation through the written Word of God.

What then, does the Bible teach concerning our salvation? Here are but a few Scriptures that speak to the matter.

We must believe on Jesus to have everlasting life. John 3:16. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

We must believe in Jesus’ resurrection and confess Him as Lord to be saved. Rom 10:9-10. 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

We must repent and be baptized for the remission of our sins. Acts 2:38. 38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

We must be believe in Jesus and be baptized to be saved. Mark 16:16. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

We must obey Jesus’ commandments for our salvation. Heb 5:9. 9 And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,

The Bible clearly indicates that the experience of salvation has many components; none of which can be taken to be exclusive. That is, if one were to say that belief is sufficient (John 3:16), what about believing and confessing (Romans 10:9-10)? The interpretation of Scripture in isolation cannot avoid direct conflicts. Clearly then, these (and other) salvation-descriptive verses cannot be taken independently. Further investigation is required to identify all the elements which make up the life-changing event we call salvation.

The verses cited above do not stand alone in indicating that the salvation experience is comprised of five key elements: Belief, Repentance, Confession, Baptism, and Obedience. The focus in this document is the relationship of baptism to the salvation experience.

The case for baptism as a requirement for salvation rests not on a single verse of suspect interpretation. On the contrary, the concept is widespread throughout the New Testament. No single conversion under the New Covenant is communicated without the inclusion of baptism. One might argue that the thief on the cross is the exception (Luke 23:43). However, Jesus had not yet died for our sins when He saved this man. Hence the thief cannot be considered as under the New Covenant written in His blood.

One other example is often cited against baptism as a requirement for salvation. Acts 10:44-48 states that Cornelius and his household experienced the Holy Spirit prior to baptism. Although a more compelling example than the thief on the cross, this account cannot be taken to conclude that the people were saved at the time the Holy Spirit fell upon them. There are other scriptural records of God’s Spirit using those outside His chosen people, or His will. For example, Balaam could not curse the children of Israel, but blessed them instead (Numbers 22-24); Saul prophesied even while trying to kill David (1Samuel 10:10-11, 18:10). The point is that God can work through the fallen or unsaved. In this encounter Peter recognizes the signs of the Holy Spirit as confirmation of the vision he had received - that God is also Savior of the Gentiles (Acts 10:34-35). It is of specific interest that his first reaction was to command that they be baptized.

Other Scriptures lend support to baptism as requisite for salvation. Acts 22:16, has Paul declaring that his baptism washed away his sins. Galatians 3:27, states that we are baptized into Christ. Romans 6:3-5, goes into length on being baptized into Christ’s death so that we can partake in newness of life. Colossians 2:11-15, is a direct allusion to baptism being our equivalent to Christ’s death and resurrection. 1 Peter 3:18-22, compares Noah’s salvation through water to ours through baptism.

One cannot get around the volume of scriptural support of water baptism as integral to salvation. The weight of material to be explained away or simply ignored is substantial.

The more fundamental argument is one of faith versus works. The current, longstanding belief is that salvation is through faith alone, and that any human work adds to the once-for-all, finished work of Christ on the cross. This belief holds that baptism is a work, and therefore cannot be requisite in salvation.

The problem with this idea lies in the fact that Jesus clearly states that belief, itself, is a work (John 6:29). Thus the “faith not works” position disqualifies even belief from salvation. Considering the idea, it is easily arguable that not just belief, but love/obedience, repentance, confession, and yes, baptism are all works, and thusly prohibited for salvation.

Clearly the “faith not works” concept is incomplete. If a person truly has free will, he must "do" something to be saved. Yet we know the finished work of Christ is sufficient (Romans 6:10, Hebrews 9:12, Jude 3). There must be something more to this than simply faith versus works.

The Bible distinguishes between works of the Law, works of the flesh, works of evil, works of(by) God, and works of Faith. After Jesus, no man can be justified by the Law (Hebrews 10:26). Similarly, works of the flesh (pride) will not save (Ephesians 2:8-9). Works of evil needs no explanation. Works of(performed by) God - the greatest being the atoning sacrifice of His Son on the cross - offer man opportunity, and man must respond (Hebrews 5:9). That leaves the concept of works of Faith.

James’ epistle includes a very direct correction regarding the relationship between faith and works. His writings demonstrate that even within the early Church there was confusion surrounding this relationship. James summarily rejects the faith-only argument (James 2:14-26). He concludes his argument in James 2:24, “You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only”. An honest reading of James cannot discount the place of works, but what kind of works?

Certainly not the works of the flesh; Paul is very clear in Ephesians 2:8-9 on this subject. Then works of faith described by James must be a different sort of work than what Paul described. James, Paul, and the writer of Hebrews use the example of the father of faith, Abraham. In Romans 4, Paul uses the faith of Abraham to show that he was justified according to his faith, not by works. But which works? The works of the Law! (Remember, Abraham lived before Moses and the Law.) Every comment by Paul on this subject was written to the Jews for the purpose of dispelling the notion that one must be under the Law (e.g. circumcision) before one can access the salvation through Christ. Paul is not discussing all works, but the specific class of “works of the Law”.

The writer of Hebrews describes a different sort of work in Hebrews 11. He uses the example of Abraham, and others. The point he makes in each example is one of faithful obedience to God. His point is that certain “works of faith” must demonstrate faith; that faith does not exist outside of the works that demonstrate it. So, the person who says he believes but does not obey does not truly believe. Hence the works of faith are one with faith, inseparable.

James 2:21 points out that Abraham was justified by a work of faith in offering Isaac on the altar. Had Abraham simply believed, and had not followed through in obedience, then his belief would have been in vain. Similarly, had Abraham concocted the idea on his own, and actually followed through with the killing, then it would have been a work of his flesh, unacceptable by God. Neither of these is the true story. The truth is that God commanded Abraham, and Abraham obeyed God. This is a work of faith accounted to him as righteousness.

In exactly the same way, baptism is a work of faith; faithful obedience to the Lord. The act of baptism alone means nothing. It is an act of faithful obedience to God, no different than that of Abraham’s. It does not add anything to the finished work of Christ; it simply allows us access to the grace that came as a result of His work (Romans 6:3; Galatians 3:27), through the washing away of our sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:18-22).

The washing away of our sins occurs as a result of our faithful obedience to the commandment of God that we should be baptized. God could have established any work of faith for this purpose. He chose baptism. Our responsibility is to perform the works of faith He has prescribed for our salvation: Believe, Repent, Confess, be Baptized, and continue in Obedience.

Does this mean that if one has been baptized under the premise that it is “an outward sign of an inward change of heart”, he must be re-baptized for the remission of his sins? When God granted me the understanding I communicated above, I could not help but consider Acts 19:1-7. Here Paul and Apollos encounter a group of disciples who had been baptized by John, but not into Jesus. Paul immediately re-baptized them. Also, I considered the idea that, just maybe, the gospel which does not include baptism as a required work of faith might be a “different gospel” (Galatians 1:6). My decision was to be re-baptized for the remission of my sins immediately upon being fully convinced of the truth. Outside of my personal conviction and decision, I leave the matter between each person and God as to what action, if any, a person ought to take.

**There goes the fabric of reality!***

Think so? In the original Greek writings there were no chapters, verses or sentence breaks. It was all run together.
Like this...
Act 19:4 ThensaidPaulJohnverilybaptizedwiththebaptismof repentancesayinguntothepeoplethattheyshouldbelieveonhim whichshouldcomeafterhimthatisonChristJesusWhentheyheard
thistheywerebaptizedinthenameoftheLordJesus.

Quite a difference, isn’t it.

Now again.
John baptized for repentance of sin, requiring a belief in Jesus.
When Jesus began to baptize people went to him. John recognized that his baptisms would decrease as Jesus’ increased.

At no time did John tell anyone to go get re baptized because Jesus’ baptism was better. At no time did Jesus demand those baptized by John get re-baptized by him.

By your doctrine all baptisms before the crucifiction were then made invalid.

At no time did Jesus ever require those baptized by his own disciples get re-baptized after the crucifiction.

***Congratulations. You have made your first step toward Catholicism. (All sins are forgiven for an adult upon their re-baptism into the Catholic Church,) although the Catholic Church recognizes the baptism of several other faiths, also.***

Even the Baptist baptism of following Christ in baptism which is not officially (in baptist doctrine) for remission of sin.

No slam on this. I’m glad to hear it. I have this hangup about being re baptized over and over.

A bit simplistic, but we’ll go with it. Keep in mind that the declinations and conjugations provided clarity of meaning. Word order and punctuation is not as important in some languages as it is in English.

Also, running the English Translation together does not constitute reconstruction of the original text. The meaning of the original has been translated, structured, ordered, and punctuated according to the understanding of the translator. Your argument fails on this account as well.

Using your theory and words:

(1) John baptized for repentance, of the sin of requiring a belief in Jesus.

(2)When Jesus began to baptize, people went to him, John, and recognized that his baptisms would decrease as did Jesus’.

Increased...

(3) ...at no time did. John would tell anyone to go get rebaptized, because Jesus’ baptism was better. At no time did Jesus demand money. Those who were baptized by John were required to get re-baptized by him.

I'm willing to trust the eminent scholars who have translated the Scriptures. I'll check one group against another, and even do some word searching on my own. However, I figure that the fine Christian linguists assembled at various times are better judges than me.

Following your train of thought, then even if Jesus did baptize the Apostles (pre-resurrection), it wouldn’t have been sufficient to add them to the Church.
I see your logic. I can’t say I agree with your premise.

Most of CoC members I have discussed this with do accept the premise that Jesus never baptized with water. In fact you are the first one I have encountered that does not. Maybe I've been lucky. :)

I would hope that you at least see the deference in the two types of water baptism. Maybe if you believe that Christ was without sin you could ask yourself what did the baptism of Christ by John do?

However if you don't believe that my premise to be true then there is no point in discussing it. I see that the thread is ready to take on the "who's the real church" turn. I have never attended a church that says it is the only church and the only way to salvation, so I have no dog in that fight. Even though I find it funny that they point to the same bible as their authority and at the same time do things like endorsing same-sex marriages.

My He give you the wisdom to complete His plan.

Most of CoC members I have discussed this with do accept the premise that Jesus never baptized with water. In fact you are the first one I have encountered that does not. Maybe I've been lucky.

I don't know that I agree or disagree with your premise. I don't see where the Scriptures say explicitly that He did baptize with water. However, it doesn't say explicitly that He didn't. Whether He did or did not is a matter of speculation. Building a doctrine on a point of speculation is sure to lead to error.

But we do know that Jesus was baptized with water. And you can ask yourself for what purpose this was done.

You should quote scripture correctly and completely if you're going to quote it. John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. "THE WORK OF GOD..." not of man.

is Baptism a work of God or man?

Mat 21:25 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?

Col 2:11 in whom ye were also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ; Col 2:12 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.

suppose I wanted to build a house and got a architect to design it> Then I got contractors to build it. Whose work would it be? Did I build my own house or not? If I have servants to serve me, and I told then go out and tell every about me. Whose work are they doing ? Their work or my work. Whose work are the disciples doing when they follow the commandments of the lord?

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Mat 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: Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.

Whoses work are they doing when they don't follow the Commandments of the Lord?

I was baptized, but it was out of submission and obedience to Jesus, not for my salvation. Do you believe that a soldier in a foxhole can't be saved, get shot, die, and have received salvation for his sins...without being dipped in water? I just don't get it. What other works do you do that makes you "good enough" to get into heaven?

Exactly...If you do a work for God, He owes you...God is become a debtor...

believe a billion Roman Catholics are very wrong about the veneration of Mary - ascribing to her the status of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix.

How many times must it be said that those two titles aren't dogmatic???

What kind of an answer is that??? It's in plenty of Catholic literature...It's taught all over the place by Catholics...I've seen the terms used numerous times here on FR...

Is saying it's not 'dogma' a way for you guys to CYA if things don't pan out??? You believe and teach it or you don't...Which is it???

Also, as an earlier poster said, if baptisim were nessessary for salvation, it would be mentioned EVERY TIME that belief is. It's not, so do we have to guess? In Christ, Wiley

Every time baptism and salvation are mention together in the same verse .Baptism is always Before salvation

Mark 16:16 “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” Acts 2:38 “Then Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’” Acts 22:16 “And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” Romans 6:4 “Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” I Peter 3:21 “There is also an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

so do we have to guess

is Baptism a work of God or man?

Man baptizes with water, God baptizes with the Holy Spirit.

You simply put too much emphasis on the symbolism of baptism. It symbolizes the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Suppose I get married but don't have a wedding ring. Am I still married? The ring SYMBOLIZES the union of the two but the two are still married even without the ring.

Wasn't I in this discussion with you the other day? God Bless you brother...you are persistent!

I think however I will move on to those around me now who don't even know Christ. I will tell them of the necessity of the shedding of His blood for the remission of my sins. I will also tell them that the act of baptism will show their obedience to Him, but the water won't do a thing for their salvation any more than rubbing beads will. (No slam intended). The baptism that I will show them is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

In Christ, Wiley

***Also, running the English Translation together does not constitute reconstruction of the original text. The meaning of the original has been translated, structured, ordered, and punctuated according to the understanding of the translator. Your argument fails on this account as well.***

Some of the English theologians of the 1880’s put quotation marks around Paul’s speech and end the quote marks ...

Quotes in their origional...

“John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
Act 19:5 When they heard [this], they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.”

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.