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.

The Roman Catholic Church is doing everything it can to make those titles dogmatic.

Co-redemptrix is a problematic title, even in Catholic circles. The above statement alone proves that it isn't worth my time debating you on the issue of veneration of Mary. Besides, it's quarter past midnight where I am. Time to go to bed. Good night, God bless.

If your interpretation is correct, then you’ll need to tell me which Scripture to follow. Shall I simply “believe”, or shall I “believe and confess”? Perhaps I should “believe and be baptized”, or “repent and be baptized”. Or, I could simply “continue in obedience”. Which of the Scriptures is correct, and which is wrong?

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.

I had it recited to me plenty in my youth. By the grace of God I began reading the Bible, and learned the truth. Now I go directly to God, and trust my Mediator, Jesus. He forgave me for the sins of my present and my youth which the mumbo-jumbo recited by Priests, and the vain, repetitive prayers I dutifully recited in “penance” couldn’t.

You do what the Church of Christ tells you to do. I'll do what Jesus tells me to do. I've been baptized. Evidently that's not good enough since I wasn't baptized in your church.

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

I've had this argument with COC people many times. You can not think on your own. Much like the Jehovah's Witnesses. You drink their KoolAid.

I'm not going to argue this any more. You and I can both send Scripture to each other defending our point. You believe what you want, I'll believe the Holy Spirit. You won't listen to me and I certainly won't listen to you. Have a good evening. In Christ, Wiley

Not sure why you’ve gotten so bent out of shape. I haven’t attacked you. Everything I’ve provided is backed up by Scripture. And I’ve raised a legitimate question about the consistency of the doctrine you’ve professed.

You said, “I’ll do what Jesus tells me to do,” and “I’ll believe the Holy Spirit”. They speak through the God-breathed Scripture. The doctrine you profess creates contradictions in the Scripture. So one of two things must be true: (1) The Scripture is in error; or (2) the doctrine is in error. Perhaps I’ve missed something. I’d be pleased to have you clear the matter up for me.

As to your baptism... I never criticized it in any way. The acceptability of it is a matter between you and God. I’ve no part in it.

As to your insults... the last bastion of a failing defense.

As to your sign-off, “In Christ, Wiley”... unconvincing after all the insults.

As to your insults... the last bastion of a failing defense.

Again, if you'd like, we can both send each other defending scripture all night long.

As to your sign-off, “In Christ, Wiley”... unconvincing after all the insults.

I did not intend to insult you. But the insult is the twisting of Scripture. I do not need your acceptance or to convince you of anything. I have the Grace of my Lord. I suggest that you continue to follow your doctrine. If that "works" for you, good. I know however that I can NEVER do anything to be good enough for Heaven so I will rely on the Grace of God. The blood of Jesus was enough for me.

Again, In Christ

As to your insults... the last bastion of a failing defense.

As a parting thought, If my words were taken as insults, I'm sorry. No excuse, but I've had a really long and expensive day. Like I said, no excuse if I sounded insulting but that is the reason.

Let's take this up on another occasion and under prayerful guidance.

In Christ, Wiley

First, it is quite clear from such passages as Acts 15 and Romans 4 that no external act is necessary for salvation Its quite clear that Jesus taught otherwise

Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Remember, not every time baptism is mentioned does it mean into water. It dose here in what more do you did to understand the truth. Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

I might also mention that many textual scholars think it unlikely that vv. 9-20 are an authentic part of Mark’s gospel. We can’t discuss here all the textual evidence that has caused many New Testament scholars to reject the passage

You are depending on too many Textual scholars. Think about it God is not mocked. Lets see what happens if we accept these Great Scholars OR idiots as I call them. Do you really in all honesty and sincerity believe that the great book of faith the Gospel of Mark would end with

Mar 16:8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulcher; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

Do you believe this or are you just grasping at straws?

I find the, “If I don’t like what it says, it probably shouldn’t be in the Bible” defense appalling. The lengths some will travel in order to preserve a false doctrine! It’s hardly worth a reply. I mean, what do they want to hear, “I agree, let’s remove it!”

The Clinton argument bothers me almost as much. This is the “It depends on what the definition of is is” - in Greek, and is applied especially to Acts 2:38, and to others as well.

Romans 12:2 — And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

The words are “STAND UP and be baptized.”

when you get baptized you are standing up then layed down immersed like a burial,then stand up again. Thats how I was Baptized for the remission of my sins.

Do you believe God can do what he wants to do, or does he have to check with you first?

Can God Lie?

Heb 6:16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Heb 6:17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: Heb 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:

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.