(More Bible Studies Available @ www.marktabata.com)
It is written:
Mark 16:16-He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
It is no secret that churches of Christ are often frowned upon by our religious neighbors for teaching that baptism (immersion in water) is part of God’s plan of salvation. Through the years, I have been called a “water dog” by sectarian disciples and preachers for my adherence to the Lord’s truth regarding this subject.
Recently, I was blessed to engage in Bible study with some Facebook friends on this topic. I would like to share their arguments with you here in this study, along with an analysis of these arguments.
Let’s study.
Can’t Understand The Bible?
The first argument that was made against the Bible teaching on baptism was that we cannot rely on logic and the Bible in trying to understand what the Bible teaches. I was informed that a person cannot properly understand the Bible without some kind of special help from the Spirit of God. As such, when confronted with the fact that every passage in the New Testament which mentions both baptism and salvation has baptism preceding salvation (cf. Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:16; John 3:5; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Romans 6:3-4; Galatians 3:26-27; Ephesians 5:26; Colossians 2:12-14; Titus 3:3-7; Hebrews 10:22; 1 Peter 3:20-21), my friends scrambled to explain that the Lord was telling them something which was different than what the Bible actually says. They claimed that the Holy Spirit was giving them a message that the Bible couldn’t, because we can’t really understand the Bible.
Of course, this claim undeniably smacks at God. How can an all-powerful and an all-knowing God not have the ability to communicate His will to mankind in a way that it can be understood? Simple reasoning shows that this is not a valid argument.
However, the Bible itself reminds us that God is able to communicate in a way that can be understood.
Jeremiah 10:23-O LORD, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps.
Jeremiah 32:17-‘Ah, Lord GOD! Behold, You have made the heavens and the earth by Your great power and outstretched arm. There is nothing too hard for You.
2 Corinthians 1:13-For we are not writing any other things to you than what you read or understand. Now I trust you will understand, even to the end.
Some things in God’s Word are difficult to understand, and there are some things that we will not understand perfectly in-depth.
2 Peter 3:14-16-Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
Notice that Peter tells us that some things are hard to understand in God’s Word (hard to understand, not impossible). He also points out that some who are “untaught and unstable” twist the Scriptures to their own destruction. This speaks to the fact that God’s Word may certainly be understood, but it will require study and care.
Is this not what Paul teaches us also?
Writing to our brothers and sisters at Ephesus, Paul wrote about the fact that God had revealed His Word to him. Then Paul tells us::
Ephesians 3:3-4-how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ),
Wow!
Through studying (“reading”) what the Bible says, we can have the same understanding as the Apostles of Jesus Himself.
Again, Paul wrote these words to Timothy:
2 Timothy 2:7 (Amplified)-Think over these things I am saying [understand them and grasp their application], for the Lord will grant you full insight and understanding in everything.
It is through diligent studying of God’s Word that the Lord will help us to understand the Scriptures.
“Imperative, urges Timothy to “consider,” i.e., to contemplatively “think over” this series of analogies (represented by the relative pronoun noun o; see NA26 on the variant reading a) that Paul has just finished “saying” (Xey(o, a graphic first person singular present tense verb). Paul urges such contemplation “because” (as the TEV appropriately renders y&Q) he is confident that “the Lord will give understanding” (cf. Mk. 4:11 par. Mt. 13:11/Lk. 8:10).” (George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles (New International Greek Testament Commentary (NIGTC)), 6634-6638 (Kindle Edition): Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company)
Again, we are reminded throughout the Bible that God expects us use reasoning and logic when diligently studying His Word.
Isaiah 1:18-Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the LORD, “Though your sins are like scarlet, They shall be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They shall be as wool.
Isaiah 41:21-Present your case,” says the LORD. “Bring forth your strong reasons,” says the King of Jacob.
John 6:44-45-No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, ‘AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT BY GOD.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.
We are told throughout the Book of Acts that Paul and the Christians “reasoned” with their neighbors.
Acts 17:2-Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures,
Acts 17:17-Therefore he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers, and in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there.
Acts 18:4-And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded both Jews and Greeks.
Acts 18:19-And he came to Ephesus, and left them there; but he himself entered the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews.
Acts 19:8-9-But when some were hardened and did not believe, but spoke evil of the Way before the multitude, he departed from them and withdrew the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus. 10 And this continued for two years, so that all who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.
The word translated here is dialegomai. It is a word that strongly urges the use of logic and reason.
“dialegomai means “to reason, argue, prove, persuade…If we are to emulate Paul’s preaching and teaching, we must do much more than just talk. dialegomai involves preaching and teaching that harnesses reason and logic into a defensive and positive exposition of God’s Word to persuade and edify.” (William D. Mounce (General Editor, Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, 1103 (Kindle Edition); Grand Rapids, Michigan; Zondervan)
Interestingly enough, it also has the idea of defense against opposition.
“dialegomai (διαλέγομαι, 1256) primarily denotes “to ponder, resolve in one’s mind” (dia, “through,” legō, “to say”); then, “to converse, dispute, discuss, discourse with”; most frequently, “to reason or dispute with.”” (W.E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words: With Topical Index (Word Study), 504 (Kindle Edition): Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc.)
The fact that so many in our day and age misuse and misinterpret the Scriptures is not an argument against the Scriptures: it is an argument against faulty methods of interpretation. What we need to do is seek to properly translate the Bible. This takes time, study, dedication, and especially humility.
Don’t Listen To Anything The Church Of Christ Says?
Another person explained that he nearly ended our study when he found out that I am a member of the church of Christ. He explained his belief that the church of Christ is a cult. Of course, this is not a new charge. It has often been the case that Christians have been called a cult.
Acts 28:22-But we desire to hear from you what you think; for concerning this sect, we know that it is spoken against everywhere.”
Acts 28:22 (Remedy)-We would like to hear what you have to say, because this cult is becoming so popular that people everywhere are talking about it.”
It is thus claimed that the church of Christ teaching regarding baptism and it’s essentially in the plan of salvation is not to be accepted since the churches of Christ are the ones proclaiming this!
First of all, the church of Christ is not a cult. Members of the church of Christ can sit down and reason with anyone from the Bible why we believe and practice as we do (1 Peter 3:15). Furthermore, as a member of the church of Christ, if I find something in God’s Word that contradicts a previously held position or practice. I will change my stance on that subject. Second, the simple truth is that every passage in the New Testament which mentions baptism and salvation places baptism before salvation (as noted previously). It is the Bible teaching these things, and the church of Christ is simply repeating what the Bible says! Third, the understanding that baptism is part of the plan of salvation was recognized by the early Christians. Notice a few quotations which establish this beyond doubt (from David W. Bercot, Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs, 2160-2190 (Kindle Edition): Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers Marketing, LLC)
“Blessed are they who, placing their trust in the cross, have gone down into the water. . . . We indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement. However, we come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and the trust in Jesus in our spirit. Barnabas (c. 70–130, E), 1.144.
“He was born and baptized so that by His passion He could purify the water.” Ignatius (c. 105, E), 1.57.
“I heard, sir, some teachers maintain that there is no other repentance than that which takes place, when we descended into the water and received remission of our former sins.” Hermas (c. 150, W), 2.22.
“Before a man bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead. But when he receives the seal, he lays aside his deadness and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water. They descend into the water dead, and they arise alive.” Hermas (c. 150, W), 2.49.
“At our birth, we were born without our own knowledge or choice, but by our parents coming together. . . . In order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe. . . . And in the name of Jesus Christ . . . and in the name of the Holy Spirit.” Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.183.
“This washing of repentance and knowledge of God has been ordained on account of the transgression of God’s people, as Isaiah cries. Accordingly, we have believed and testify that the very baptism which he announced is alone able to purify those who have repented. And this is the water of life. . . . For what is the use of that baptism which cleanses only the flesh and body? Baptize the soul from wrath and from covetousness, from envy, and from hatred.” Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.201.
“We who have approached God through Him have received, not carnal, but spiritual circumcision, which Enoch and those like him observed. And we have received it through baptism by God’s mercy, since we were sinners. And all men alike may obtain it.” Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.216.
“But there is no other [way] than this: to become acquainted with this Christ; to be washed in the fountain spoken of by Isaiah for the remission of sins; and for the rest, to live sinless lives.” Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.217.
“Christ has redeemed us by being crucified on the tree and by purifying us with water.” Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.242.
“The things proceeding from the waters were blessed by God, that this also could be a sign of men being destined to receive repentance and remission of sins, through the water and bath of regeneration—as many as come to the truth and are born again.” Theophilus (c. 180, E), 2.101.
“When we come to refute them [the Gnostics], we will show in its proper place that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God. Thus, they have renounced the whole faith. . . . For the baptism instituted by the visible Jesus was for the remission of sins.” Irenaeus (c. 180, E/ W), 1.346.
“But there are some of them [Gnostics] who assert that it is unnecessary to bring persons to the water. Rather, they mix oil and water together, and they place this mixture on the heads of those who are to be initiated. . . . This they maintain to be the redemption. . . . Other [heretics], however, reject all these practices, and maintain that the mystery of the unspeakable and invisible power should not be performed by visible and corruptible creatures. . . .These claim that the knowledge of the unspeakable Greatness is itself perfect redemption.” Irenaeus (c. 180, E/ W), 1.346.”
These quotations could be easily and greatly multiplied. The only ones in the early church who denied that baptism was part of the plan of salvation were the Gnostics, those who tried to combine the Bible with pagan Greek teaching.
It was also claimed that the church of Christ is a denomination, confusing the church of Christ with the American Restoration Movement. This is another misunderstanding and slander against members of the churches of Christ. The church that Jesus built (Matthew 16:18) is reproduced when the Word of God is planted and in good and honest hearts (Luke 8:11; Matthew 13:19). When the Word of God is thus preached and taught without denominational creeds and dogma, it just brings forth the church of Christ (just like an apple seed produces nothing but an apple tree). The American Restoration Movement was an attempt by sincere followers of Jesus Christ from many denominational bodies to get rid of human creeds and traditions and return to the pure and simple New Testament Christianity. There have been many of these Restoration Movements throughout time!
“Would you say the current state of affairs is a mockery of what Jesus wanted? About 200 years ago, it appeared to be so for a few brave men and women of different denominational affiliations. They concluded that more was needed than reformation. What they sought to do was to divorce themselves from any and all creeds and restore Christianity according to the pattern laid out in the Bible. Thus was born the Restoration Movement. The efforts to restore soon developed into a mass movement of people toward this noble and worthy goal. They no longer followed human creeds but only two guiding principles: WHERE THE BIBLE SPEAKS, WE SPEAK! WHERE THE BIBLE IS SILENT, WE ARE SILENT!” (Calvin Fields, 10,000 Faces of Christianity, 9175-9183 (Kindle Edition): Xulon Press)
I am thankful, humbled, honored, and proud to be a member of the church of Christ. We are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but we are doing our best to seek out and follow God’s Word.
Holy Spirit Baptism?
Another argument made against Jesus’ words in Mark 16:16 were that the Lord is discussing Holy Spirit baptism.
First, whether Jesus is talking about water baptism or Holy Spirit baptism in this passage, makes little difference to the matter we are discussing. My contention is that baptism precedes salvation! Whatever baptism Mark 16:16 is discussing, it is essential to salvation! Second, that Mark 16:16 is not discussing Holy Spirit baptism is evident from the fact that this passage is parallel to Jesus’ words in Matthew 28:19, where the baptism there is done by disciples of Christ. However, only Jesus can baptize people in the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33). Therefore the baptism of Mark 16:16 is not Holy Spirit baptism. Third, the purpose of Holy Spirit baptism was to miraculously reveal and confirm God’s Word to mankind (cf. John 14:26; 16:13; Acts 2:1-4; 10:44-46). It has nothing to do with saving someone from sin. Yet the baptism of Mark 16:16 has to do with the salvation of the sinner, showing that it is water baptism. Fourth, the baptism of Mark 16:16 is for “every creature” from “all the world.” But Holy Spirit baptism was not for every person, but only for a select few. Notice that in Acts 1:15 we are told that there were more than 120 believers gathered together on Pentecost along with the Apostles of Christ, yet Acts 2:1-4 shows that the Holy Spirit baptism only fell on the Apostles. The only other examples of this phenomenon are on the household of Cornelius (Acts 10), and those upon whom the Apostles laid their hands (Acts 6:1-6; 8:14-19; 19:1-6; Romans 1:11; 2 Timothy 1:6). Finally, Paul says in Ephesians 4:1-6 that there is only one baptism that all believers share in. If Holy Spirit baptism was for every disciple, then this would make sense: for in addition to Holy Spirit baptism, there is clearly water baptism as well (cf. Acts 8:35-38; 10:47-48). The “one baptism” that will last till “the end of the age” is water baptism (Matthew 28:19). When we read of baptism passages in the New Testament, we should automatically assume that it is reference water baptism (unless context demands otherwise), since water baptism was commonly used by Jews, pagans, and Christians.
“Although the verb “baptize” can have a metaphorical use, the context usually gives a clear indication of this. Without such an indication, the ordinary use of the word at the time in Jewish and Christian circles for the religious immersion of a person in water should be assumed.” (Everett Ferguson, Baptism In The Early Church: History, Theology, And Liturgy In The First Five Centuries, 3243 (Kindle Edition); Grand Rapids, Michigan; William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company)
Ferguson has this in footnote 488:
“Cf. Albrecht Oepke, “βἀπτω, βαπτἰζω (et al.),” in Gerhard Kittel, ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, tr. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), Vol. 1, pp. 539-540, that βαπτἰζειν meant technically “to baptize in water” so it was unnecessary to specify the medium. Cf. Gerard-Henry Baudry, Le baptême et ses symboles: Aux sources du salut (Paris: Beauchesne, 2001), p. 5, that “baptize in water” is a pleonasm.” (Everett Ferguson, Baptism In The Early Church: History, Theology, And Liturgy In The First Five Centuries, 22259-22265 (Kindle Edition); Grand Rapids, Michigan; William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company)
Holy Spirit baptism was for a specific time, for a specific group of people, for specific purposes which have been fulfilled and accomplished.
Why Didn’t Jesus Say “And Is Not Baptized” At The End Of Mark 16:16?
Others argued that if Jesus was trying to teach the essentiality of baptism in Mark 16:16, He should have worded the last part of the verse differently:
Jesus (Mark 16:16): He who believes and is baptized will be saved: but he who does not believe will be condemned.
Proposed Translation: He who believes and is baptized will be saved: but he who does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned.
It is thus claimed that since Jesus did not speak this way, then baptism really is not essential to salvation.
First, the first part of the verse is not nullified by the second part of the verse. Jesus clearly places belief and baptism before salvation, and nothing changes that. Second, the reason why Jesus did not word the statement this way is obvious. If someone did not believe in Jesus, would they then go ahead and baptized? Of course not! Consider some parallel statements. “He who eats his food and digests it will live: but he who does not eat will starve.” Isn’t that simple? Again: “he who comes to the door and knocks will be welcomed in: but he who does not come to the door will remain outside.” Wouldn’t it be silly to say, “whoever does not come to the door and does not knock at the door he doesn’t approach will be kept outside?” Of course! Very simply: if one wants to be saved, he must believe and be baptized: if he does not believe, he is condemned.
The “Water” Of John 3:5 Is Water From The Womb And Physical Birth Not Baptism
John 3:5-Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
It was argued claimed that the “water” in this verse is talking about physical birth, not baptism. Since the “new birth” of this passage is necessary for a person to enter into the kingdom of God, some were very desperate to give the impression that this could not be a reference to baptism!
First, the context of John 3 shows that the word “water” was used to have reference to the waters of baptism (cf. John 3:23). Second, there was already a phrase used by the Jewish people to reference physical birth, i.e., “born of the flesh.” Jesus used that phrase Himself in this passage! Third, the language of being “born again” and similar phraseology was used by the Jewish people of the first century to reference water baptism!
“Gentiles were never allowed entrance to the mikveh except during the process of conversion. This was an exclusively Jewish ordinance. It is often assumed that when a person wanted to become a proselyte, a convert to Judaism, that he would be circumcised and viewed as a convert from that point on. Such is not the case. To become “children of the covenant,” “perfect Israelites,” and Israelite in every respect, both as regarded duties and privileges, three things were required for the admission of such proselytes: Circumcision (Milah) Baptism (Tebhilah) in a Mikveh Sacrifice (Qorban); in the case of women, baptism and sacrifice109…“As he stepped out of these waters he was considered as “born anew”–in the language of the rabbis, as if he were “a little child just born” (Yeb. 22a; 48b; 97b), as “a child of one day” (Mass. Ger. C. ii).” (Dr. Barry Fike, Mikveh: Jewish Ritual Immersion and Christian Baptism, 64-65 (Kindle Edition): Tustin, CA: Trilogy Christian Publishers)
Fourth, the Christians of nearly the entire history of the church have understood the water of John 3:5 to be a reference to baptism. The idea that the passage is talking about physical birth is a recent interpretation! Ferguson points out:
“The most important text in John for Christian baptism is John 3: 3 and 5, “Except one is begotten from above [or, again, ἄνωθεν], that person cannot see the kingdom of God. . . . Except one is begotten of water and Spirit [ἐξ ὕδατoς καì πνεύματoς], that person cannot enter the kingdom of God.” 476 The usual translation is “born,” probably because of Nicodemus’s misunderstanding in verse 4. But if we take the ambiguous ἄνωθεν as “from above” (its meaning in 3: 31 and 19: 11) and follow the emphasis on the Spirit in verses 6-12 (esp. v. 8), then Jesus’ statements concern primarily the divine begetting, not the human rebirth, although the latter would be implicit even if not explicit. 477 God gives new life through the Spirit (6: 63) in the water. 478 John 3: 5 became the most cited baptismal text in the second century and continued to be important afterward. Despite the overwhelming historical and majority contemporary consensus, there have been insistent efforts to remove John 3: 5 from the dossier of baptismal texts….The preposition “of ” governs both water and Spirit; the birth has a water-Spirit source, forming a conceptual unity. There is only one birth, not two.” (Everett Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries: History, Theology and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries, 3138-3156 (Kindle Edition, emphasis added); Grand Rapids, Michigan; William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company)
Another researcher notes:
“But, for the purpose of, if possible, a still higher degree of assurance, I will cite the opinions of several persons and parties, viz.: “Alford’s Greek Testament,” page 643, “There can be no doubt, on any honest interpretation of the words, that ‘born of water’ (Genne thanai ex hudatos) refers to the token or outward sign of baptism—ek pneumatos to the thing signified, or inward grace of the Holy Spirit. All attempts to get rid of these two plain facts have sprung from doctrinal prejudices, by which the views of expositors have been warped.” Alford thinks there can be no doubt but that doctrinal prejudices, by which expositors have been warped, explain how anyone could interpret the “plain words, born of water,” otherwise than as referring to water baptism. Any other interpretation, he supposes, is hardly an honest one. When we come to consider the character and standing of this witness, and the unequivocal* character and dogmatic style of his testimony, it is not easy to see how any greater assurance could be had from any uninspired testimony. Again, as proof that water baptism is to be understood by the phrase, “born of water,” in this verse, I read from Dr. Wall, “History of Infant Baptism,” Vol. I., 43. I quote from the Oxford edition, University press, 1862: “And thirdly, because we see by it that they understood that rule of our Savior, Except one be regenerated (or born again) of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, of water baptism; … And so did all the writers of these 400 years, not one man excepted.” At this point Wall is commenting upon the writings of Justin Martyr, who wrote about the middle of the 2nd century. On the high authority of Dr. Wall we are assured that for 400 years of the first years of Christianity not one man denied that ‘‘ born of water,” signified water baptism. On page 92, same vol., in commenting on the writings of Cyprian, and in regard to the words, born of water, Dr. Wall says: “There is not any one Christian writer of any antiquity, in any language, but what understands it of baptism. And if it be not so understood, it is difficult to give an account how a person is born of water any more than born of wood.” This is plain and stands as a historical statement unchallenged since the days of Justin Martyr, A. D. 140, till, comparatively, but a few years ago. There is, perhaps, no important text of the scriptures in regard to which there has been so little dispute as in regard to the phrase, “born of water,” in John 3: 5, until quite recently. And even since opposition to the plain sense of the passage has come up, it has been, as Dr. Wall says: on account of doctrinal prejudices of commentators, expositors, etc. It looks as though, in the light of such testimony, nothing further need be said. But to the testimony now before us on this point, I add as follows: Bengel says, “born of water” means baptism; Moses Stuart says it means baptism; Albert Barnes says the same; John Wesley says it means baptism; Bloomfield says the same; The Methodist Discipline takes the same view; the Presbyterian Confession of faith quotes it as signifying baptism, and so does the Episcopal prayer-book. If the citation of authorities may be allowed to establish, as correct, an interpretation of a scripture, the meaning of this passage is settled by the foregoing, especially as it should, and may be truthfully added that this list of illustrious names might be easily increased to many hundreds, with but few and feeble dissenters of very recent date.” (L.B. Wilkes, Designs of Christian Baptism, 100-102 (Kindle Edition): Charleston, AR: Cobb Publishing)
John 3:5-like every passage does in the New Testament which mentions baptism-places baptism before salvation.
Cornelius Household Received Holy Spirit Baptism Before Water Baptism So They Must Have Been Saved Before Baptism?
Another person argued that the reception of Holy Spirit baptism by Cornelius and his household before water baptism shows that they must have been saved before their baptism in water (Acts 10:44-48).
First, Peter tells us specifically why the household of Cornelius received Holy Spirit baptism. It was to show the Jewish Christians that the Gospel could now be preached to the Gentiles!
Acts 11:14-18-who will tell you words by which you and all your household will be saved.’ 15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, ‘John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?” 18 When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.”
The reception of Holy Spirit baptism here for Cornelius and his household was not to save them, but to demonstrate to Peter and the other Jewish believers that it was time to start preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles. As such, they were baptized immediately.
Second, notice that their baptism in water was that baptism which had been authorized by the Lord Jesus.
Acts 10:47-48-Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
What was the baptism which Jesus authorized? It was the baptism of the Great Commission (Mark 16:16). As such, Cornelius and his household were not saved from their sin until they were baptized in water, as is true for every disciple of Christ.
Deathbed Conversions Like The Thief On The Cross And People Who Don’t Have Water?
Another asked about the thief on the cross, and those who may not have opportunity or water to be baptized.
Jesus told the thief on the cross:
Luke 23:43-And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”
First, whether or not the thief on the cross was baptized with the baptism of John is unknown. There is not enough evidence for us to know with absolute confidence. However, the weight of the evidence suggests that he was baptized with John’s baptism. Notice that we are told John preached all through the area of Judaea and people from all over the local regions came to be baptized by him (Matthew 3:5-6; Mark 1:4-5). His preaching focused especially on the Messiah and the coming kingdom (Matthew 3:2), which is specifically what the thief on the cross mentions to Jesus, implying he had learned something about the Lord and His kingdom before his crucifixion (Luke 23:40-42). Second, whether or not the thief was baptized with the baptism of John, we know that he was not baptized with the baptism of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20; Mark 16:15-16). The baptism of the Great Commission was not issued until long after both he and Jesus had died! He had no more command to be baptized with Great Commission than anyone else who lived before the Great Commission! Third, the thief lived and died under the Old Testament Law (Hebrews 9:16-17). Under the Old Law, thieves were required to make full restitution of what they had stolen and offer specific sacrifices before they could be forgiven (Leviticus 6-7). The thief on the cross was not able to do these things, yet the Lord showed him mercy! This tells me that in situations where a person is on their deathbed and wants to be baptized and is hindered, or is unable to be baptized for whatever reason, the Lord will take these circumstances into account. I don’t know how He will judge: that is His business. But this tells me even more that we should not put off for tomorrow what we can do today!
To be honest, I believe that this argument does not hold “much” water (pun intended). I am not denying that there are circumstances where a person cannot be baptized. I have worked with individuals who wanted to be baptized, but their families kept them from it. Also, I have known some ministers who were denied administering baptism to believers by authorities in local jails. I have even been acquainted with a person who was on his way to be baptized and died when his toe hit the water in the baptistery.
However, I have known some who have been baptized in extremely difficult circumstances. An example comes to mind of a good friend who was studying with someone in a nursing home. The gentleman wanted to be baptized, but the nursing home for whatever reason did not grant permission for this to be done. My friend rented a van, got some friends to assist him, rented a pool at a local motel, and transported and baptized the gentleman into Christ!
If there are circumstances where a person is unable to obey the command to be baptized, God will take care of that. All the more reason to obey Him now!
Baptized Because Your Sins Have Already Been Washed Away?
In Acts 9:1-11, we read of how Saul (later known as the Apostle Paul) became a believer in Jesus, repented of his, and was praying for three days and nights. At the end of this, Ananias told Paul what he must do:
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.’
It was argued by some in this exchange that baptism was done for Paul to show that his sins had already been washed away.
First, notice the passage is clear that the Apostle was urgently commanded to be baptized. It is also interesting to notice that the phrase “why are you waiting” denotes urgency. It was a phrase used in the Jewish Apocrypha to denote acting immediately (cf. 4 Maccabees 6:23; 9:1). There was no delay-Saul needed to get baptized into Christ immediately! Second, notice that the command to get baptized was a direct reference to water baptism. We see this for at least two reasons. The baptism here is a command to be obeyed. Only water baptism is a command that one can be obeyed (cf. Acts 10:47-48). Holy Spirit baptism was a promise to be received, not a command to be obeyed (cf. Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:4-5). Further, the word that is used here for “wash” is the same word that was used by a first Jewish historian, Josephus, to describe washing through the act of baptism (Josephus, Against Apion 2.24.203; 2.23.198; Antiquities Of The Jews 3.263; 3.11.4.; cf. Everett Ferguson, Baptism In The Early Church: History, Theology, And Liturgy In The First Five Centuries: History, Theology, And Liturgy In The First Five Centuries, 21258 Footnotes 149 and 150, (Kindle Edition); Grand Rapids, Michigan; William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company) Third, notice that the text uses the middle voice. The middle voice suggests action that one prescribes for oneself, reminding us again that this baptism is personally chosen. This implicitly forbids infant baptism. Fourth, consider what the passage teaches us about the connection between being baptized and washing away sins.
“ ‘Why wait any longer,’ Ananias asks. ‘You believe in Jesus as the Christ (proof of Paul’s belief is found in that he is not carrying out his intended persecution); you have repented of your sins (three days in prayer and fasting). You are a suitable candidate for baptism. Why wait any longer to receive forgiveness of your sins?’ “Be baptized” literally means “cause yourself to be baptized,” i.e., allow someone to dip you (i.e., the verb is middle voice in the Greek). Baptism is connected with the washing away of sins. This verse is strongly indicative of the fact that a person’s sins are not forgiven in God’s mind until the time that person is obedient in baptism. A person’s sins are washed away (forgiven), not previous to, but at the time of baptism. Here is further evidence, were it needed, that Paul was not saved on the Damascus road, for a person is not saved until his sins are forgiven. Paul still had his sins, three days after his Damascus road experience, as is evident from the fact that Ananias is here telling him how to have them now forgiven.” (Gareth Reese, Acts: A Critical And Exegetical Commentary, 9991-9998 (Kindle Edition): Moberly, Missouri: Scripture Exposition Books LLC)
The text is absolutely clear regarding “baptism” and “washing away of sins.”
“Ananias asks Paul to complete four actions. (1) Paul must “get up” (v. 10), i.e., take action in obedience to God’s directives. (2) He must “be immersed” in water (βάπτισαι), i.e., express repentance of sins, the need for cleansing, and confidence in God’s provision of forgiveness by immersion in water (see 1: 5; 2: 38). (3) He must “wash away” (ἀπόλουσαι) his sins; i.e., he is in need of God’s forgiveness, in particular of his rejection of Jesus and his actions as persecutor of Jesus’ followers. The metaphor of “washing away” connects with the reference to immersion, for in Jewish culture, immersion in water symbolized the cleansing from sins. (4) He must “call on” (ἐπικαλεσάμενος) the name of Jesus, i.e., invoke the name of Jesus as he is immersed in water, trusting that God now forgives sins through Jesus, his Righteous One (see on 2: 38; 3: 6, 16).” (Eckhard J. Schnabel, Acts (Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament Book 5), 1344 (Kindle Edition); Grand Rapids, Michigan; Zondervan)
Speaking of the Greek grammar, Collins quotes from Jackson (who refers to renowned scholar Lenski regarding the matter):
“So, be baptized and wash away your sins are both aorist imperatives. Whenever the aorist tense is used together with the imperative mood, it indicates a great urgency for this command to be carried out. So the emphasis is on being baptized. As Wayne Jackson pointed out, calling on the name of the Lord is an aorist participle, and it is closely associated with the aorist imperatives be baptized and wash away your sins. So, it is grammatically possible that submitting yourself to baptism is to call on the name of the Lord. Now, let’s dig a little deeper and find out what else God’s Word says about calling on the name of the Lord. On the day of Pentecost, Peter quotes Joel and said: “And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved” (Acts 2: 21). First, when the people heard this saying, they did not get the idea that all they had to do was ask Jesus into their heart. Instead, they asked Peter what they must do (Acts 2: 37). Peter let them know that calling on the name of the Lord included repentance and baptism (Acts 2: 38). Once again, this shows calling on the name of the Lord is associated with being baptized, and it is more than just invoking His name or asking Him into the heart to be saved. Jesus made it clear that it takes more than a verbal plea such as, “Lord, Lord,” to be saved because a person must obey the Father’s will (Mt. 7: 21; Lk. 6: 46). So, calling on the name of the Lord includes obeying the gospel (Rom. 10: 13-16). Since calling on the name of the Lord, which includes baptism, is necessary to be saved, it proves that Saul was not saved at this point in his conversion because Ananias told him to call on the name of the Lord. Of course there are other verses that teach that baptism is necessary to be saved as well (Mk. 16: 16; 1 Pet. 3: 21). Finally, notice what Paul tells the Corinthians: And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God (1 Cor. 6: 11). Paul used the same word washed as Ananias did in Acts 22: 16. He had just finished naming many sins that would keep a person from going to heaven. Then he lets the Corinthians know that they used to be guilty of those sins, but they had been washed, sanctified, and justified. In other words, their sins had been washed away, just like Saul’s would be washed away when he submitted himself to baptism. The word wash means to “wash off or away” (Thayer). When we think about washing off, we think about water and soap. Understanding this simple word should make us think about the water that we are baptized in and how Jesus’ blood is the cleansing soap that removes the stain of sin from our souls (Rev. 1: 5). There is nothing magical about the water; it is simply the place that God has designated where we will come in contact with the cleansing power of Jesus’ blood. We know this is true by our faith in the working of God (Col. 2: 12). It is difficult to understand how anyone could associate a verbal plea, or saying “the sinner’s prayer” with the word wash. Both 1 Corinthians 6: 11 and Acts 22: 16 are talking about the same thing, which means our sins are washed away when we are baptized in water in the name of Jesus for the remission of our sins. It is also interesting that this washing was done “in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God” because it fits perfectly with The Great Commission (Mt. 28: 19) and with what Peter taught on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2: 38). We can see this idea of washing in several other passages as well (Heb. 10: 22; Eph. 5: 26; Titus 3: 5). Notice what Thayer says about our two verses: … 1 Cor. 6: 11 … Acts 22: 16. For the sinner is unclean, polluted as it were by the filth of his sins. Whoever obtains remission of sins has his sins put, so to speak, out of God’s sight is cleansed from them in the sight of God. Remission is (represented as) obtained by undergoing baptism; hence, those who have gone down into the baptismal bath (lavacrum, cf. Titus 3: 5; Eph. 5: 26) are said to have washed themselves, or to have washed away their sins, i. e. to have been cleansed from their sins. There should be no doubt for those who examine Saul’s conversion with an honest heart that baptism is essential for salvation and it is the point at which a person’s sins are washed away.” (Cougan Collins, IS BAPTISM NECESSARY FOR SALVATION?, 1325-1375 (Kindle Edition); Lone Grove, OK)
Baptism Invalid?
Another person asked if a misunderstanding of baptism invalidates baptism. We must remember that nearly every reference in the Epistles baptism was written those those who either needed further education about baptism or who had misunderstood some important fact about baptism. In every case, the Christians were still affirmed as being saved and members of Christ’s church (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:14; Galatians 1;1-4; Colossians 1:13; 1 Peter 2:9). The minimum knowledge of what a person must know in order to be saved is shown in Acts 8:37: understanding the atoning death of Jesus, His burial, and resurrection on the third day (Isaiah 53: 1 Corinthians 15:1-8) and repentance from sin (cf. Luke 6:46).
With that being said, there is so much false teaching about baptism in the religious world that I urge my denominational friends who have been baptized to consider being rebaptized when they learn these things. In truth, most want to before I make the suggestion! If they choose not to, that is between them and God (Romans 14: James 4:12).
Conclusion
As this conversation demonstrates, there are many reasons given by people who reject the Word of God. Yet none of these arguments and quibbles justifies refusing what God’s Word teaches about the connection between baptism and salvation! Let it be understood that
Friends, if you have not believed in Jesus, repented of your sins, and been baptized into Christ, why not do so today?
The churches of Christ stand ready to assist you!
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen.