Foolish Preaching About Baptism
There are many people who think that "baptism is not essential to salvation." They think that salvation is by faith only, and that baptism has nothing to do with it. It is a shame that so many preachers have misrepresented the teachings of the Bible on this important subject. Most preachers who say that baptism is not essential to salvation read passages in the Bible that say nothing about baptism and say, "See, there it is." But you can't learn what the Bible teaches about baptism, unless you read the verses where the Bible mentions the subject. You can't prove that baptism is not essential to salvation by proving that faith is. You can't prove that baptism is not essential to salvation by proving that repentance is The only way to learn what the Bible has to say about baptism and salvation is to read the passages that mention baptism.
In my files, there is a copy of a church bulletin giving the sermon outline used by a certain Baptist preacher. He denies that baptism is essential to salvation, but wears the name "Baptist." In this particular bulletin, he gives his outline on "The Doctrine of Baptism." He quotes from some creed that says, "Christian Baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The act is a symbol of our faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour. It is prerequisite to the privileges of a church relation and to the Lord's Supper. Baptism is not a saving act, but it symbolizes the fact that we have already been saved by a personal trust in the Lord Jesus and that we have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit." He was preaching a series of sermons on his Declaration of Faith, and this was one of the sermons in that series. He explains what his denomination believes on the subject of baptism.
In the course of this sermon, this Baptist preacher said, "Baptism will not save anyone: The three scriptures most used by the advocates of baptism for salvation, do not teach that one must be baptized in order to be saved." Yes, that is what he said. He sets himself over against God. God inspired the writers of the New Testament to teach baptism for the remission of sins, but this Baptist preacher opposes God. I challenged him for a public, honorable discussion of his position on this subject, but he even refused to answer my letter. He was brave when he knew that nobody could reply to his "foolish preaching," but he was not so brave when he was given the opportunity to let an audience hear both sides of the controversy. He knew that he had everything to lose and nothing to gain, because his people would learn the truth and forsake sectarianism.
After making the above statement, he turned first to Acts 2:38. His outline says, "Acts 2:38, which teaches that one is to be baptized in view of the fact that his sins have already been forgiven by trusting in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ." Let me kindly tell you good people that his statement is not true. It is contrary to the truth. It is false doctrine. What did Peter actually say? "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" (ASV). The King James Version says, "for the remission of your sins." Peter does not say, "repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ because you are already saved." He says do it "for the remission of sins," or "unto the remission of sins."
These preachers who think that one is to be baptized because he is already saved will admit that one must repent to be saved. But, in Acts 2:38 they have repentance "for the remission of sins," and have baptism "because you are already saved." But, whatever repentance is "for" baptism is "for." They are both "for" the same thing, and that is "for the remission of sins." When a preacher denies that the word "for" in Acts 2:38 means "for," he is also denying that one must repent in order to be saved.
"For" means "for" and not "because of." When you send little Johnny to the store "for" a loaf of bread, you don't send him "because" you already have the loaf of bread. There is not a single translation of the New Testament that translates the "for" in Acts 2:38 as "because of." All translate it "for, to or toward, end toward which, unto, with a view to, in order to, in order to receive, etc." No reputable translation of the book of Acts translates the word "because of." This indicates that those who claim that Acts 2:38 teaches that we are to be baptized "because we have already been saved" are guilty of perverting the Word of God.
In the International Critical Commentary on Galatians, Ernest DeWitt Burton says, "The proposition eis with baptizo signifies (a) literally and spatially "into," followed by the element into which one is plunged: Mk. 1:9; Cf. 1:8a; (b) "unto" in the telic sense, "in order to obtain": Acts 218; (c) followed by onoma, "with respect to," specifically, "with mention or confession of": I Cor. 1:13,15; Matt. 28:19; Acts 8:16; 19:5; with similar force but without the use of onoma Acts 19:3." Notice the testimony of scholarship on the passage in question. Burton says the word translated "for" in the King James Version is here used "in the telic sense," and gives a translation of what he means by telic sense, "in order to obtain." His testimony can be found at the bottom of page 204 in his commentary, and serves to further demonstrate the "foolish preaching" of so many preachers, as well as the particular preacher whose outline we are reviewing.
The next passage considered in this Baptist sermon outlined is Mk. 16:16. The preacher says, "Mark 16:16 emphasizes the fact that belief is the one thing necessary to escape condemnation." What does the Bible say? Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; he that believeth not shall be damned." Now, does "Mark 16:16 emphasize the fact that belief is the one thing necessary to escape condemnation?" I read where Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ..." He says nothing about "He that believeth shall be saved, and may be baptized if he wants to." This is "foolish preaching," and does not agree with what our Lord said.
Look at that verse again. The phrase "that believeth and is baptized" modifies the pronoun, "He." The principle clause in this sentence is, "He . . . shall be saved." The words, "that believeth and is baptized," describe what kind of "He" shall be saved. What kind of "He" is described? He "that believeth and is baptized." So, Jesus does not say that "belief is the one thing necessary to escape condemnation." Foolish preaching says it, but Jesus did not say it. The order of faith, baptism, and salvation in this verse is: (1) faith, (2) baptism, and (3) shall be saved. Sectarianism, with its foolish preaching has it (1) faith, (2) shall be saved, and (3) baptized.
But, somebody says, consider the last clause in the verse: "He that believeth not shall be damned." It doesn't say that "he that is not baptized shall be damned." Friends, he didn't need to say it. What good would it do a rebellious sinner to be immersed in water? He refuses to believe in the Son of God. He refuses to repent of his sins. It wouldn't do him one bit of good to be baptized. He wouldn't even want to be baptized. It has been expressed like this: "He wouldn't if he could, couldn't if he would, and it wouldn't do him any good if he did." I believe what Jesus said; why don't you?