“Objections To Baptism” (Pt. 1 of 4) Introduction. There are many objections raised against baptism. The purpose of this article(s) is to help those who may have these objections in mind come to a knowledge of the truth. It is also to help those who are Christians to “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15). Please appeal to the Scriptures for the answer to these objections. 1) Objection #1: Christ does not say “He who does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned” in Mark 16:16. The point of this objection is to try and disprove that Christ commands us all to be baptized in order to have salvation. This objection is commonly used; yet, it ignores the first half of the verse. Indeed, the second half of the verse is important—it expresses the need for belief; however, it does not negate the importance of the first part. It is obvious that Christ does not mention baptism in the second part of this verse. Yet, He did mention it in the first half. Notice the subjects of the two clauses: Salvation and Destruction (condemnation). The first clause speaks concerning salvation. “He who believes and is baptized will be saved.” Now, we must answer the question, who does Christ (according to this passage) say will be saved? The answer is obvious: the one who “believes and is baptized.” The second clause deals with the subject of condemnation. Christ tells us a way to be destroyed—don’t believe! It is obvious that one who does not believe will be condemned (John 3:18 says, “he who does not believe is condemned already”). Still, it must be said that one cannot separate belief from baptism in the first clause. The word “and” is considered a very simple word in our vocabulary; yet, it is very important. The word is used to combine things together. When Christ couples belief with baptism using the word “and” it cannot be broken. This phrase makes both belief and baptism necessary to salvation. You cannot have salvation without one or both of them! 2) Objection #2: The Bible teaches we are saved by faith. There are many who use this objection to baptism also. The statement alone is one that is validated by the Scriptures. Yes, we are saved by faith! Christian, stand up and admit that we are saved by faith for the Bible teaches it. However, the objection implies that we are not saved by baptism. To this, I must object—appealing to the Scriptures. It is certainly true that passages such as John 3:16 only mentions belief as being essential to one’s salvation. However, I ask this: if John 3:16 teaches faith is the only thing that is essential to our salvation, will you accept the consequences? If John 3:16 (and similar passages) teaches that faith is the only thing that is necessary for salvation, does Luke 13:3 teach repentance is the only thing that is necessary for salvation? If John 3:16 teaches that faith is the only thing that is necessary for salvation, does Matthew 10:32 teach that confession is the only thing necessary for salvation? If John 3:16 teaches that faith is the only thing that is necessary for salvation, does 1 Peter 3:21 teach that baptism is the only thing necessary for salvation? If not, why not? Taking the stance that faith is the only thing one must do to be saved is a dangerous belief to have. Obviously, there are many things the Bible says “saves.” We must have all of them in order to have salvation. John 3:16 does not teach that faith alone saves. Nor does Luke 13:3 teach that repentance alone saved. Matthew 10:32 does not teach that confession alone saves. And, 1 Peter 3:21 does not teach that baptism alone saves. Rather, these verses indicate the importance of each. These verses teach that each is necessary for salvation. We must live by “every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4). We cannot be fooled into thinking that faith is the only thing man must do in order to have salvation. James says, “You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only” (James 2:24). If faith alone saves, no one will be lost. “For it is written: “As I live, says the LORD, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God” (Romans 14:11). There will be no unbelievers on judgment day! Also, if faith alone saves, then even demons will be saved. James 2:19 says, “You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe–and tremble!” The faith that saves is the kind of faith that Noah had. Noah had a faith that was obedient. Remember, Noah believed God was sending a flood to destroy the world. But, Noah would not have been saved without building an ark! We can believe in God, but we won’t be saved without obeying him (remember, Christ says to be baptized!). Conclusion. I hope this article has helped dispel these objections to baptism based on Scriptural proof. If something is not clear, please contact us and ask your Bible question. - Eric Krieg - “Objections To Baptism” (Pt. 2 of 4) Introduction. There are many objections raised against baptism. The purpose of this article(s) is to help those who may have these objections in mind come to a knowledge of the truth. It is also to help those who are Christians to “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15). Please appeal to the Scriptures for the answer to these objections. 3) Objection #3: Acts 2:38 actually says to “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ because your sins have already been forgiven.” Some argue against one of the most common verses that Christians use to prove the necessity of baptism by claiming the Greek word translated “for” in the King James Version was inaccurately translated. There are two meanings of the Greek word “eis,” “because of” and “in order to.” Simply meaning, the passage will either indicate that baptism is done because one’s sins have already been forgiven. Or, that baptism is done in order to have one’s sins forgiven. So which is it? Obviously there are two contradicting views as to the correct meaning of the word “eis” in Acts 2:38. The correct answer will, however, allow us to decide whether baptism is or is not necessary to have one’s sins forgiven. There have been many translations of the Bible published. At least 54 translations have not agreed with the “because of” teaching. Some of the translations that teach baptism as necessary for forgiveness are: English Revised Version, Living Bible, New American Standard, New International Version, New King James Version, King James Version, New World Translation, Revised Standard Version, Wesley’s Translation, and Wycliffe (1308) (according to bible.ca). Many other versions could be provided, but this list includes many well-known and accepted translations. There is still another problem when one claims that the word “eis” (or “for”) in Acts 2:38 means “because of.” Ask yourself this question: Did Jesus Christ come to the earth and die because we have already had our sins forgiven, or in order that we may have the forgiveness of sin? The answer to that question will help us determine the meaning in Acts 2. When Christ was instituting the Lord’s Supper, He told His disciples to take the fruit of the vine, which represented His shed blood. Christ said His blood was shed “for the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:28). Now compare the phrases in Acts 2 and Matthew 26. Do they look familiar? They should. The phrases are exactly alike in both the English and the Greek. Therefore, whatever the phrase means in Matthew 26:28 relating to Christ’s death, it must mean the same relating to baptism in Acts 2:38. 4) Objection #4: The Philippian Jailor was only told to believe in order to be saved. After Paul and the other prisoners had been released from their chains, the jailor drew his sword and was ready to kill himself. However, Paul cried out and stopped the jailor from doing such. After Paul had stopped him, the jailor, having heard the messages of the hymns and the prayers that we read about in Acts 16:25, he asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” The response by Paul and Silas is the subject of this objection. They said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (v.31). Obviously, those who believe that one is saved without baptism will use this verse to show that baptism was not essential in New Testament conversions. This is the danger of not realizing the entire context of the story, as Luke, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, recorded for us, in Acts 16:25-34. This was not a case of conversion by the method of “faith only;” rather, it is yet another case of conversion by the method of faith. We have previously discussed that faith does save an individual. However, “faith alone” does not save. Let’s notice the rest of the story. After Paul and Silas told the jailor to believe (v.31), they “spoke the word of the Lord to him and all who were in his house” (v.32). It is not told what was said; other than the fact that the Gospel was preached. However, we can rightly conclude what was included in the preaching of the “word of the Lord” by the following verse. After hearing the word of God, faith results (Romans 10:17). But, the jailor must have known something else was necessary. “He took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized” (v.33). Yes, this jailor, who heard the word of God taught, immediately was baptized. Ask yourself this question: If Paul and Silas taught the jailor that baptism was not necessary to salvation, why would the jailor “immediately” do so after midnight? Why would they not wait till the morning, or a more convenient time? Obviously, baptism was necessary in the case of the Philippian jailor. Conclusion. I hope this article has helped dispel these objections to baptism based on Scriptural proof. If something is not clear, please contact us and ask your Bible question. - Eric Krieg - “Objections To Baptism” (Pt. 3 of 4) Introduction. There are many objections raised against baptism. The purpose of this article(s) is to help those who may have these objections in mind come to a knowledge of the truth. It is also to help those who are Christians to “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15). Please appeal to the Scriptures for the answer to these objections. 5) Objection #5: The thief on the cross was not baptized; yet, he was saved. If he can be saved without baptism, so can I. Many today will point to the thief on the cross as an argument against baptism. We can see the account of this individual in Luke 23:39-45 (also see Matthew 27:38-44 and Mark 15:27-32). This man was indeed told that he would be saved. But the question remains, can we be saved like the thief today? I believe that if we appeal to the Scriptures, this reasoning will be found to be flawed. The first flaw that is not realized by folks is that they cannot prove that the thief was not baptized. Luke does not address the issue. It could be quite possible that he was baptized. In Matthew 3, many were baptized (the text says Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the regions around the Jordan were baptized by John the baptist in the Jordan—Matthew 3:5-6). Perhaps the thief was one of these folks. Another flaw with this theory is that the thief seemed to have knowledge who Christ was. After the other thief joined in with the mocking of Christ, the thief Jesus saved indicated a couple of things: 1) He knew there was a God (v.40), 2) He knew there was a God to be feared (v.40), 3) He recognized that Christ was not deserving of death (v.41), 4) He realized that he had done wrong (v.41), and 5) He indicated belief in a life after death (v.42). Now ask yourself: Does this thief sound like someone who never knew about Christ? Or, does this sound like an individual who had prior contact with the Gospel? Could he not have been a fallen disciple seeking forgiveness? Still, even if the thief had no prior knowledge of who Christ was, and if it could be proven that the thief was not baptized, this objection to baptism would not be validated. How is it that we can expect one to fulfill a commandment of Jesus before it was given? Was it not until after Christ’s death, burial and resurrection when He said, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark 16:16). We, however, do live after this requirement of salvation was spoken. How then, does the thief on the cross being saved without baptism prove that we do not have to be baptized? Also notice that the thief died before the baptism that we are under today came into effect. How do we know this? Consider what the likeness of baptism is according to Paul in Romans 6:2-4. “Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 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.” When we are baptized, Paul, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, said we die to sin. We are buried (completely immersed) in water, and we are brought out of the watery grave of baptism to walk a new life for Christ. That is the imagery of baptism as compared to Jesus being put to death, buried and raised from the dead. Now, with the understanding of what the comparison of baptism is, let’s apply this to the objection. Christ was being crucified and died while the thieves were on the cross. Christ had not been buried or resurrected. How is it fair to expect the thief on the cross to have been buried with Christ in baptism, and risen like Paul stated? However, we can be today! Finally, the way that the thief was saved does not take away from the commandments in the bible. The thief does not change Peter saying that baptism NOW saves us (1 Peter 3:21). The thief does not change Paul’s instruction that we are baptized INTO Christ (Galatians 3:27). The thief does not change Peter’s instruction in Acts 2 to be baptized in order to receive the forgiveness of sin (Acts 2:38). The thief does not change the fact that conversions in Acts included baptism (Acts 2,8,9,10,11,16,18,19,22). Again, it does not change Christ’s commandments after His resurrection (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:16). Conclusion. I hope this article has helped dispel these objections to baptism based on Scriptural proof. If something is not clear, please contact us and ask your Bible question. - Eric Krieg - “Objections To Baptism” (Pt. 4 of 4) Introduction. There are many objections raised against baptism. The purpose of this article(s) is to help those who may have these objections in mind come to a knowledge of the truth. It is also to help those who are Christians to “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15). Please appeal to the Scriptures for the answer to these objections. 6) Objection #6: Saul was saved on the road to Damascus before he was baptized. Oftentimes an objection to baptism comes from the account of Saul’s (later known as the apostle Paul) conversion. Many will claim that he was saved when Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus; rather than after he got to the city and was baptized. One argument folks will make is that Ananias (the one Paul was told to go and see) addressed Saul as “Brother Saul” (Acts 9:17) before he was baptized. Let’s be careful to observe what happened in the conversion of Saul (the accounts of his conversion are found in Acts 9,22,26). In Acts 9, Saul was on his way to persecute the church in Damascus. As he was journeying, a bright light shone and he heard the voice of the Lord. Saul was “astonished” and he was “trembling” at this and asked what Christ wanted him to do (v.6). To which, Christ told Saul to go into the city to hear what he had to do. Saul was 3 days without his sight and arrived in Damascus. Ananias had seen a vision and the Lord spoke with him preparing him to meet with Saul. Ananias went to Saul, Saul received his sight, and he was baptized. Let me ask this question: Where does the text say that Saul was saved on the road to Damascus? It doesn’t. In fact, we noticed that Saul was told to go into the city and be told what he MUST do. Obviously, anything less than doing what Christ said isn’t sufficient, so it is incorrect to assume Saul could have been saved before he went into the city. Upon arrival in the city, we must notice what Saul was told to do to be saved. Ananias told Saul to “Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). If Saul was saved before baptism, he had to have been saved while in his sins. Saul was told that baptism was to “wash away” his sins. Baptism today is still to “wash away” our sins. If you have not been baptized, you have not had your sins washed away! Let us notice a summary to this issue: If Saul was saved on the road to Damascus, 1) He was saved before the Lord knew it. The Lord told him to go into the city (Acts 9:6) 2) He was saved before he knew it. When one is converted and is forgiven of past sin, there is great rejoicing (see Acts 8:39). Yet, Saul was still in a miserable condition on the road to Damascus. He was without sight, and went without food and drink (Acts 9:9). Sound like a man who was rejoicing to you? 3) He was saved before Ananias knew it. Ananias told him something he needed to do (Acts 22:16). If Saul was already saved, Ananias was wasting his breath. 4) He was saved before being forgiven (Acts 22:16; Acts 2:38). 5) He was saved outside of Christ (Galatians 3:27—must be baptized in order to be in Christ). 6) He was saved before he was saved (1 Peter 3:21). 7) He was saved before Christ said he would be (John 3:3-5; Mark 16:16). (source: bible.ca) Yet, Saul was called “Brother” by Ananias before he was baptized—some will say in objection to baptism. Yes, he was called brother” before he was baptized. However, this does not show that Saul was a Christian brother. Ananias and Saul were brethren in the sense that they were both Jews. Either way, Saul was still told to be baptized in order to have his sins forgiven after this statement was made. Conclusion. I hope this article has helped dispel these objections to baptism based on Scriptural proof. If something is not clear, please contact us and ask your Bible question. Let us not accept anything less than Scripture for a subject. Let us not make excuses for doing what the Scriptures plainly say. Jesus said, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:16). Peter clearly said, “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 2:38). No excuse will save you or I in the day of judgment. - Eric Krieg -
Posted on: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 09:01:12 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015