A.One of the plainest teachings of the New Testament is the doctrine of baptism.
B.Despite the clarity of the Scriptures, men have been debating over the purpose and form of baptism for hundreds of years.Let us consider some of the arguments and how we may answer them.
II.IS BAPTISM NECESSARY FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS?
A.We affirm that baptism is necessary for forgiveness of sins according to the Bible.
1.As part of the Great Commission, Jesus commanded His disciples to teach and practice baptism for salvation.
a.In Matthew 28:18-20, Jesus commanded the apostles to baptize those whom they taught in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.They were also to pass this commandment on to others as part of the gospel message.
b.In Mark’s account of the Great Commission, the Lord stated explicitly that those who believe the teaching of the gospel and are baptized shall be saved (Mark 16:16).
2.The book of Acts records that baptism for the forgiveness of sins was indeed taught and practiced by the earliest disciples of Christ.
a.On the Day of Pentecost following Christ’s resurrection and ascension, Peter declared to the Jews who believed in Jesus that they must repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38), and they obeyed his teaching (Acts 2:41).
b.Following this pattern, the subsequent conversions in the book of Acts likewise included baptism of believers, which we may rightly deduce was for the forgiveness of sins, for no other reason is given (8:36-39; 9:18; 10:47-48; 16:15, 31-34).
c.Notice that baptism was synonymous with the washing away of sins according to the words of Ananias in Acts 22:16.
3.In the epistles, multiple references are made to baptism’s role in the salvation of Christians.
a.Romans 6:3-11 identifies baptism as the means by which one dies to sin, is buried into Christ, and is raised up to walk in newness of life.
b.Galatians 3:27 declares that baptism is the means by which one enters into Christ (in whom alone is salvation – Acts 4:12; see also Col. 2:11-12).
c.1Peter 3:21 says plainly, “Baptism now saves you…”
B.Consider some arguments against this affirmation and the answers to those arguments.
1.Some argue that forgiveness of sins occurs when one believes on Jesus and that baptism is simply an outward sign of that inward belief and forgiveness.
a.Those who argue this claim that baptism “for the forgiveness of your sins” in Acts 2:38 really means baptism “because of forgiveness of sins.”
b.This is a false argument because the context and the original language of Acts 2:38 prohibit this meaning.
i.In the context, those who were convicted of their sins by Peter’s words asked, “What shall we do?”Peter then told them what to do about their sins, which was to repent from them and be baptized for the forgiveness of them.
ii.This false argument hinges on the meaning of the Greek word eis, which is translated “for” and not “because.”While eis has various meanings, in Acts 2:38 it clearly indicates a purpose or a result – forgiveness – rather than a cause.
iii.If we accept the argument that Acts 2:38 means forgiveness of sins had already occurred, then we must also conclude that Christ poured out His blood because forgiveness of sins had already occurred, for similar language is used in Matthew 26:28.Of course, forgiveness became possible after Christ poured out His blood just as forgiveness comes to believers after they are baptized.
2.Some argue that the teaching of baptism for forgiveness of sins is legalism.
a.Legalism is the pursuit of righteousness through a system of law rather than through a system of grace and faith.
b.Baptism for the forgiveness of sins is not legalism because the Scriptures command it as a conditional work of faith, not a work of merit that earns salvation.
i.Baptism is a Scriptural condition set by the Lord for believers to obey in order to receive the blessings that Christ has died to give us, including forgiveness and salvation (see passages noted above).
ii.Teaching that baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins is no more legalism than teaching that faith is necessary for forgiveness of sins.
III.IS THE FORM OF BAPTISM TO BE SPRINKLING, POURING, OR IMMERSION?
A.We affirm that the form of baptism is complete immersion in water.
1.The word “baptism” is a transliteration of the Greek word baptisma, which means “immersion.”
a.When a word is transliterated, it is adopted from one language into another while keeping virtually the same pronunciation.
b.It is unfortunate that baptism was not simply translated according to its meaning (immersion) rather than transliterated and thus left open to interpretation.
2.Even without a literal translation, the meaning of baptism can be understood by observing some examples in the Bible.
a.Notice that in Acts 8:38-39, both Philip and the Ethiopian went down into the water.This was necessary for Philip to baptize the Ethiopian.
b.Also, when Jesus was baptized, the text says that He came up out of the water (Matt. 3:13-17; Mark 1:9-11).
c.Likewise, notice that John baptized in Aenon near Salim because there was much water there, which was necessary for immersion (John 3:23).
d.Also, let it be noted that when the word baptisma is used, no further description is required because the definition of the word is “immersion.”
B.Consider some arguments in favor of other forms of baptism and the answers to those arguments.
1.Some will argue that the pouring of water is an acceptable form of baptism.
a.To justify the argument, Mark 7:3-4 and Luke 11:38 are often cited, where variations of the word baptisma are used to describe a ceremonial washing.The point of citing these passages is to show that persons who washed did not have to be completely submerged.
b.This is a weak argument, and by no means does it justify pouring as a form of baptism.
i.It is both implied and explicitly stated that this washing was for the hands.This being the case, of course the hands were submerged in the water.
ii.It is neither implied nor explicitly stated that pouring was the mode of washing hands.Moreover, this has nothing to do with baptism for the forgiveness of sins, and it is a weak attempt to justify a false argument.
c.Some have argued in favor of pouring as a mode of baptism by the following reasoning.
i.In the cases of the 3,000 at Pentecost (Acts 2:41) and the household of Cornelius (Acts 10:48), some contend that there would not have been enough water to submerge so many people.This is vain, unfounded speculation that is equally damaging to the idea of pouring.(The truth is that every synagogue had a “mikvah,” which was a tank of water intended for ritual immersion.)
ii.In the case of the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:35-39), some contend that the Ethiopian and Philip simply went down to the banks of the stream together.Nothing in the context indicates this, and this certainly does not justify pouring.
2.Some will argue that the sprinkling of water is another acceptable form of baptism.
a.Similar arguments are made with regard to sprinkling as those made in favor of pouring.That which refutes the idea of pouring also refutes the idea of sprinkling.
b.One passage that is used in an attempt to justify sprinkling as baptism is 1Peter 1:2, where Peter wrote that Christians are “sprinkled with His blood.”However, this is simply an allusion to the old covenant’s blood sprinkling as a foreshadow of Christ’s sacrifice (see Heb. 9:18-28) rather than a description of baptism.
IV.CONCLUSION
A.By no means does this lesson answer all of the arguments over baptism (infant baptism, baptism of the Holy Spirit, baptism for the dead, baptism for church membership, etc.)
B.However, this does provide a thorough answer to popular arguments against the true purpose and form of baptism.
