Intro
I said in my last post that I would try and get these out in a shorter timeframe. But it didn’t happen with this second post in my baptism series. Turns out that there isn’t a whole lot of time left when moving into a new house and trying to unpack and organize everything. Who knew? Anyway, I’m continuing my series on baptism with talking about Baptismal Regeneration. I only briefly made mention of it in my last post and now I intend to go into more depth. As I said before, Baptismal Regeneration is the belief that one must be water baptized in order to be saved. In these next 2 or 3 posts, I aim to show you how the Bible does not teach that despite what some people believe.
Culture
When talking about baptism, one must take into account the culture of the day in which the early church existed. It’s important to note that Jesus did not come up with baptism. His cousin John certainly didn’t. In fact, the concept of baptism existed for centuries. The Jews dipped themselves under water 3 times before entering the temple. When Gentiles converted to Judaism, they performed that same rite and afterwards were declared “born again”. As a matter of fact, baptism often signified conversion from one religion to another. In some Greek cults, that baptism occurred in animal blood. Gross.
All that to say, everyone knew and understood the concept of baptism. This makes it understandable why the early church emphasized it so heavily. After all, if you claim to believe, but refuse to perform a simple rite of passage to demonstrate that (not to mention a command of the one you follow), just how genuine is your faith?
All-Sufficient?
One major problem with Baptismal Regeneration is that it inherently denies the sufficiency of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. Yep, you heard me. Now, I don’t think anyone who believes this doctrine would actually make that claim. They’d deny it outright. However, let’s think about it logically. On the cross, Jesus said, “It is finished.” Furthermore, Paul states that salvation is by faith through grace and not by works (Ephesians 2:8-9). If we are required to take a physical act in order to be saved (such as getting water baptized), then that makes salvation at least partly works-based. More on this later. This means that what Christ did on the cross was insufficient and we have to do something in order to finish it. And if Jesus made the claim that it was finished but was technically wrong…. That would make Jesus a liar. And that’s a HUGE problem.
I referenced one of Paul’s statements in Ephesians earlier, but that one isn’t even the heavy hitter. Paul’s writings in Romans 4-5 explain in great detail how we are justified by faith and not by anything we can do.
If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. Romans 4:2-5 (NIV)
Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand….Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! Romans 5:1-2, 9 (NIV)
I’m only giving you a sample of Paul’s argument. I encourage you to read the first 5 chapters of Romans and take note of how much Paul pushes faith and grace with no mention of baptism. Many people consider the book of Romans to be like another gospel. Truly it contains some of the best descriptors of the gospel and salvation – all without mention of the necessity of baptism. If baptism was truly necessary, wouldn’t Paul have mentioned it?
Works-Based
I want to expand upon the works-based nature of Baptismal Regeneration. Because many proponents claim that it’s not. I argue it is. Here’s why. Admittedly it doesn’t claim that you must continually work to be saved or remain saved. However, it says to receive God’s gift of salvation, we must do something to make our confession and repentance “stick”. That is the definition of works-based salvation.
We tend to think of works-based as the life-long, works-only, hoping to get to Heaven someday. In that sense, proponents of Baptismal Regeneration aren’t advocating a works-based salvation. However, they advocate that your heart posture and faith before the Lord do nothing without baptism. So, proponents push for a works-based salvation without calling it that because it doesn’t match what we think of as works-based. But regardless of the number of works attached to salvation, it contradicts what the Bible says about faith.
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him. Hebrews 11:6 (NIV)
The Bible names various things that pleases God. However, this is the only location that says how a person will never please God, no matter how many “good things” he does that to please Him. And that one way is: lack of faith. Nearly every time Jesus rebukes or chastises His disciples, it is due to a lack of faith, for example, the storm where Jesus was asleep on the boat. Jesus woke up, rebuked the storm, then asked the disciples where their faith was.
A Gift
To further emphasize the works-based nature of Baptismal Regeneration, take a look at these two passages from Romans.
Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. Romans 4:4 (NIV)
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23 (NIV)
In these passages, we see Paul calling salvation a gift of God. And he also states that one does not work for a gift – else it becomes an obligation. And the Bible refers to salvation as a gift repeatedly, I just referenced one such instance here. I mean, how can we do something to receive a gift besides accept it with an outstretched hand and gratitude in our hearts? It’s like me giving my brother-in-law a Christmas gift and then telling him, “Do ten push-ups if you want this gift.” If I did that, it’s no longer a free gift.
Faith In….
Do you see why I claim Baptismal Regeneration is works-based and denies the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice? Preaching this doctrine runs the risk of people placing their faith in the act of baptism rather than faith in Jesus. And that’s dangerous. That leads to people having a false belief in their own salvation. Not good.
To further illustrate this, I know someone who got re-baptized because the first time they were was not for the “purpose of salvation”. Therefore, they had to get baptized again – for the purpose of salvation – in order to be saved. This person had faith in Jesus for many years. Yet, came to believe that wasn’t enough and needed baptism to make their salvation genuine. That worries me. Not for that person’s salvation – I believe in the security of their salvation. But for anyone who grows up hearing about it. Because of the risk I mentioned earlier about people having a false belief in their salvation.
Paul’s Bold Statements
In the last section I mentioned that Paul left out discussions of baptism in his writings in Romans. I take it one step further here and wish to point out this incredibly bold statement he makes in 1 Corithians.
I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. 1 Corinthians 1:14-17 (NIV)
I especially want to highlight verse 17, “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel”. Here, Paul makes a clear separation between baptism and the gospel. After all, Paul says later in this book that it is the gospel that saves you (1 Corinthians 15:1-2). If baptism is indeed necessary for salvation, then why would Paul not be called to baptize? It makes no sense.
I wish to further illustrate this using the deductive reasoning formula: if A=B and B=C, then A=C. Only let’s make G the gospel, B baptism, and S salvation. So then, if G = S (1 Corinthians 15:1-2) and B = S (Baptismal Regeneration), then G = B (baptism is a necessary part of the gospel), right? Yet by excluding baptism from his definitions of the gospel, Paul says that G ≠ B (baptism isn’t necessary). And if that’s the case, then either G = S is wrong, or B = S is wrong. And Paul explicitly says that G = S (1 Corinthians 15:1-2, Romans 1:16). Therefore, B = S must be wrong. It’s impossible to have a case in which both G = S and B = S are true and still have G ≠ B. In summation, G = S and G ≠ B, therefore B ≠ S.
Wrapping Up
I’m hoping you’re starting to see that salvation is by faith alone in Jesus’ sacrifice alone. I only give general, Biblical arguments here regarding baptism, salvation, and Baptismal Regeneration. In my next post, I am going to address the major Scripture passages that believers in this doctrine cite as proof of Baptismal Regeneration. Watch for it to come out and don’t forget to subscribe so you don’t miss it!
Leave a Reply