Not Sent to Baptize "Baptism, the Moment of Salvation, and the Church of Christ"
Baptism Deep Dive coc style • Sermon • Submitted • Presented
0 ratings
· 5 viewsNotes
Transcript
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Not Sent to Baptize (1 Cor 1:16-17)
— Why was Paul able to leave the baptism of so many in Corinth to others? (Pratt, 4V 152) --
BAPTISM IS A BIGGER DEAL THAN YOU THINK IT IS. . . UNLESS
Baptism is a Bigger Deal than You Think It Is
Baptism is a Bigger Deal than You Think It Is
Every Example in Acts
Baptism Language
Unless you Grew up in the Churches of Christ...
Unless you Grew up in the Churches of Christ...
Emphasis not Christ, Baptism
Gospel?
Part 1: The Necessary Baptism: Accomplished by Faith, Signed and Sealed by Water
Part 1: The Necessary Baptism: Accomplished by Faith, Signed and Sealed by Water
CHAPTER 1 - THE NECESSARY BAPTISM
CHAPTER 1 - THE NECESSARY BAPTISM
Baptism does not Necessitate Water
There are more baptisms than just water —> Matt 3:11, Mk 10:38-39, Lk 12:50, Ac 11:16, 1 Cor 10:2 ( 1 Cor 12:13)
What does baptism picture? (Buried into Christ) —> But we aren’t literally buried right, we are symbolizing it, what are we symbolizing?
I agree that Noone is normally saved without baptism, but I mean the reality that we symbolize and seal with the water act
There is a separation between Baptism the water event and the Spiritual Burial/baptism that it represents
You separate them by saying one can be baptized without faith and it is not efficacious; I am simply saying the same thing in reverse: one can have faith without being baptized.
Clear biblical parallel with Circumcision.
Romans 2:25-29, Col 2:11-12.
There was physical circumcision which signified the circumcision of the heart, same with baptism.
One can be baptized “of the heart” without being baptized physically as the sign of that spiritual reality
The context is circumcision WITHOUT HANDS, a spiritual circumcision, he doesn’t then turn and apply a physical baptism that is WITH HANDS, the baptism too is the type without hands, spiritual reality that the physical reality represents
Buried in the water is SYMBOLIC of a burial, isn’t actually a burial, and may or may not be resurrection picture in baptism.
The Truest baptism is your burial into Christ.
This is speaking to the meaning of baptism, what it represents, not the water act. Me being positionally identified with Christ in his death and resurrection.
Cornelius was baptized into Christ before by water - all those in OT were baptized into Christ’s death and resurrection.
Gal 3:27 is heart of idea, I think clearly that could be true of someone who hasn’t touched water
The Spiritual can (even must) precede the Water
“Those who hold to baptismal regeneration would have us to believe that one passes from being a “natural man” to a “spiritual man” through baptism; yet, from whence does this desire to be baptized come? Is God not pleased when we are baptized? Of course. Yet, Paul said that the one who is still fleshly cannot please God. If such a person is the enemy of God, enslaved to sin, how is it that he is able to do such a spiritual and pleasing thing as to desire to be baptized?”
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
Is someone in the flesh when they are walking to the baptismal waters?
Castelein rightly identifies baptism as an act of obedience (4 views 133), the question here is is it possible for one to desire an act of such obedience without first having experienced the new birth that the restorationist claims accompanies water baptism? Thomas Nettles rightly argues, “Scripture represents all spiritual obedience as subsequent to and consequent on the new birth,” and thus that one would not desire to come without having first experienced a new birth. (4V Nettles 146)
If you know that he is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who practices righteousness has been born of him.
Surely baptism counts as an act of righteousness
“Baptism is an act of obedience to Christ that testfies to the prior existence of the regenerating work of the Spirit that has produced faith in Christ.” (Nettles 4V 147)
CHAPTER 2 - ACCOMPLISHED BY FAITH
CHAPTER 2 - ACCOMPLISHED BY FAITH
The traditional Church of Christ position is elucidated well by Dr. John D. Castelein, a professor and minister in the restoration tradition, when he says, “In baptism, God acts. God’s sovereign act is to bestow on the repentant believer the spiritual blessings achieved by Jesus Christ in his voluntary sacrifice for our sins on the cross. We believe that in the NT plan of salvation, baptism marks the point in time when God, because of his grace - and for no other reason - cleanses and forgives penitent believers of all their sins. It is the occasion when God incorporates them into JEsus Christ and instills his Holy Spirit in them.” (Castelein, in 4 Views 130-131)
Castelein argues that at baptism is when one calls on the name of the Lord, making “the good confession” or the “profession of faith.” (Castelein, in 4 views, 131)
Spiritual Baptism is Accomplished by Faith
All the verses that are not wet.
And Especially when the Bible so often and so clearly speaks of faith as the means of salvation (Matt 9:2, 9:22, 9:29, 17:20, Lk 7:50,Jn 3:16, 6:29, 7:38, Jn 11:25-26, 20:29, Ac 15:9, 26:18, Rom 1:17, 9:31-32, 10:9-11, Rom 11:20, Gal 2:15-16, 3:2, 3:7-9, 3:14, 3:22-24, 3:26, 5:6, Eph 2:8-9, 3:12, 3:17, Heb 11:6, 1 Pet 1:8-9, 1 Jn 5:4-5)
We are saved the same way the OT saints were saved, I think that is the entire clear point of Romans 4. (3:21-5:2)
Richard L. Pratt Jr. “It is no more appropriate to argue that baptism justifies a person that it is to argue That Abraham was justified by circumcision. AS Paul forcefully argues in Romans 4, Abraham was declared righteous before he was circumcised. His standing before God was set in place before he was circumcised. In the same way, Christians are declared righteous apart from baptism. (Pratt, 4V, 151)
Blood of Jesus (new covenant) needed for Abraham AND me
i.e. Rom 10:9-13. (Quotes OT here to say always this way)
Cornelius
Thief on the Cross
One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!” But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.”
Same guy reviled him in the same way moments before, no faith to faith and he then confesses
Let the Christ, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross that we may see and believe.” Those who were crucified with him also reviled him.
So also the chief priests, with the scribes and elders, mocked him, saying, “He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he desires him. For he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’ ” And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way.
Thief may have been baptized Response
by who? John. So was his baptism the same as Jesus? I thought that all didn’t start until Christ’s death?
Acts 19 - rebaptized - but were already called disciples before the baptism
Was baptism necessary before Christ’s death? or after?
Will of the Testator Response
For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood.
“Before the death of Jesus, people could be forgiven through faith, after the death one must be baptized.”
So it was easier to get saved before Jesus death and resurrection than after
So what began that new covenant requirement was what? . . . so the moment he died . . . ?
Jesus died before thief. (Is he an exception? If there are exceptions . . . let there be)
(What about others who were alive while Jesus was alive, heard and believed and were saved in the same way, and stayed alive after he died. Like the paralytic or the woman he said your sins are forgiven. Did they have to get baptized to be saved?)
How were the people before Jesus saved? If by Christ, then your interpretation of Heb 9 contradicts, because this new covenant deal only applies to those after his death.
The Message of Hebrews a. The Gracious Benefactor
These verses make the point that until the testator dies the benefits of the will cannot possibly be made available to the legatee. The death of the testator must be established beyond all doubt. At many points this letter insists that Christ died and died for us, offering himself for our redemption
“The will takes effect” - WHAT IS A WILL? It doesnt give new commands, it pays out benefits to benefactors!
What is the context of Hebrews 9 about? What is the context? Christ’s blood being better than the blood of animals, and the death of Christ applying to those in the OT as well.
On what basis was Abraham saved? How were his sins covered?
We are saved the same way those in the OT were
What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”
But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.
Clear teaching is the method of salvation has never changed.
What about someone who believed before Jesus death like the Thief and then didn’t die? Did they need to be baptized?
Faith necessarily inherently includes repentance/confession, it does not inherently necessarily include baptism. “Is faith and repentance part of water baptism, Yes! Is water baptism part of faith and repentance? No.” We have examples of people who have faith that aren’t baptized - Acts 10, All Old Testament Saints, Thief on the Cross
Castelein rightly states that “the entire NT, in fact, consistently unites faith and repentance as correlated actions;” however, he adds active obedience to the umbrella of faith though giving no biblical warrant to do so. (Castelein in 4 views 133)
Does someone believe/have faith before they are baptized, or not until during?
(If someone came to you and said Jesus is Lord, I believe he is the Christ, I want to be baptized - do they have faith then?) So there IS belief without baptism.
Someone can have Faith, honestly believe, and just not know about baptisms importance. So in your view they have faith and go to hell if they die.
Perhaps you chalk these up to exceptions, perhaps you also chalk up to exception the millions of Christians who were baptized as babies and grew up loving the Lord their entire lives, by the way who make a robust and weighty biblical argument that their baptisms are legitimate baptisms. Perhaps all miscarried babies, and infants, and children in general are also exceptions to the requirement.
Once you admit exceptions, you enter dangerous divine-like territory of deciding which exceptions are acceptable and which are not; it is time to at least leave behind the word essential and use a word more fitting, like normative.
CHAPTER 3 - SIGNED AND SEALED BY WATER
CHAPTER 3 - SIGNED AND SEALED BY WATER
Not simply memorial, but also not ex opera operato
Spiritual Baptism should be Immediately Followed by Water Baptism as Sign and Seal
Graduation Ceremony
Water Baptism is Connected to Salvation, it is the Seal and Affirmation of Salvation. It is not however the effectual cause of salvation; this belongs to faith alone. The believer should be baptized very soon after profession of faith, as demonstrated in the book of Acts, as the seal and sign of their immersion into Christ.
The word baptism can be functioning as Metonymy, like circumcision - “The substitution of the name of an attribute or adjuct for that of the thing meant, for example suit for business executive, or the track for horse racing”
So baptism means - the whole of it, salvation into Christ —> representative of the larger series of events that it symbolizes
i.e. - “the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin” - not just the blood, blood represents the whole of it
Circumcision - representative of larger reality of salvation. Sign and Seal in OT of conversion. A proselyte in the OT could have said “By circumcision, I went from the darkness into the light . . . by circumcision I came into the knowledge of God,” they wouldn’t mean ex opera operata, they would mean it as the visual marker of all they had been through and done in faith
Baptism is the Graduation Ceremony - this should happen very soon after faith as the seal and sign of their immersion into Christ
One can have faith, which saves, before baptism, but should still be baptized.
Part 2: The What About Part
Part 2: The What About Part
Likely the part you are most interested in
Acts 2:38?
Acts 2:38?
1.
“For the forgiveness of sins” doesn’t necessarily mean that the baptism BRINGS forgiveness, it could be that it is because of forgiveness of sins
Matthew 3:11 (ESV)
“I baptize you with water for repentance...”
You aren’t unrepentant until you get under the water, you get to the water only by being repentant?
Eis could mean in order to get, or it could also mean because of - Matt 12:41
Matthew 12:41 (ESV)
The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented eis the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.
Romans 6:3 (ESV)
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized eis Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
1 Corinthians 10:2 (ESV)
and all were baptized eis Moses in the cloud and in the sea,
(More: 1 Pet 3:21, Matt 28:19, Ac 19:3, 1 Cor 1:15, 12:13)
“This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of “eis” does exist as in 1 Cor. 2:7….But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of “eis” for aim or purpose. It is seen in Matt. 10:41 in three examples “eis onoma prophetou, diakaiou, mathetou” where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in Matt. 12:41 about the preaching of Jonah….They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koine generally (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received (A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, III:35-36).”
Repentance does not EQUAL Baptism
Repentance Greek Word - metanahayo - change one’s mind
“Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
Is he saying anything about baptism there?
Then he began to denounce the cities where most of his mighty works had been done, because they did not repent.
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,
When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”
but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance.
Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.
(Christians told to repent)
Repent is 2nd Plural
Be Baptized is 3rd Singular
YOUR (sins) is 2nd Plural
You will receiveis 2nd Plural
2.
IF IT DOES MEAN THAT - It is still an assumption that this is the pattern for every salvation ever, when this doesn’t fit the biblical witness.
He doesn’t say it is required
Forgiveness of sins in this own book without water -
To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”
to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’
Saved/Forgiven By Faith
The crucial thing is faith in Christ – that’s the idea of sola fide
Baptism without faith is empty, faith without baptism is still loyalty to Christ!
Faith + Understanding = Baptism
Faith w/o Understanding = Still saved (Biblical faith)
This describes most Christians that have ever lived – didn’t have Bibles – its so clear in the text, yeah well they didn’t have one
What is terrifying is when you listen to many church of Christ talk – you would think they are more committed to baptism than to Jesus, that they trust more in their baptism than in Jesus, that when asked why they know they are going to heaven think first about their baptism.
For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
We know of exceptions to baptism, there are no exceptions to faith.
Gen 15:6, Rom 4
The whole point of Romans 4 is that we are saved the same way that Abraham was - Faith.
and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—
Faith alone is that which is salvific – the only thing that is the effectual cause
Gal 2:15-16, 3:2,7-9, 14, 22, 24, 5:6
Eph 1:13
Rom 3:22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 4:3-5, 5:1-2, 10:9-10.
1 Jn 4:15.
3.
“It seems here that the only way to receive the Holy Spirit is by baptism.” —> Acts 10
If Acts 10 is an exception because of Redemptive history, so too can Acts 2 be.
Acts 10?
Acts 10?
43-48
43 - No mention of baptism
44 - “Gift of holy spirit” same phrase from Acts 2 - 47 - “Just as we have”
Saved before Baptism - not REQUIRED (Essential)
Acts 2 - the ones speaking in tongues were saved, are these not? Based on what?
As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way?”
(It was as he began, he didn’t say what they would need to believe - No, look at 10:43-44 - As he was still saying THESE things. See also 11:13-14 - he did declare that message)
“The Promise/Gift of the Father” - They were saved
Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing.
And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles.
In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.
(Acts 8 - you can be saved without receiving the gift of the holy spirit - Old Testament Saints, Apostles waiting for Pentecost - - - but you can’t have the Holy Spirit and NOT be saved)
Account of this circumstance - Narrative - Not explicitly Didactic)
Even if 2 separate baptisms - you’re not going to get the miraculous without the indwelling
So Ananias departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes, and he regained his sight. Then he rose and was baptized;
Regained sight, received Holy Spirit, THEN baptized.
Mark 16:16?
Mark 16:16?
kk
Acts 22:16?
Acts 22:16?
I don’t know when Paul was saved, but if I grant that he is saved at the moment of his baptism, he has been contemplating these things for days, will he trust Christ and call on him for forgiveness, and now he is told to call on his name and he does, that doesn’t then necessarily mean that that is the only way that this could happen
Calling on the Name of the Lord
Leap / Assumption / Eisegesis to say Calling on Name of the Lord = Baptism
The two are separate
OT people - very beginning - Gen 4:26. Joel 2:32 being quoted in Rom 10:13. Other NT - Ac 2:21, 7:59, 1 Cor 1:2 (present active - continually calling), 2 Tim 2:22 (also a continual act, present active)
Covenant Language - Suzrain Vassal Treaty
Paul called on the name of the Lord by being baptized, but it doesnt follow that that is the what EVERYONE will call upon the name of the Lord
These terms form two sets–the first, “arise and be baptized,” the second, “wash away your sins, calling upon the name of the Lord,” or more literally, “wash away your sins, having called upon the name of the Lord.” The remission of sins is effected by calling upon the name of the Lord in this passage–it is represented, as elsewhere, by baptism. One thing is for certain: given what we have seen previously of Paul’s own theology of justification, he certainly did not interpret Ananias to be teaching any form of baptismal regeneration!
Castelein argues that at baptism is when one calls on the name of the Lord, making “the good confession” or the “profession of faith.” (Castelein, in 4 views, 131)
Colossians 2:9-12?
Colossians 2:9-12?
Doesnt say anything about water - you cant use this passage to say “The only way to be buried with Jesus in baptism is through the water act”
Romans 6?
Romans 6?
Not necessarily water baptism, could be said of one saved not water baptized hypothetically
Separation between water and what it represents
1 Cor 12:13 for instance
If don’t assume water – immersed in Christ
Spiritual reality more than physical - you aren’t really buried in water, buried with him is a spiritual reality
II II Romans 2:26-28 – Circumcision- important outward sign, but the thing that circumcision represents can be separated from the act itself, same thing
Someone can be baptized and not be saved because their heart wasn’t correct, so baptism and salvation are separated, I think it can be separated the other way, but separated being the key part
Romans 6 talks about the effect of being in Christ positionally, not that water is the only way to achieve that effect
1 Peter 3:21?
1 Peter 3:21?
Wayne Grudem argues that Peter’s statement, followed by the clarification about the appeal of a good conscience and not the washing of the body, is explicitly denying that the physical baptism is the key baptism in view, and emphasizing the the inward spiritual reality, which occurs prior to the physical sign, is what is central. (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 974.) Bruce Demarest and Gordon Lewis agree, saying “Peter made clear, however, that the efficacy of baptism resides not in the washing of water but in the individual’s faith in the resurrected Christ.” (Bruce A. Demarest and Gordon R. Lewis, Integrated Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 3:272-73) Owen agrees, saying that the distinction Paul makes between outward and inward circumcision should be applied here as well. (Owen 154) Baptism is here also painted as the crucial physical response to the central inner reality.
Baptism means more than water baptism (see top) - buried with Christ, filled with the Spirit, brought into the body supernaturally
“But it is water here”
Water wasn’t the means of salvation in the illustration, it was what they were saved FROM - not saved BY it, saved THROUGH it
Water Represents Death and Judgment
Peter himself separates it from water, and says the crucial part is an appeal to God for a good conscience, can that happen without water? Surely.
Maybe the water in baptism represents OUR death in the same way, but it is not the thing that saves, it is our being buried and brought alive with Christ spiritually that saves
Why would Peter have to explain that it doesn’t save because it washes you literally, who would have held that clumsy and absurd of a view?
foremost in Peter’s mind, again, is the death of Christ as the sacrifice for sin. Men are brought to God, not by what they do, but what God has done in Christ Jesus (v. 18). Upon the heels of this he mentions God’s act of judgment in the days of Noah. At that time eight souls were saved through water. Peter then says that this water “symbolizes” baptism (as the NIV translates the Greek term antitupon, literally, “antitype”). Baptism now saves us, Peter says–just as the water “saved” Noah and his family. But, of course, we know that Peter was not asserting that there was some salvific aspect to the flood waters themselves–God shut up the ark, and God saved Noah and his family. But the water is a symbol, Peter says, a symbol seen now in baptism. But is Peter dropping the symbolization so as to make baptism the means of salvation? Certainly not. Dr. Wuest has commented so well that we give his words at length:
“Water baptism is clearly in the apostle’s mind, not the baptism by the Holy Spirit, for he speaks of the waters of the flood as saving the inmates of the ark, and in this verse, of baptism saving believers. But he says that it saves them only as a counterpart. That is, water baptism is the counterpart of the reality, salvation. It can only save as a counterpart, not actually. The Old Testament sacrifices were counterparts of the reality, the Lord Jesus. They did not actually save the believer, only in type. It is not argued here that these sacrifices are analogous to Christian water baptism. The author is merely using them as an illustration of the use of the word “counterpart.” So water baptism only saves the believer in type. The Old Testament Jew was saved before he brought the offering. That offering was only his outward testimony that he was placing faith in the Lamb of God of whom these sacrifices were a type….Water baptism is the outward testimony of the believer’s inward faith. The person is saved the moment he places his faith in the Lord Jesus. Water baptism is the visible testimony to his faith and the salvation he was given in answer to that faith. Peter is careful to inform his readers that he is not teaching baptismal regeneration, namely, that a person who submits to baptism is thereby regenerated, for he says, “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh.” Baptism, Peter explains, does not wash away the filth of the flesh, either in a literal sense as a bath for the body, nor in a metaphorical sense as a cleansing for the soul. No ceremonies really affect the conscience. But he defines what he means by salvation, in the words “the answer of a good conscience toward God,” and he explains how this is accomplished, namely, “by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,” in that he believing sinner is identified with Him in that resurrection.”
John 3:3-10?
John 3:3-10?
Cleansing Water as a Greater Motif in Scripture that Baptism takes part in but does not Exhaust
Then I bathed you with water and washed off your blood from you and anointed you with oil.
I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.
John 3, John 4, John 7.
Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.’ ” Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
Explicitly identified with Holy Spirit, not baptism
let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,
“Water and cleansing in these contexts refer to . . . Christ’s completed work to cleanse the entire person of sin.” (Nettles 4V 147)
“The washing of our bodies with pure water, being born of water and the Spirit, the washing of regeneration, the washing of water with the word point not to baptism but to the reality of the Spirit’s powerful application of the word for salvation.” (Nettles 4V 148)
Perhaps the most significant of these passages is this passage covering Christ’s conversation with Nicodemus about new birth. It is argued that Christ’s words about the necessity of being born “of water and Spirit” (John 3:5 ESV) is an argument for that rebirth occurring at the baptismal waters. (Smith 25) However, as Sinclair Ferguson argues, the waters of baptism should not be in view here; rather the point is about man’s inability, which is referenced five times in these verses. (Ferguson 119) Ferguson says Jesus is emphasizing the necessity of being regenerated, and argues that the reference to water is best understood against the background of Ezekiel 36:25-27 and the promise of clean water being sprinkled on the new covenant people of God. He says, “In the rest of the passage, Jesus speaks of only one birth, the birth from above. ‘Water and Spirit’ probably refers to the two-fold work of the Spirit in regeneration, he simultaneously gives new life and cleanses the heart.” (Ferguson 122) Gary Burge adds the compelling point that is mentioned above, that Nicodemus was berated by Jesus for not knowing what he referred to; however, if this is about Christian baptism that was yet to be instituted, how could Nicodemus have known? (Burge 115-116)
Titus 3:5?
Titus 3:5?
A final passage to be considered is Titus 3:5, where it is argued (Smith 25) that regeneration again is unbreakably placed at baptism. (Pusey 12) However, Ferguson rightly points out that baptism is not mentioned here, rather it is the more expected description of washing which is consistent with all that has been said thus far, pointing again to Ezekiel 36. (Ferguson 122) Paul Jewett agrees that the efforts made in Titus 3 to this end fall under the category of “vague uncertainty,” and are often used vainly to make water baptism the only means and moment of regeneration.
James 2?
James 2?
kk
Conclusion
Conclusion
Summary
In conclusion, we must again insist that the Scriptures must be taken as a whole–when we find in the direct, clear statements of Scripture truths that are contradictory to assumptions based upon passing comments, we must take the clear statements over the assumptions. In the issue of salvation, we must take the clear statements of Scripture regarding the work of the Spirit of God in regenerating lost sinners seriously.
Maybe I am wrong, am I a false teacher? Be careful with this label.
----
Nowhere Faith in Jesus
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory, obtaining the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.
Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”
Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.’ ”
because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.”
Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?