Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation?





Martin Luther said this about baptism and salvation: "Further, we say that we are not so much concerned to know whether the person baptized believes or not; for on that account Baptism does not become invalid; but everything depends upon the Word and command of God. This now is perhaps somewhat acute but it rests entirely upon what I have said, that Baptism is nothing else than water and the Word of God in and with each other, that is when the Word is added to the water, Baptism is valid, even though faith be wanting. For my faith does not make Baptism, but receives it. Now, Baptism does not become invalid even though it be wrongly received or employed; since it is not bound (as stated) to our faith, but to the Word."

Say what? Is this true? Here is what John MacArthur says about baptism.

Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation?


No. Let's examine what the Scriptures teach on this issue:
First, it is quite clear from such passages as Acts 15 and Romans 4 that no external act is necessary for salvation. Salvation is by divine grace through faith alone (Romans 3:22, 24, 25, 26, 28, 30; 4:5; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8-9; Philippians 3:9, etc.).

If water baptism were necessary for salvation, we would expect to find it stressed whenever the gospel is presented in Scripture. That is not the case, however. Peter mentioned baptism in his sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38). However, in his sermon from Solomon's portico in the Temple (Acts 3:12-26), Peter makes no reference to baptism, but links forgiveness of sin to repentance (3:19). If baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sin, why didn't Peter say so in Acts 3?
Paul never made water baptism any part of his gospel presentations. In 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Paul gives a concise summary of the gospel message he preached. There is no mention of baptism. In 1 Corinthians 1:17, Paul states that "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel," thus clearly differentiating the gospel from baptism.
Those passages are difficult to understand if water baptism is necessary for salvation. If baptism were part of the gospel itself, necessary for salvation, what good would it have done Paul to preach the gospel, but not baptize? No one would have been saved. Paul clearly understood water baptism to be separate from the gospel, and hence in no way efficacious for salvation.

I will post other reasons from John tom. What do you think about baptism? Is it necessary for salvation? Does infant baptism guarantee salvation for the infant?
Let me know.

3 comments:

Truth Unites... and Divides said...

Hi Jamie,

Saw your comment over at Denny Burk's blog. Bounced over here. You have a great blogroll. So I think you're on solid ground doctrinally.

BTW, Piper, MacArthur, Driscoll, Phil Johnson, the Together for the Gospel team, et al are all firm complementarians.

To answer your question in this post, I don't think so. The guy on the cross next to Jesus wasn't baptized.

Jamie Steele said...

Great point TUD

Anonymous said...

Baptism... is not salvation but is commanded if possible to do so. I believe that baptism confirms salvation in a persons heart. I have known some who doubt, that have not been fully immersed.