.jpg)
Having grown up in a Baptist Christian School, it was always impressed upon us that baptism was an integral part of our Salvation journey. We were taught that, while it was not required for Salvation; it was highly recommended as an act of obedience to Jesus' words in The Great Commission, as well as following His example in having been baptized Himself. During my time at one of the plethora of churches I've attended over the years*, I did get baptized, but at this point I've come to understand that it was more out of the sense of fear the pastor drove into us rather than any real requirement of Scripture.
Allow me to explain --
I'll actually begin with something my current pastor mentioned in Church* this morning that struck me as being relevant to this subject. He brought out the idea that Jesus' Baptism by John was a symbol of His having been Anointed of God to lead people into the Kingdom of God. This was the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies that God would send a Messiah* to save Israel, and in turn, the rest of humanity, from our sins. They would have seen this as an act of dedication to a religious sect, albeit one that had never existed before. This is one of many ways in which God was meeting them where they were at; because it was a long-standing tradition in Pagan societies to show connection and identity with whatever sect the person was joining*. It's only in looking back on it later that we see Jesus' Baptism in light of His being an anointed King*. At the same time, the Bible makes it abundantly clear that we are not meant to be kings, but Ambassadors and a Royal Priesthood. (2 Corinthians5:20, and 1 Peter 2:9, respectively) While the book of Revelation may speak of certain ones ruling and reigning with Him from Heaven, that has little to do with our lives today, other than the point of us having accepted Christ into our hearts. The fact that Christianity is the most prevalent group that still practices baptism today doesn't mean anything other than the point at which most have not fully studied the Scriptures to get the full context. Those Churches that believe that baptism is necessary to Salvation are the most wrong here. (And we all know how harsh Jesus was towards False Teachers)
Before we go any further, it's important to understand the difference between Infant Christening (or Dedication) and Baptism. (to me, those who conflate the 2 are getting it wrong) By definition, Baptism is a public display of one's own faith in God. This requires that they be of an age (and capability) to understand Salvation and to have chosen it for themselves. Babies are inherently incapable of this. When parents decide to have their baby christened or dedicated, they are making a promise in front of their family and friends to raise the child up in the knowledge of God. They are guaranteeing the opportunity for their progeny to choose Salvation for themselves at a later date. That's all. The Catholic idea that an "unbaptized" baby will go to Hell is not Biblical.
This overview gives a good summary of the truth --
The Bible doesn't specify an age of accountability in years, but it does indicate that a person is accountable when they are old enough to understand the consequences of their actions. Some Christian denominations have set specific ages for accountability, such as seven years old in the Catholic Church and eight years old in Mormonism. Others have suggested ages based on other factors, such as 12 years old because that's when Jesus began to understand right and wrong, or 13 years old because that's the age of the Jewish Bar Mitzvah. However, some groups, like John MacArthur, believe that God knows when each person is accountable and doesn't need to identify a specific moment.
At the same time, I found this commentary on Isaiah 7:15-17 helpful to this discussion --
NIV He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right,
What does Isaiah 7:15 mean?
Isaiah is describing to King Ahaz the sign the Lord is giving to him. It involves the birth of a baby to a woman who is still, at the time of their conversation, a young maiden or virgin (Isaiah 7:14). She will soon give birth to a boy and name him Immanuel, which means "God with us."
Many scholars understand this sign or prophecy to have a double fulfillment. We know from Matthew 1:18–23that Isaiah's words will be fulfilled in the birth of Jesus, who will be the long-promised Messiah. His words will also be fulfilled within a few years as evidence to Ahaz that God has spoken the truth about the coming destruction of Judah's enemies.
Now Isaiah adds some detail. This boy, Immanuel, will "eat curds and honey" when he knows right from wrong. It's unclear what the significance is of eating curds and honey. Some commentators suggest that the arrival of the Assyrian army in the region will lead to a change in diet for those in Judah. Isaiah may be pointing toward that. The Assyrians and Babylonians ate a form of curds called "ghee" and paired it with honey.
Isaiah's statement regarding the boy's ability to know evil from good might suggest the point where children begin to develop control over their impulses: as early as three years old. Or, this might refer to the stage where culture considered a person fully responsible for their actions, somewhere between the ages of 12 and 20. Both would fit with the historical outcome of what Isaiah is pointing to, as described in the following verses (Isaiah 7:16–17).*
Now that we have a solid basis for definitions and background, let me get to insights that lead me to believe that Baptism isn't Biblically necessary.
As indicated above, Jesus' own actions were nothing more than an indication of dedication that people were already familiar with. This gave His Earthly Ministry authority beyond the provenance of man, and in doing so, lend validity to His words and acts of healing. That being said, no where in Scripture do we see Jesus baptizing His Disciples*.
While there are many verses to be found in the New Testament concerning baptism, they are all metaphorical to the act of accepting Salvation in Christ*. And that, as I have come to discover, is really the only aspect of Christianity that is truly one of obedience. I know I'm not explaining myself very well here, but what I mean is that Salvation itself is the only step of obedience required to gain us entry into Heaven. The rest is essentially "frosting on the cake", if you will.
Those who embrace the idea of Baptism being a necessary step in Salvation are doing something common to people who are promoting their own agendas through Scripture. This is called "cherry-picking" and it's an ignorant, lazy approach to the Bible and it's truths. These people are not taking the full context of the Bible concerning the given subject into consideration. The following article has some excellent insights on the allegorical nature of Scripture references on Baptism --
In commenting on this man's statements, I would just like to say that I was glad to see his reference to Colossians 2:9-13 where Paul uses the analogy of circumcision to represent the spiritual transformation wrought in our hearts by Salvation. I was planning to use this myself by way of argument against baptism. As I see it, actions speak louder than words. If God mandated the Israelite men (and baby boys) to be circumcised as a physically hidden way of identifying them with Him; then it only follows that Salvation be a hidden spiritual identification with God. In either case, the point was meant to be a life lived out in evidence of this connection. Honestly, what good is 2 minutes in a pool or lake if this is not followed by a public display of our faith in everyday life??* I mean, obviously, being Baptized isn't automatically going to mean that we behave perfectly from that point on; but wouldn't you agree that your continued Spiritual Growth is a better indication of your faith to your friends and family than a moment spent under water??
You can search through the entire New Testament; but no where will you find a verse that definitively speaks to physical baptism as a required element of Salvation. Not one verse that talks about Salvation tells us that it demands any more from us than belief, from which will stem repentance and confession of Jesus as Lord. John 3:16, which is familiar to us all as the core verse of the Gospel literally says, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that whosoever believes on Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life." No mention of Baptism here. Romans 10:9-10 tell us "If you confess with your mouth and believe in your heart that Jesus is Lord, you will be Saved." Again, no mention of Baptism. There is, in fact, no sign of physical baptism in any of Paul's writings. We see many people who use 2 Corinthians 5:17 in connection with the act of water baptism in that it is a visual representation of the old becoming new; but Paul never suggests that. He has been enlightened directly from Jesus that Salvation is a purely spiritual thing to be lived out in the love of God by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The following commentary from Zondervan supports this, although there is nothing here specifically about baptism -- https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/2-corinthians-5-17
Even in the conversation between Nicodemus and Jesus (Jn. 3:1-21), when He is teaching Nicodemus about Salvation, Jesus clearly says in verses 5-6 that water birth is physical and being "born again" is Spiritual. No instruction on baptism here whatsoever.
What about the Great Commission??, you may ask?? Didn't Jesus mandate that the Disciples baptize new Believers?? I would then direct you back to the beginning of this post and remind you that baptism was a cultural norm in that place, day, and age. God always meets people where they're at. Taking the full context of Scripture into consideration, we have no need to stay there.
Another passage we can look at is the record of Jesus' death on the Cross and the Thief who recognized Him for Who He was and admitted that he and the man on the opposite side deserved to die for their respective crimes. This was all he did, and Jesus allowed Him into the Kingdom. No Baptism, no Speaking in other Tongues, no Catechism, no Communion, no Bible Study. Not even entrance into a Temple or Church Meeting; never mind Membership. Nothing other than the recognition of Jesus and His Lordship, along with his remorse for sin. Just Jesus. Nothing else.
As always, this is just my perspective and you can do with it what you want. My only hope is to lead you to a place of relationship over works, guilt, or shame and to provide the truth as revealed in the full context of Scripture.
-- God Bless!!
Footnotes:
See my Personal Intro for details on the Denominations I have experience with.
The same Church where I attended school, actually; and while they still baptize, the name plate and general teaching is Non-Dom.
The word "Messiah" means "anointed one" in the Ancient Hebrew.
God's use of Pagan practices in leading His people actually started with the Judaic Laws after the Exodus from Egypt. I maintain therefore, that, if God can do that to direct dedication and worship onto Himself, then we can do things that others may question in meeting others where they are at in order to worship Him or share the Gospel to certain individuals or groups. (I plan on a post about tattoos in the near future, so watch for it) The point of anything lies in personal intent, not origins...
The anointing of leaders/kings in the Bible started with Moses' brother, Aaron when God told him to set the Levites as Priests over the nation of Israel.
As to the point at which an individual is capable of understanding and choosing Salvation, I have always heard, (and believed) that babies and those who are Mentally Challenged get a "free pass" into Heaven due to their inability to make this decision. I agree with the article when it says that God knows the person's heart and gives grace accordingly.
While John 3:22 speaks of Jesus spending time with the Disciples "and baptizing", this was only metaphorical in view of the Kingdom of God. John 4:2 explicitly tells us that only the Disciples actively baptized people.
The only clear instance of physical baptism other than Jesus' in the Bible is in Acts when Phillip meets with the Ethiopian Eunuch. But once again, that was the cultural norm. There is no need for us to observe this today.
I have personal stories I could share of serious misbehaviors since having been baptized in 2003 or 4. My youngest was still young enough to where I needed my husband to watch her while I went into the pool, and she was born in 2002, so it was a while ago...
The photo article is very good as well. Here's the link if you're interested... https://pointlessthorns.wordpress.com/2020/11/24/is-baptism-required-for-salvation/
Comments