One of the most controversial subjects on the religious scene over the years has been, and continues to be, water baptism.  From my vantage point having been involved in many years of Bible study and having “preached Christ” for over forty one years now, this subject isn’t controversial because of any ambiguity as regards its meaning in Scripture.  If one will simply read everything the New Testament says about baptism and one is able to be totally objective, not subjective, one will come away knowing clearly what the New Testament teaches as to the (1). Proper candidates for water baptism. (2). The action involved. (3). The design or purpose for which the proper candidate is to be baptized. (4). The state or relationship that follows.

As we continue this study we will consider each of these four at least and maybe others as well. Try if you are able to read what is said as if you had never heard anything taught about this subject whatsoever. Read each passage cited as if it was the first time you ever read it. Can you do this? If not, you will probably not come away with the Biblical teaching on this subject (Matthew 5:6; John 8:31-32; 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12). If you are able to be totally objective in your study I am confident when you have completed this study-you and I will be in agreement as to what the New Testament teaches on “water baptism.”

Our English translations came down to us from the “common Greek” language in which the New Testament was originally written. This being true, it becomes advantageous for us to occasionally refer to the original words. I have taken a course in Greek for my own personal enrichment, but most folks have to rely on the work of translators. Anyone who can read however can buy study aids written by scholars which show how a word is used giving the Greek word and its English equivalent and the passages where this word is used and the shades of meanings it takes on according to the context in which it is used. Some standard works to assist in such a study are: (1). W. E. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words. (2). Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon. (3). Vincent’s Word Studies of The New Testament. (4). Zondervon’s Pictorial Bible Dictionary. The student should keep in mind that a modern English Dictionary will use words the way they are currently used. The English language is a living, growing, changing language. If you don’t believe it, consider how the word “cool” and “gay” are used today as opposed to what they meant years ago!  The New Testament was written almost entirely in what is known as the Koine Greek. Perhaps providentially, this common Greek language ceased to be spoken abruptly in the first century. This means that when we find out from the proper sources what a word meant then, we will know what it means as God views it for all time. That language was frozen.

An interesting aside is the fact that many religious folks who disagree with my brethren and me on water baptism, when their scholarship is on the line, will faithfully translate the Koine Greek into English supporting what we believe the Bible to teach.  When they are setting forth their theology, however, they almost universally contradict their own scholarship. While some minimize or denigrate the essentiality of water baptism, one large group gives it too much credit, for they teach “baptismal regeneration.”  Let me say at this point that New Testament Christians believe that “water baptism is a part of the new birth” Titus 3:3-5, but we do not believe in “baptismal regeneration” which would be “salvation by baptism alone.”

Here’s What Some Scholars Say:

(1). Martin Luther: “Baptism is a Greek word, and may be translated immersion, as when we immerse something in water, that it may be wholly covered.”
(2). John Calvin: “The word baptize signifies to immerse, and it is certain that immersion was the practice of the ancient church.”
(3). John Wesley: “We are buried with Him-alluding to the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion” (Wesley’s Notes on Romans 6:4).
(4). Layman Coleman: “The primary significance of the original is to dip, plunge, immerse; the obvious import of the noun is immersion.”
(5). Edinburg Encyclopedia: “In the time of the apostles the form of baptism was very simple. The person to be baptized was dipped in a river or vessel.”
(6). Liddell and Scott: “Baptizo: to dip in or under water.”
(7). Thayer: “Baptizo: to dip repeatedly, to immerse, submerge.”
(8). The Greek Catholic Church testifies that immersion was the original practice, and continues to practice immersion.
(9). The Roman Catholic Church admits that immersion was the original practice.
(10). The Church of England admits that immersion was the original practice.
(11). The Methodist Church approves of immersion and immerses those who request it.
These quotes are taken from Leroy Brownlow’s book “Why I Am A Member of The Church of Christ,” pg. 136-137).

King James: “Repent and be baptized...for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38).
American Standard: “Repent ye, and be baptized..unto the remission of your sins.”
Rotherham’s Emphasized: “But Peter (said) unto them: Repent ye! and be immersed...into remission of your sins.”
Modern Speech: “Repent, replied Peter, and be baptized..with a view to the remission of your sins.”
Modern English: “Change your mind and be baptized...for  a release of your sins.”
Twentieth Century: “Repent, answered Peter, and be baptized...for the forgiveness of your sins.”
Anderson: “Repent and be immersed..in order to the remission of your sins.”
Living Oracles: “Reform, and be each of you immersed in the name of Jesus Christ in order to the remission of sins.”
R. A. Knox’s Translation (Catholic copyright, 1944, by Sheed & Ward, Inc.): “Repent, Peter said to them, and be baptized..to have your sins forgiven.”
Centenary Translation of the New Testament, by Helen Barrett Montgomery (Published by the American Baptist Publication Society: “Repent, answered Peter, ‘and be baptized..for the remission of your sins.’ “
The Reverside New Testament, by William G. Ballantine: “Peter said to them: ‘Repent and be baptized..for the forgiveness of your sins.”

I could have written out all twenty four translations of Acts 2:38. Not one of them translated “EIS” which is our English word “For” to mean “because of.” Without exception they translate it “in order to the forgiveness of sins.” (IBID Pgs. 140-143).

J. R. Graves Baptist Preacher:

The following is a quote from a (Baptist Quarterly, July 1877, page 309). I am quoting it from (Vol. 18 No 2 of “Walking In Truth” edited by Tom O’Neal). “The consensus of all scholars, in all ages, establishes the fact that baptism is the act referred to by the phrase ‘born of water’...and it is a Baptist doctrine” (The Tennessee Baptist, May 17, 1884) adding “No Baptist that we ever heard or read of ever believed otherwise until A. Campbell frightened them away from an interpretation that is sustained by the consensus of all scholars of all denominations in all ages” (IBID,. Oct. 30, 1886). Another Baptist preacher, James W. Willmarth said, “Christ said to him: “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, i.e., Baptism and Renewal by the Spirit are conditions of true citizenship in the kingdom of God on earth”(Emp. mine ket).

The above isn’t what any Baptist preacher I ever heard preach today. It isn’t what the “Standard Manual for Baptist Churches by Edward T. Hiscox” says either. In fact it uses the strong word “repudiates” to speak against the idea that the above is true. Remember now that I have said that my brethren and I “do not believe in baptismal regeneration, as stated earlier;” We believe it is only a part of, or the final act which consummates one’s “birth into the kingdom” or the church of Christ, as Scripture abundantly teaches (John 3:3-5; Acts 2:22-38, 41, 47; Colossians 1:13-14; Romans 6:3-6). Immersion must be preceded by a genuine faith in Jesus as the Christ, repentance, and confession of one’s faith. Then and only then does it change one’s state or relationship to God.

“Baptism is not essential to salvation, for our churches utterly repudiate the dogma of “baptismal regeneration” ;but it is essential to obedience, since Christ has commanded it. It is also essential to a public confession of Christ before the world, and to membership in the church which is his body. And no true lover of his Lord will refuse these acts of obedience and tokens of affection” (Std. Man. For Bapt. Churches by Edward T. Hiscox D. D. Note 8, pages 20-21).

If baptism isn’t essential to salvation then (1). “Remission of sins is not essential to salvation as some of their own scholars have translated (Acts 2:38) to teach. (2). Then one doesn’t have to be “born again” as they frequently teach one must and as the Bible teaches as well, but connects with “water baptism.” (3). If it is “essential to obedience” and yet one can be saved without it, obedience isn’t essential to one’s salvation! Yet the Bible says Christ saves the obedient (Hebrews 5:8-9; Matthew 7:21; 1 Peter 1:22-25). (4). Hiscox admits that Christ commanded it! But he says it isn’t essential. Then one can be saved and disobey a direct commandment of Jesus Christ but (John 14:48; Luke 6:46; Acts 3:22-23) all teach that one can not please Christ and disobey His words (commandments)! (5). Hiscox says it is essential to a public confession of Christ before the world and to membership in the church which is his body, but not essential to salvation. Therefore a public confession of Christ before the world nor membership in the church which is His body are essential, for baptism is how this is accomplished. (6) He says further that no true lover of the Lord will refuse these acts of obedience or tokens of affection. But he has already said that baptism isn’t essential and our churches utterly repudiate it. Therefore one doesn’t have to be a true lover of the Lord nor obey this token of affection! Can you not see the hopeless contradictions in this?

Over the years my brethren and I have tried to show the absurdity of the position of our Baptist friends and other “faith only” advocates as well, on the subject of  baptism and several other doctrinal errors they espouse. We have converted many of them as a result of debates and by preaching and teaching. One of the points we have consistently made is to show that according to their own doctrine it would be easier to get to heaven than to get into the Baptist church. This would be true of other Protestant churches as well.  Why? Because they frequently deny the essentiality of water baptism and often run to the penitent thief whom Jesus saved, as “proof” that he wasn’t baptized and was saved: Not that this matters in the least, for he lived and died under the law of Moses while Jesus was on earth and possessed the power to forgive sins under any, all, or no conditions whatsoever (Matthew 9:6).

The New Testament including Christ’s “great commission” which commanded baptism for salvation was not in force while He lived (Hebrews 9:14-18). It is a much different matter for us this side of the cross of Christ. One is not only “baptized into Christ” but one is “baptized into His death” (Romans 6:3-6). Too, when we reach the spiritual benefits of Christ’s death, in water baptism, we are “reconciled unto God in one body by the cross” (Ephesians 2:11-17). The same thing that saves one in the blood of Jesus, places one into His church or kingdom. What is it? It is “water baptism” (1 Peter 3:20-21; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 1:22-25; Acts 2:22-38, 41, 47; John 3:3-5). The reason we say it is easier to get into heaven than into the Baptist church is because you can’t be a Baptist and therefore a member of the Baptist church without water baptism and that by an “ordained Baptist preacher”-unless they have changed that, too! Still they say you can go to heaven like the thief on the cross and never be baptized! See?

Their creed book and their preachers all teach that one is saved by “faith alone” or when one “accepts Jesus as one’s personal Savior.” Question? Does doing this make one a Baptist? Answer, No, No, one isn’t a Baptist until one has been baptized. Their baptism isn’t into Christ, for the remission of alien sins, to wash away sins, or into the one body, to be saved etc., as Scriptures teach. Their “baptism” is of a person whom they say is saved already, saved out of the Baptist church. Then how can they claim to be the New Testament church? It should be obvious that one’s salvation isn’t connected to being a Baptist nor a member of said “church.” Can one be saved “out of Christ” and not “in His blood bought church?” Why no! When a penitent believer upon confession of his faith in Jesus is immersed, it is “into Christ” and “into His death” and “into His blood bought body” as we have seen already (Acts 2:22-38, 40-41; Romans 6:3-6; Galatians 3:26-29; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:20-21).

All spiritual blessings are “in Christ” said paul in Ephesians 1:3. Since one is “baptized into Christ,” one can have none of these spiritual blessing before water baptism, as taught in the last will and Testament of Jesus Christ. This isn’t so called “church of Christ doctrine,” this is the teaching of the doctrine of Christ. We are told that we must “abide in His doctrine” and that if a man or angel teaches otherwise than what the apostles taught and that they had received in the first century, one will “have not God” and “be accursed” (2 John 9-11; Galatians 1:8-9; Matthew 15:8-9).

Some of the following paragraph is adapted from a weekly bulletin by Dudley Ross Spears, a good friend of mine and a fellow preacher of the gospel of Christ now working in Clarkesville, Tennessee with the Warfield Church of Christ.

The Greek word eis is a preposition meaning “to or into,” indicating the point reached or entered.  It primarily indicated motion toward something as entering into a place, condition, or time.  It shows purpose and result.  It is translated “into, unto, for, among (John 21:23) and at” (Matthew 12:31).  It is used with verbs of motion showing movement in the direction of an object.  In (John 21:23), the saying that John would not die was spread among or to the brethren. “Because of” is completely unacceptable as an alternate translation. In (Matthew 12:41), the people repented “at the preaching of Jonah.”  Their repentance was a response to or unto his preaching.  Jesus said to His disciples, “Why sleep ye? Rise and pray, lest ye enter into (eis) temptation” (Luke 22:46). Can this be translated “lest ye enter because of temptation?”

In (Mark 1:4) we read “John did baptize in the wilderness, and preached the baptism of repentance for (eis) the remission of sins.”  Can this be translated that John baptized and preached “repentance because sins are already forgiven?”

In (Luke 3:3) we read “And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for (eis) the remission of sins.” Can this be translated that John preached “the baptism of repentance because sins are already  remitted?”

Scripture says in (Romans 3:25) “Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for (eis) the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.”  How could one have faith in the blood of Christ if His righteousness is declared because sins are already forgiven before He shed His blood?

Luke records what happened on Pentecost when believers asked of Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” “Then Peter said unto them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for (eis) the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38). If “because of” is unsuitable in the previous examples, why would it be acceptable in this verse? The same preposition is used in both phrases which are identical in English and Greek.  How can it mean “because of” in one and not the other?  How can it ever mean “because of?” If it cannot mean that, it cannot be translated that way.

Notice The Following Parallel

Jesus shed His blood for (eis) the remission of sins (Matthew 26:28).

Repentance and baptism are for (eis) the remission of sins (Acts 2:38).

If for the remission of sins means because sins are already forgiven in (Acts 2:38), please explain how it means the opposite in (Matthew 26:28). Furthermore, since repentance and baptism are connected with the conjunction and the preposition (eis) has the same meaning for one as it does the other. If baptism is for (eis) remission of sins, repentance is for (eis) remission. This means that repentance isn’t essential if it means that baptism isn’t! See?

The Bible clearly teaches that both are essential. The Devil knows that baptism is the final act of the “new birth” into the kingdom or church of Christ. He cares not how many people are “baptized” just so long as they aren’t “scripturally baptized” for he can keep them out of Christ and His kingdom all the while thinking themselves servants of Christ (Matthew 7:13-28). Paul indicated that our obedience must be “from the heart” and a “form of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection” to be made free of sin (Romans 6:16-18; 1 Peter 1:22-25).

 Dear friend and reader, don’t be deceived by the doctrines of men! Believe on Jesus-Repent of your sin and errors-Confess Jesus with your mouth-Be buried with Him in baptism into His death and arise to “walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:3-6). Contact us if we can help you. If you desire further study on this matter see the address on the front or back of this tract.
 

The Scriptures say that "Christ is the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him" (Hebrews 5:9). You need to consider in the light of this treatise whether or not you have done so!

As one reads the acts of the apostles of Christ, one can read how folks were converted to Christ when men inspired by the Holy Spirit were present among them. We believe these cases of conversion form the pattern for how men are converted to Christ today. Any deviation from this is a departure from the word of Christ, and is condemned as "another gospel" as  Paul said in (Galatians 1:6-9).  Have you "obeyed the gospel?" (2 Thessalonians 1:6-10; 1 Peter 1:22-25; James 1:18-25).  ket