Is baptism necessary for salvation?

[phoenixdem]

I think baptism has much more to do with salvation than does the Lord's Supper.

I believe 99% of the same things that the church I attend believes. They only place we differ is in the matter of baptism. Although I do wish they would observe the Lord's Supper more often.

BTW the pastor and the deacon board are aware of my beliefs concerning baptism and they still allowed me to be a deacon and a Sunday School teacher. Pretty Christian of them isn't it?


Without reading the sermon I will probably agree with Spurgeon since I do not believe in baptismal regeneration. I've actually had people try to convince me that I do believe in baptismal regeneraion, but I know what I believe and I do not believe that.

What type of Baptist Church do you attend?

 

[greatdivide46]

What type of Baptist Church do you attend?

Southern Baptist

 

[greatdivide46]

Your post is quite lengthy so I'll probably answer it with a series of posts rather than just making it longer.

Acts 2:38
38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

1. Repent. First step mentioned by Peter. Repentance is only possible through faith, consequently, faith is first.

Agreed.

2. each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins- According to your interpretation, Peter is saying that baptism is for the forgiveness of sins.

Because that is what he is saying -- word for word.

3. and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.- According to your interpretation, the Holy Spirit is given as result of baptism.

I don't know if I'd say as a result of baptism. God promises to give us the Holy Spirit when we are baptized.

Acts 10

43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”

Here Peter tells us that the forgiveness of sins comes from faith. Baptism is not mentioned which would be a contradiction IF baptism is the vessel for the forgiveness of sins.

Actually, I don't see faith mentioned in this verse either. It does come to my mind though that we are baptized in the name of Jesus so it doesn't seem to be a very large step to think that through His name could be a reference to baptism. Not that I necessarily think baptism is the vessel for the forgiveness of sins. It's simply the point in time when God says He'll forgive our sins.

The Holy Spirit is given prior to baptism which would be a contradiction if the Holy Spirit is given as part of baptism.

Actually, I believe that the gift of tongues was given prior to baptism, just like it was at Pentecost. However, I don't believe the gift of tongues is the same as the gift of the Holy Spirit that we receive when repent and are baptized.

 

[Hentenza]

Your post is quite lengthy so I'll probably answer it with a series of posts rather than just making it longer.

No problem.

Because that is what he is saying -- word for word.

Only according to your interpretation. In English as well as in Greek the verse can be read either way which is why we have to look beyond this verse to understand it.

I don't know if I'd say as a result of baptism. God promises to give us the Holy Spirit when we are baptized.

In Acts 10 the Holy Spirit is given before baptism so obviously it is not given at baptism.

Paul tells us in Eph. 1:13-14
13 In [q]Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also [r]believed, you were sealed in [s]Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is [t]given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

No mention of baptism here. The vessel for the giving of the Holy Spirit is faith (having also believed) not baptism.

Actually, I don't see faith mentioned in this verse either. It does come to my mind though that we are baptized in the name of Jesus so it doesn't seem to be a very large step to think that through His name could be a reference to baptism. Not that I necessarily think baptism is the vessel for the forgiveness of sins. It's simply the point in time when God says He'll forgive our sins.

Here is the verse:

43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.” (bold mine)

Everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins. There is no mention of baptism in this verse.

Actually, I believe that the gift of tongues was given prior to baptism, just like it was at Pentecost. However, I don't believe the gift of tongues is the same as the gift of the Holy Spirit that we receive when repent and are baptized.

The gift of tongues is not part of this conversation and I just showed you two verses where the Holy Spirit is given prior to baptism so obviously it is not given at baptism.

 

[greatdivide46]

Only according to your interpretation. In English as well as in Greek the verse can be read either way which is why we have to look beyond this verse to understand it.

I'm just reading the verse the way its written. I really don't see any need to look beyond this verse to understand it since I can understand it perfectly well without looking beyond it.

In Acts 10 the Holy Spirit is given before baptism so obviously it is not given at baptism.

In Acts 10 what was given before baptism was a gift of the Holy Spirit, specifically speaking in tongues, not the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Paul tells us in Eph. 1:13-14
13 In [q]Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also [r]believed, you were sealed in [s]Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is [t]given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

No mention of baptism here. The vessel for the giving of the Holy Spirit is faith (having also believed) not baptism.

No, there is not mention of baptism in this verse. There is also no mention of repentence (Acts 2:38) or confession (Romans 10:9). Should I therefore conclude that I don't have to repent or confess Christ before men? Besides I would interpret "you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise" as a reference to baptism.

Here is the verse:

43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.” (bold mine)

Everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins. There is no mention of baptism in this verse.

As I said, I would interpret "through His name" as a reference to baptism. As you have said, we have to look beyond this verse to understand it.

The gift of tongues is not part of this conversation and I just showed you two verses where the Holy Spirit is given prior to baptism so obviously it is not given at baptism.

And I showed you a verse where the Holy Spirit is given after baptism. Besides I can make a case that the two verses you showed were talking about a specific gift of the Holy Spirit and not the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit Himself.

Have a great Sunday!

 

[RobertZ]

No, there is not mention of baptism in this verse. There is also no mention of repentence (Acts 2:38)

Belief and repentence are inseperable sir, you cannot have one without the other. If one has truly believed on Christ then they have already repented.

or confession (Romans 10:9)

How are you going to confess something you have not first believed in? confession "just like water baptism" is a response to what has already taken place in the heart of the believer.

 

[His_disciple3]

Belief and repentence are inseperable sir, you cannot have one without the other. If one has truly believed on Christ then they have already repented.




How are you going to confess something you have not first believed in? confession "just like water baptism" is a response to what has already taken place in the heart of the believer.

don't mean to butt into this discussion but would like to help both of you guys.

Romans 10:8-11
8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
KJV

if you guys would really examine Romans 10 about the confess part, instead of seeing it as you have been taught and/or preached all your life, then you could clearly see this is not a confession of our sins that Paul is preaching here, but if we will confess with the mouth the Lord Jesus. So I will say "Jesus Christ you are Lord" see I just confessed that Jesus Christ Is the Lord. He is God. 1 john says if the spirit confesseth that the Christ has come in the flesh then that spirit is of God, this is not that the spirit confesses his sin just as romans 10 is not of us confessing our sins. but rather us and the Spirit confess him as Lord and/or the Christ. verse 10 verifies this with the mouth confession is made and then verse 11 refers to the confess Him as Lord again, if we have believed with the heart that God has raised Him from the read then we will not be ashamed to confess Him as Lord of our salvation, which again states that it is by grace we are saved through Jesus Christ and not that of ourselves. Hopes this as helped , please take time to read scriptures as it says not as it has been preached. I have trouble with this myself from time to time!!

 

[RobertZ]

don't mean to butt into this discussion but would like to help both of you guys.

Romans 10:8-11
8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
KJV

if you guys would really examine Romans 10 about the confess part, instead of seeing it as you have been taught and/or preached all your life, then you could clearly see this is not a confession of our sins that Paul is preaching here, but if we will confess with the mouth the Lord Jesus. So I will say "Jesus Christ you are Lord" see I just confessed that Jesus Christ Is the Lord. He is God. 1 john says if the spirit confesseth that the Christ has come in the flesh then that spirit is of God, this is not that the spirit confesses his sin just as romans 10 is not of us confessing our sins. but rather us and the Spirit confess him as Lord and/or the Christ. verse 10 verifies this with the mouth confession is made and then verse 11 refers to the confess Him as Lord again, if we have believed with the heart that God has raised Him from the read then we will not be ashamed to confess Him as Lord of our salvation, which again states that it is by grace we are saved through Jesus Christ and not that of ourselves. Hopes this as helped , please take time to read scriptures as it says not as it has been preached. I have trouble with this myself from time to time!!

Thank you for saying this and we are both on the same page, I just have a hard time explaining myself in the text from time to time.

 

[greatdivide46]

Belief and repentence are inseperable sir, you cannot have one without the other. If one has truly believed on Christ then they have already repented.

I would disagree with you based on Acts 2. It seems pretty obvious that the people that Peter preached to believed because they asked, "What shall we do?" Peter, instead of telling them they already believed so they didn't need to do anything, told them to repent and be baptized. Apparently Peter assumed the belief did not necessarily imply repentance because he felt the need to tell people who already believed that they needed to repent as well.

How are you going to confess something you have not first believed in? confession "just like water baptism" is a response to what has already taken place in the heart of the believer.

I agree, but I'm still not quite ready to relegate confession to the category of something nice to do, but we don't really need to, as baptism is by so many people.

 

[greatdivide46]

don't mean to butt into this discussion but would like to help both of you guys.

Romans 10:8-11
8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
KJV

if you guys would really examine Romans 10 about the confess part, instead of seeing it as you have been taught and/or preached all your life, then you could clearly see this is not a confession of our sins that Paul is preaching here, but if we will confess with the mouth the Lord Jesus. So I will say "Jesus Christ you are Lord" see I just confessed that Jesus Christ Is the Lord. He is God. 1 john says if the spirit confesseth that the Christ has come in the flesh then that spirit is of God, this is not that the spirit confesses his sin just as romans 10 is not of us confessing our sins. but rather us and the Spirit confess him as Lord and/or the Christ. verse 10 verifies this with the mouth confession is made and then verse 11 refers to the confess Him as Lord again, if we have believed with the heart that God has raised Him from the read then we will not be ashamed to confess Him as Lord of our salvation, which again states that it is by grace we are saved through Jesus Christ and not that of ourselves. Hopes this as helped , please take time to read scriptures as it says not as it has been preached. I have trouble with this myself from time to time!!

I agree with you about confession in Romans 10. It is not confession of sin, but confessing Jesus as Lord.

 

[busdriver72]

I agree, but I'm still not quite ready to relegate confession to the category of something nice to do, but we don't really need to, as baptism is by so many people.

Interesting comment. I haven't seen anyone relegate it to that catagory in this thread. I completely agree with that, and I think most everyone on this thread would agree with that...baptism is not to be delegated as just one of those "nice" things to do. It clearly commanded in Scripture for believers in Christ (those who have already believed in Christ.)
There does seem to be two extreme views that we have to contend with...get baptized or you'll go to hell.....or, don't worry about.
Neither is true.

Concerning the fellow with a phobia of water......
...invite him to a pool party......and "accidentally" trip him?
Then the pastor jumps into the pool and says "Hey, since you're here.."

No, seriously, I heard a very well seasoned, experienced pastor and Bible teacher (who was a staunch fundamentalist) get asked about the issue of baptism and the proper method.
He said, of course, the proper method is by emersion, but he said to not let the method over-ride the meaning. Since baptism is not what saved the person by physically washing the whole body immersed in water...but it is the response of a sincere conscience toward God...and act of faith...if someone was "sprinkled" (or whatever) as a believer and in their heart and mind they were being baptized into Christ he would not tell them that their method was invalid and didn't matter. God saw what they did as being obedient unto Him pertaining to baptism in their heart and mind...the meaning over-rides the method. Faith over-rides the form.
There was much wisdom in that, though I must confess, as a baptist I still wanna grab'em by the ankle and drag 'em into the baptistry.

 

[jmc66]

Very interesting question. Odd that I came upon this question just after posting a new thread.

My thread is asking for thoughts on Acts 8:14-17.

Read that....then feel free to comment on my post concerning this passage.

........


To answer YOUR question. I was raised to believe that we receive the Spirit when we are saved by faith. Baptism is but a symbol of our new birth and we are taught to be baptized show that we can show symbolically what has happened in our life once we received Christ.

Since Christ instructed us to be baptized, I would have to say that I think it very important that we follow thru with it. If we don't, our salvation probably was not genuine.

That being said, the only question that would baffle me would be this: "What happens to the person who is saved, but dies just shortly before his designated time for baptism?"

My belief is that he WOULD go to heaven. But I feel that I'll never know for sure until I get to Heaven and have that question answered by the Good Lord himself.

 

[phoenixdem]

Very interesting question. Odd that I came upon this question just after posting a new thread.

My thread is asking for thoughts on Acts 8:14-17.

Read that....then feel free to comment on my post concerning this passage.

........


To answer YOUR question. I was raised to believe that we receive the Spirit when we are saved by faith. Baptism is but a symbol of our new birth and we are taught to be baptized show that we can show symbolically what has happened in our life once we received Christ.

Since Christ instructed us to be baptized, I would have to say that I think it very important that we follow thru with it. If we don't, our salvation probably was not genuine.

That being said, the only question that would baffle me would be this: "What happens to the person who is saved, but dies just shortly before his designated time for baptism?"

My belief is that he WOULD go to heaven. But I feel that I'll never know for sure until I get to Heaven and have that question answered by the Good Lord himself.

"have that question answered by the Good Lord himself. "

The Good Lord has already answered that question. Baptism isn't required for salvation. There is sufficient Scripture bearing on that matter.

 

[His_disciple3]

I would disagree with you based on Acts 2. It seems pretty obvious that the people that Peter preached to believed because they asked, "What shall we do?" Peter, instead of telling them they already believed so they didn't need to do anything, told them to repent and be baptized. Apparently Peter assumed the belief did not necessarily imply repentance because he felt the need to tell people who already believed that they needed to repent as well.


I agree, but I'm still not quite ready to relegate confession to the category of something nice to do, but we don't really need to, as baptism is by so many people.

hello, my friend, I guess we would disagree on the definition of repent then, repent also means to turn or to change one's mind. in the King James Bible several places in the old testament it states that God repented from the thoughts. this is not saying that God ask for repentance/forgiveness. John the Baptist also along with Jesus preached repent for the Kingdom Of God is at hand. but we as students of the Bible must realized what they meant. the new covenant was entering into the picture while Jesus, John the Baptist and Peter was saying repent. the old covenant was about to be replaced. so is it possible that by saying repent for the kingdom of God is at hand or repent and be ye baptized, that they were simply saying we need to change our mind about the way we have been doing things. not is it only possible But I believe that this is exactly what they were saying. this as the Baptism part Peter was preaching, was in that dispensation, as later on God revealed to Peter that Peter too needed to repent (change his mind) about the gentiles receiving salvation. and in Acts 19, Paul/saul the apostle called for the gentiles gave a spiritual baptism as John and Jesus both preached that it was about to come about, Paul gave this spiritual baptism after the believers had already been water baptised. so many today would need to change their mind/repent to as what dispensation we are in. if water baptism is the proper baptism for todays church why would Paul the Apostle for today's church/this dispensation give them a second baptism after they had receive the right one?????

KJV
Acts 19:1-5
19 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
KJV

another thought on this is in acts 2, Peter preached the prophecy of Joel ( joel 2) which states after this God will pour out His spirit on all flesh and finishes up with whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved and Paul preached this in Romans 10 nothing about water baptism. after His Spirit has come, after Jesus has left after He told the disciples that they can't come with Him, but God will send the other mediator( THe Comforter) , His Holy Spirit, and after this all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. with a period. at the end of the sentence, no semi colon or colon a period with no room to add anything to it, not even water baptism. so see what scriptures are preaching not what some have said they preach. or in a round about way repent, change your mind and come forth into this dispensation. many are still under the dispensation of the blood of bulls and goats being remission of sin some are under the dispensation of water baptism being the repentance of Sin. both were meant to be in their time for that Precious Blood of Christ had not been shed as of yet. But now we have that purifying Blood of the Lamb of God we no longer need the others. yes Peter preached water after the Blood had been shed But God opened his eyes or caused Peter to repent/change his mind also!!

 

[DeaconDean]

Hi Hentenza,

You wrote that being a baptist and/or being baptized does not effect our salvation. While I am in full agreement with the first, I merely pointed out that there was a time that baptists did hold this as a basic tenant of the faith, I'm just not sure, with all the Scriptural evidence regarding water baptism that the second is true.

I think that you'll find that your following claims regarding baptism are certainly not in keeping with Peter's claims about the work of baptism. He clearly says that the first believers at Pentecost should be baptized for repentence of sin and that it was after this baptism that they would receive the Holy Spirit.

Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins ; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The steps he seemed to explain to them was that they should repent in their heart; be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of their sins; and then they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Friend, from the very beginnings of Baptists in America, they have not believed baptism was necessary for salvation.

And I cite the oldest Baptist Confession of Faith in America:

1. Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptised, a sign of his fellowship with Him in His death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into Him;1 of remission of sins;2 and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.3
   
2. Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in and obedience to our Lord Jesus, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.4
   
3. The outward element, to be used in this ordinance, is water, wherein the party is to be baptised, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.5
   
4. Immersion, or dipping of the person in water, is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance.6

Footnotes: ​

1. Ro 6:3-5; Col 2:12; Gal 3:27.
2. Mk 1:4; Ac 22:16.
3. Ro 6:4.
4. Mk 16:16; Ac 8:36-37; 2:41; 8:12; 18:8.
5. Mt 28:19-20; Ac 8:38.
6. Mt 3:16, Jn 3:23.

philadelphia confession-chapter 30

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

Hi Ted,

The concept is not as cut and dry as you suggest. Please consider the following:

1. The Greek word εἰς (rendered in the translation that you posted as "for") has a large semantic range of meaning. Among the plethora of possible definitions are "for", "among", "because of", "in view of", "onto", "in", "into", etc. The word can easily be translated as "because of" since that is a proper translation of this verse that also fits the context.

2. The English word "for" also has a large range of meanings such as “in order to be", "become", "get", "have", "keep", “because of", "as the result of,” “with regard to”, etc. Again, one can read the verse to where "for" means "because of" or "as the result of". The context supports this translation as well. For example, if I say that I took two tylenol tablets for my fever I am obviously not saying that I took the tables in order to get the fever but that I took the tables because of my fever.

3. In many verses of scripture, baptism is not mentioned as the cause of the remission of sins. Take Acts 10 for example where Peter is preaching to a gathering in Caesarea:

43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.” 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the [ag]message. 45 All the [ah]circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” 48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.



In verse 43 Peter makes no mention of baptism as effecting remission of sins but explicitly cites faith as the vessel. This directly contradicts Acts 2:38 if baptism is the cause for the remission of sins. Secondly, the Holy Spirit fell upon them prior to their baptism which refutes that the giving of the HS only happens after baptism. Thirdly, verse 47 explains why one is baptized which involves the inability to refuse baptism once the Holy Spirit has been given. Furthermore, Peter compared the apostle's indwelling experience to the current indwelling experience calling it equal or identical.


Most Baptists hold to the reformation cry of salvation by faith alone. If baptism is necessary for the remission of sins then salvation is not by faith alone since it would also include baptism. Scripture is clear (Eph. 2) that salvation is by the grace of God through faith alone and that none of our works are included as necessary. Baptism is a work since it is a conscious work that we schedule, and do. We can boast about our baptism as I've seen many do.

Might I add;

Three times in Romans 4, the preposition “eiV” (ice) is used. In verse 5: “his faith is counted “eiV = for” righteousness.” In verse 9: “faith was reckoned to him “eiV = for” righteousness. In verse 22: “it was imputed to him “eiV = for” righteousness.” In each of these verses, the preposition “eiV” never means “in the stead of”, but signifies “towards, in order to, with a view to”, and in rare circumstances, it can mean “because of.” It has a uniform usage as “into” or “unto.” The clearest meaning in this passage of scriptures is found in verse 10: “with the heart man believeth unto “eiV” righteousness”: that the believing heart reaches out towards and lays hold of Christ Himself. This passage (cf. Rom. 10:10) may help us to understand what justification by faith is, for it shows that righteousness there comes to us when we embrace God’s goodness offered to us in the Gospel. We are then, for this reason, made just: because we believe that God’s propitious to us through Christ. (Calvin)

The Doctrine of Justification, Restated and Reviewed, Author: me.

And in support of the above, I cite where B.H. Carrol says:

To illustrate the power of the local context in determining the meaning of the Greek preposition, eis (here we have the preposition with the accusative case after it), we now cite most pertinent New Testament examples: Matthew 12:41: "They repented eis the preaching of Jonah." Because eis ordinarily means in order to, must we so render it here? It is a fact, according to chapter 3 of Jonah, and did our Lord so mean it? If so, they failed in the object of their repentance, because Jonah never preached to them after they repented -- not a word. The only preaching he did preceded the repentance, and was the cause of the repentance. Therefore, Dr. Broadus teaches in his Commentary on Matthew that eis here must have its rare meaning – because of. They repented because of, eis, the preaching of Jonah. But they say we must make the ordinary meaning the meaning in every case.

The Theory of Baptisimal Regeneration, by B. H. Carroll

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

Faith is pefected when it is accompanied by works.

James 2:21-21 Wasn’t Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? You see that faith was active together with his works, and by works, faith was perfected.

We also have to remember that there is a command by God to His ministers to baptize. So the one refusing to baptize and the one refusing to be baptized are not expressing a completed faith.

I love it when people use James in support of works based faith and salvation. I also cite from my paper:

Martin Luther wrote in his preface to James and Jude: “James does nothing more than drive a man to the Law and its works.” And this is apparent in some faiths teachings. However, Luther also admits that James wanted to guard against those who relied on faith exclusively but wasn’t quite up to the task.

During the first century, it is commonly held that James was the bishop of the church in Jerusalem. And Paul was a missionary. History dictates that during the early church, two viewpoints developed early on. Paul is well known for his battles with “legalists.” They were the type who said faith in God was correct, but what was also required was a submission to the “Law.”

Luther also was quick to point out that James called the “Law” a “perfect law of liberty.” (cf. Jas. 1:25) Paul viewed it as a Law that brings slavery, (Gal. 5:3) wrath, (Rom. 4:15) sin, (Rom. 7:7) and death (Rom. 7:10).

When men are turned away from their own self-efforts, the next step is to run in the complete opposite direction. If they cannot trust in their own self-righteousness, if they cannot be justified by their own works, then it is just a minor shift to reject works of any kind, and there is no such thing as ungodly living or ungodly practice. This is the door which leads down the path to antinomianism. They turn the grace of God into lasciviousness. (Jude 1:4) And this is very apparent in what it was spreading during the early church.

It has been argued that Paul and James are not contradictory, but rather, complimentary. This can be seen by the statements by these men in that Paul says you are justified by faith, verse James’ teaching that you are justified by works and not by faith alone. Arthur W. Pink wrote:

“Unless the subject and scope of James’ Epistle be clearly seen, the apprehension of many of its statements can only issue in God-dishonoring, grace-repudiating, soul-destroying error. To this portion of the Word of God, more than any other, have legalists appealed in their opposition to the grand truth of justification by grace, through faith, without works. To the declarations of this Epistle have they turned to find support for their Christ-insulting, man-exalting, Gospel-repudiating error of justification by human works. Merit-mongers of all descriptions cite James 2 for the purpose of setting aside all that is taught elsewhere in Scripture on the subject of justification. Romanists, and their half-brothers the Arminians, quote "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (v. 24), and suppose that ends all argument.”[7]

What is maintained is, that Paul addresses the fact of how a man can be justified before God, and James addresses how a man can be justified before man. Paul addresses our justification of persons, while James addresses our justification of profession. The one is by faith alone, while the other worketh by love and produces obedience. (Pink)

Both men use Abraham as an example. And the supposition that James addresses the empty profession rests on the fact that when James says:

“Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?” –Jas. 2:21 (KJV)

Whereas Paul says:

“For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” –Rom. 4:3 (KJV)

A fact that most seen to overlook at are the differences between what Paul is quoting from, and what James quotes, rather, bases their statements on. Paul uses Gen. 15:6 as his basis in Romans 4, and James uses Gen. 22:1-19 for his basis. Abraham was seventy-five years old when he believed God in Genesis 15. However, Abraham was 100 years old when Isaac was born. (cf. Gen. 22:6) Tradition has it that Isaac was around twenty-five when Abraham took him to the mountain for the sacrifice. If the Catholics and Arminians are correct, then it logically means that Abraham had to wait fifty years in order to actually be justified! No! We merely point out that the offering of his son, gave evidence to Abraham’s faith in God.

Professing to be a Christian when one is not may secure a standing before men, it may improve his moral and social prestige, he may be able to join a church, and help promote his commercial interests, but can it save him? What is the use to fein to be charitable when works of charity are withheld? What good does it bring to calling oneself a Christian when empty stomachs are met with good words? How can a person claim to be a Christian and clothe the naked by good wishes? What does it profit to profess to be a believer when there is no true piety?

Neither can a person be saved by a mere empty hollow confession of the Gospel. To say that I am a Christian and am unable to appeal to any good works and spiritual fruits as proof of it, profits neither the person nor those who listen. Without the essential element of “faith worketh by love” (cf. Gal. 5:6), no matter how much reading or studying, no amount of head knowledge, no amount of preaching and teaching one can do, they are no more than “sounding brass and tinkling symbol.” Without love, those professors will be the ones pleading their works but will be told: “Depart, I never knew ye.”

[7] Arthur W. Pink, The Doctrine of Justification, Chapter 9, Its Evidence, book on-line, accessed 5/31/09, found on the World-Wide-web at: 9. Its Evidence

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

If baptism is necessary for salvation then salvation is not by faith alone. Baptism is a work. It does not impart grace and is therefore merited. Salvation is unmerited. It is a free gift.

Amen!

You are saved how?

By faith through grace, it is the gift of God. (cf. Eph. 2:8-9)

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

When you compare scripture with scripture you will find that the seal, the promised Holy Spirit is given when one is baptized (see Acts 2:38)

How about showing me in scripture where any of the disciples were baptized prior to Pentecost.

In fact, they received a partial infilling after the resurrection. (cf. John 20:21-22)

And in fact, at Acts 2:1-4, in the upper room, show me where anybody there had been baptized prior to the coming of the Holy Spirit.

 

[greatdivide46]

.
KJV
Acts 19:1-5
19 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
KJV

You characterized the baptism in this passage as a spiritual baptism. I disagree. I see nothing in these verses that indicates this is not a literal baptism in water.

What's telling in this passage though, is that these disciples believed but did not yet have the Holy Spirit. In fact, they had never even heard that there was a Holy Spirit. This fact immediately brought to Paul's mind their baptism. They knew he was talking about baptism in water because they said they were baptized unto John's baptism which everyone agrees is a baptism in water.

Why did baptism come to Paul's mind when he discovered that these disciples believed but didn't know anything about the Holy Spirit? Because Paul knew that believers receive the Holy Spirit when they are baptized in water (Acts 2:38; 1 Cor. 12:13). Certainly there's a spiritual aspect to baptism, but we dare not deny the physical aspect of baptism -- immersion in water. There are just too many verses that, unless they are misinterpreted, clearly state that God saves people when they are baptized in water.