Is baptism required for salvation?

[greatdivide46]

Yes, there are some verses that seem to indicate baptism as a necessary requirement for salvation. However, since the Bible so clearly tells us that salvation is received by faith alone (John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5), there must be a different interpretation of those verses. Scripture does not contradict Scripture. In Bible times, a person who converted from one religion to another was often baptized to identify conversion. Baptism was the means of making a decision public. Those who refused to be baptized were saying they did not truly believe. So, in the minds of the apostles and early disciples, the idea of an un-baptized believer was unheard of. When a person claimed to believe in Christ, yet was ashamed to proclaim his faith in public, it indicated that he did not have true faith.

First of all there is no place in Scripture where it says we are saved by faith alone. The verses cited (John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5) indicate that we are certainly saved by faith. But just because repentance, confession and baptism are not mentioned together with faith does not mean that they are not included in the requirements for salvation. In fact Titus 3:5 does mention the "washing of regeneration" which in New Testament times was a way of referring to baptism. The only place where faith alone is mentioned (James 2:24) it is stated that it does NOT justify.

Does Acts 2:38 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does 1 Peter 3:21 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does John 3:5 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does Acts 22:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does Galatians 3:27 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Yes to all of the above.

 

[miamited]

hi anada,

You wrote: IMO the "good" thief proved the answer is yes. If it were it would have been included alongside faith in Christ in every instance Salvation is mentioned.

Do you have verifiable proof that the thief was not baptized?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[greatdivide46]

As for the thief -- he didn't need to be baptized since baptism for entry into the body of Christ was not even instituted until the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. The thief is not a good example of how a person normally becomes a Christian. Surely his circumstances were extraordinary.

 

[a pilgrim]

As for the thief -- he didn't need to be baptized since baptism for entry into the body of Christ was not even instituted until the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. The thief is not a good example of how a person normally becomes a Christian. Surely his circumstances were extraordinary.

If baptism is what puts one in the body of Christ, did the Apostles and all the existing disciples get REbaptized? They had John's baptism which was a National baptism of repentance for Israel, not the church.

 

[greatdivide46]

If baptism is what puts one in the body of Christ, did the Apostles and all the existing disciples get REbaptized? They had John's baptism which was a National baptism of repentance for Israel, not the church.

My guess would be: Yes, they did get baptized in Jesus' name. However, I can't be dogmatic about that since the Scripture doesn't really say. I can't see how they wouldn't have been, though.

 

[a pilgrim]

My guess would be: Yes, they did get baptized in Jesus' name. However, I can't be dogmatic about that since the Scripture doesn't really say. I can't see how they wouldn't have been, though.

Sola Scriptura, are we bible believers, or theory provers?

Do I adjust my doctrine according to the scriptures or visa versa?

What is the final authority, house doctrine, or the bible?

 

[greatdivide46]

Sola Scriptura, are we bible believers, or theory provers?

Do I adjust my doctrine according to the scriptures or visa versa?

What is the final authority, house doctrine, or the bible?

Well, I'm a Bible believer.

I adjust my doctrine according to the Scriptures, but where the Scriptures are silent I have to take my best guess based in the rest of Scripture.

The final authority is the Bible, which is precisely why I would guess that the apostles were baptized in Jesus name even though the Scriptures are silent as to that. I mean it hardly seems likely that the Apostles would tell others to be baptized in Jesus' name and not do it themselves.

 

[His_disciple3]

First of all there is no place in Scripture where it says we are saved by faith alone. The verses cited (John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5) indicate that we are certainly saved by faith. But just because repentance, confession and baptism are not mentioned together with faith does not mean that they are not included in the requirements for salvation. In fact Titus 3:5 does mention the "washing of regeneration" which in New Testament times was a way of referring to baptism. The only place where faith alone is mentioned (James 2:24) it is stated that it does NOT justify.

Yes to all of the above.

why would the Bible say that we are saved by faith when it clearly states that we are saved by grace through faith and not that of works. If water baptism is what saves us then the person doing the baptism is the one that saved you and not God. Man Baptized you thus man has saved you.

repent means to turn from, or to change ones mind, so yes we need repentance by changing our mind or renewing of the mind, and turning from our evil ways, confessing is not confessing our sins, if I had to confess every one of my sins I would never be saved, for I can not remember every sin that I have done. Romans 10 says to confess Him Lord, " Jesus Christ YOU are Lord" there I just confessed.

Now for the Baptism show me in one scripture that you just quoted and said yes to all :

Does Acts 2:38 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?
​

Does Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does 1 Peter 3:21 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does John 3:5 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does Acts 22:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does Galatians 3:27 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?
​

please show me one verse where it mentions water???? in either of your verses please show me where water/ John's baptism is the one that is being referred to!!

now let me show you what the Bible Does say about Baptism:

Ephesians 4:5-8
5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
KJV

One Lord, One faith and (one work of that faith: Baptism, is the Baptism or work that Christ did for you. not what you do for Him or you do for yourself least ye boast) Baptism : what can wash away our sins water? or Blood?

Hebrews 9:22
22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
KJV

so what Baptism should we seek:
Acts 19:3-6
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.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
KJV
Acts 1:5
5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
KJV
Matthew 3:11
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
KJV
Jesus was baptised and the disciples were baptized with John's baptism, however after they were baptized with John's baptism Jesus said this:

Mark 10:38-39
38 But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?
39 And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them,Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:
KJV

after the disciples had been water baptized Jesus said YE shall be baptized! so what baptism unto salvation do you seek, water or Blood??

 

[His_disciple3]

Well, I'm a Bible believer.

I adjust my doctrine according to the Scriptures, but where the Scriptures I silent I have to take my best guess based in the rest of Scripture.

The final authority is the Bible, which is precisely why I would guess that the apostles were baptized in Jesus name even though the Scriptures are silent as to that. I mean it hardly seems likely that the Apostles would tell others to be baptized in Jesus' name and not do it themselves.

the scriptures are not silent in that the disciples were to receive another baptism after they had received the water baptism, but they had not yet received it for the fact that it was not available, for the blood had not been shed! but even Jesus told them that they would receive it, and if Jesus said it, it would come about, no silence or guessing if the disciples received it.

Mark 10:38-39
38 But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?
39 And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them,Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:
KJV

 

[His_disciple3]

If baptism is what puts one in the body of Christ, did the Apostles and all the existing disciples get REbaptized? They had John's baptism which was a National baptism of repentance for Israel, not the church.

if you base your doctrine on scriptures as you say then you would have to answer yes to your own question did the disciples get REbaptised, For Jesus said they would!

Mark 10:38-39
38 But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?
39 And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them,Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:
KJV

Jesus was baptized by John before He ever started His Ministry, as scriptures teaches us, but well unto His minstry He said this:

Luke 12:46
50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!
KJV

so what saith ye, does scriptures teach of two baptism and does scriptures teach that only one is the right one we should seek. ONE Lord, many things in this world for us to bow to, but only ONE that will be the right one, ONE faith, many things we can have faith in but only ONE will be the right ONE, different ways that we can be baptized, only ONE will be the right ONE, so according to scripture what saith ye, the baptism of John or the Baptism that Jesus promised that He would baptize with?


and think upon this, if John's baptism in needed for salvation? does all that receive the baptism of John receive salvation, or does only those that have God in there heart receive baptism! so who better to know the heart and to baptize unto salvation: John/man or God/Jesus, so who should we let baptize us? man/preachers or God/The Holy Spirit? I choose God

 

[His_disciple3]

hi anada,

You wrote: IMO the "good" thief proved the answer is yes. If it were it would have been included alongside faith in Christ in every instance Salvation is mentioned.

Do you have verifiable proof that the thief was not baptized?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

that is a really good question Ted. one that I have never thought of, however do you have verifiable proof that every time Scriptures speaks of baptism it means water. if Water was the ONE baptism then there would have been another way and Jesus would not had to die. no just as the blood of the bulls and goats was not sufficient neither is the water baptism and we have a New Testament, where by we are, even as the old testament states, saved by grace through faith and not of our works and this is How God could clearly tell paul and anyone else that comes to Him for salvation :

2 Corinthians 12:9
9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
KJV

Lord, I am weak, there is nothing I can do, I need you, Lord, please save me.
Or do we say :

no Lord it's ok . You don't have to do anything I'll just get water baptised that will save me!


Ephesians 2:8
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
KJV

 

[trek4fr]

Mod has decided my posts are not welcomed here.

 

[greatdivide46]

why would the Bible say that we are saved by faith when it clearly states that we are saved by grace through faith and not that of works. If water baptism is what saves us then the person doing the baptism is the one that saved you and not God. Man Baptized you thus man has saved you.

Amen. You are right. Baptism saves no one.

repent means to turn from, or to change ones mind, so yes we need repentance by changing our mind or renewing of the mind, and turning from our evil ways, confessing is not confessing our sins, if I had to confess every one of my sins I would never be saved, for I can not remember every sin that I have done. Romans 10 says to confess Him Lord, " Jesus Christ YOU are Lord" there I just confessed.

Again, I couldn't agree with you more.

Now for the Baptism show me in one scripture that you just quoted and said yes to all :
please show me one verse where it mentions water???? in either of your verses please show me where water/ John's baptism is the one that is being referred to!!

Why is it that people who come to the Bible with the preconceived idea that baptism is merely a confirmation of our salvation feel free to change the definition of the word "baptism"? Water is inherent in the word baptism. Wherever baptism is mentioned, unless context shows otherwise, it means immersion in water. I don't understand why its so hard for people to just accept the dictionary definition of baptism. I've even had people tell me that dictionaries are not inspired therefore they all give the wrong definition of baptism.

now let me show you what the Bible Does say about Baptism:

Ephesians 4:5-8
5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
KJV

One Lord, One faith and (one work of that faith: Baptism, is the Baptism or work that Christ did for you. not what you do for Him or you do for yourself least ye boast) Baptism : what can wash away our sins water? or Blood?

Since there is obviously a water baptism in Scripture it seems to me that the one baptism is baptism in water when we are indwelt by the regenerating presence of the Holy Spirit and God saves us by washing us in the blood of Jesus. I don't see the one baptism excluding water baptism.

so what Baptism should we seek:
Acts 19:3-6
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.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
KJV
Acts 1:5
5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
KJV
Matthew 3:11
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
KJV
Jesus was baptised and the disciples were baptized with John's baptism, however after they were baptized with John's baptism Jesus said this:

Mark 10:38-39
38 But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?
39 And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them,Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:
KJV

after the disciples had been water baptized Jesus said YE shall be baptized! so what baptism unto salvation do you seek, water or Blood??

I seek both because Scripture says they occur simultaneously. The water, of course, does not save, but it is the answer of a good conscience toward God (see 1 Peter 3:21)

 

[greatdivide46]

the scriptures are not silent in that the disciples were to receive another baptism after they had received the water baptism, but they had not yet received it for the fact that it was not available, for the blood had not been shed! but even Jesus told them that they would receive it, and if Jesus said it, it would come about, no silence or guessing if the disciples received it.

Mark 10:38-39
38 But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?
39 And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them,Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:
KJV

This is an obvious metaphorical use of the term baptism. Jesus is using the word to mean overwhelm with suffering. It has nothing at all to do with the literal use of the word "baptism" which is to be immersed in water. But yes, the disciples would be overwhelmed with sufferings.

 

[a pilgrim]

GD46, I see you have just gone back to the standard argument and have not yet resolved that the Apostles and the 120 only had John's baptism, (that being the national baptism of repentance for Israel,) and that they would have had to have post Acts 2 baptism to be IN CHRIST.

Also, you said in an above post,

I don't understand why its so hard for people to just accept the dictionary definition of baptism.

Are you serious? The dictionary, our final authority? Also,

Ephesians 4:5-8
5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
KJV

Since there is obviously a water baptism in Scripture it seems to me that the one baptism is baptism in water when we are indwelt by the regenerating presence of the Holy Spirit and God saves us by washing us in the blood of Jesus. I don't see the one baptism excluding water baptism.

There are many baptisms in scripture. Because of your interpretation, it may seem obvious to you, but have you considered it could be otherwise. We all are wrong on somethings. What about this:

1 Cor. 12
[13] For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Titus 3
[4] But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
[5] Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
[6] Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

This is Spirit or spiritual baptism into the Body of Christ by the Holy Spirit and it is not by a work which we have done. The scripture clearly teaches the number involved between the guilty sinner and the Righteous God:

1 Tim. 2
[5] For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

If one HAS to be baptized in water by a human agent in order to be placed IN CHRIST, then the above scripture is inaccurate. There has to be TWO mediators between God and men, Christ Jesus AND the "baptizer."

Disclaimer: I want to make it clear, I am not one of those who think baptism is so UNimportant that it is skipped, rescheduled, down-played. It was an integral part of the Apostolic Formula. Those repenting and turning to salvation provided in Christ were always immediately baptized.

Acts 2
[41] Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

But they had to receive it FIRST.

John 1
[12] But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
[13] Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

This birth was spiritual, not an ACT of man.

 

[greatdivide46]

Originally posted by a_pilgrim

GD46, I see you have just gone back to the standard argument and have not yet resolved that the Apostles and the 120 only had John's baptism, (that being the national baptism of repentance for Israel,) and that they would have had to have post Acts 2 baptism to be IN CHRIST.

I don't know what the standard argument is so I'll have to trust you that I've gone back to it. Of course the Apostles and possibly even the 120 experienced John's baptism. However, it is my contention that on the Day of Pentecost recorded in Acts 2 in accordance with Jesus command in Matthew 28:19 that the Apostles the 120 and the other 3,000 who became Christians that day were all baptized in the name of Jesus. I know Scripture doesn't say they were, but somehow I just can't believe that the Apostles themselves were disobedient to a command Jesus gave them concerning others.

Also, you said in an above post,

Originally posted by greatdivide46

I don't understand why its so hard for people to just accept the dictionary definition of baptism.
​

Are you serious? The dictionary, our final authority?

Exactly the point I was trying to make. People who come to Scripture with the preconceived notion the baptism is nothing more than a sign or a confirmation just dismiss the dictionary definition because it goes against what they believe. Believe it or not words have meaning and the meaning of baptism is to immerse in water.

 

[His_disciple3]

Salvation in the Bible is not a monolithic concept; there are many different understandings of salvation and what it means to be saved. Sometimes it means deliverance or to be set free. Sometimes it means to return from exile. Sometimes it means to restore relationship. Most often, it means healing, wholeness. What it does not mean is “to go to heaven.” For the Jews and for the early church, the hope of an afterlife was envisioned, not as floating off to heaven, but in being resurrected to live on a new earth. This doesn’t mean that there is no afterlife, but that the focus of following Jesus was not in going to heaven, but in seeing God’s will done on earth. How is that done? Jesus told us. Love God, love others. That’s how God’s will is done on earth. That’s how we (and the earth) are saved – restored, healed, set free, made whole.

We can’t do this alone. We need each other. This is why communities are so important. And one of the signs for entering this “kingdom of God” community that Jesus taught about is baptism. Baptism is a sign of leaving behind one way of life and embracing another way of life, especially in turning away from a self-centered life into a God-centered and others-centered way as Jesus taught us. So if we see baptism as a sign of commitment to God’s people and God’s work on earth, I think we have a healthier and more Christ-centered understanding of what this rite points to – that we are covenanting with God and with each other to be communities of compassion in a world that needs saving in every way that the scriptures describe it.

could you give some scripture reference to your claim of salvation

 

[trek4fr]

Mod has decided my posts are not welcomed here.

 

[tackattack]

GD46, I see you have just gone back to the standard argument and have not yet resolved that the Apostles and the 120 only had John's baptism, (that being the national baptism of repentance for Israel,) and that they would have had to have post Acts 2 baptism to be IN CHRIST.

Also, you said in an above post,

Are you serious? The dictionary, our final authority? Also,

There are many baptisms in scripture. Because of your interpretation, it may seem obvious to you, but have you considered it could be otherwise. We all are wrong on somethings. What about this:

1 Cor. 12
[13] For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Titus 3
[4] But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
[5] Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
[6] Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

This is Spirit or spiritual baptism into the Body of Christ by the Holy Spirit and it is not by a work which we have done. The scripture clearly teaches the number involved between the guilty sinner and the Righteous God:

1 Tim. 2
[5] For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

If one HAS to be baptized in water by a human agent in order to be placed IN CHRIST, then the above scripture is inaccurate. There has to be TWO mediators between God and men, Christ Jesus AND the "baptizer."

Disclaimer: I want to make it clear, I am not one of those who think baptism is so UNimportant that it is skipped, rescheduled, down-played. It was an integral part of the Apostolic Formula. Those repenting and turning to salvation provided in Christ were always immediately baptized.

Acts 2
[41] Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

But they had to receive it FIRST.

John 1
[12] But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
[13] Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

This birth was spiritual, not an ACT of man.

I just have a couple of comments, hope you can take them at face value and not read too much into it.

1- the dictionary is our final authority on what words mean, that's their purpose. While the Bible is my final authority for how to live my life and know God and Christ better, I don't go to my Bible when I need a recipe for pancakes. Words mean something.

2- I though the scripture clearly teaches the number involved between the sinner and God was one? Then you followed that by saying it's 2, did you just contradict directly the scripture you quoted?

3-I'd also like to add that Christ is my mediator, he tore the curtain and I have a serious problem with someone standing between me and God almight if his name isn't Jesus. No baptizer is necssary for my savation from Christ. I could just as easily baptise myself. My sanctification comes from Christ's grace resting on me, convicting me and me accepting it into my heart. That's typically followed by a lot of things like dieing to the old self, indwelling of the spirit, testimony, baptism. That's all indicative though and not dependant.

 

[His_disciple3]

Sure. The Hebrews wanted to be saved from their captivity and enslavement in Egypt. The Israelites wanted to be saved from their exile in Babylon. The crowds that followed Jesus into Jerusalem wanted him to save them from Roman occupation. Peter wanted Jesus to save him from drowning in the sea.

For specific references, see: Judges 10:15; 1 Sam 7:8; 1 Chron 16:35; Psa 60:5; Psa 80:3,7,19; Luke 23:29; 2 Tim 1:9; Titus 3:5; Luke 1:71; Luke 19:9; 2 Cor 7:10; Titus 2:11

You can find many more using a concordance. The instances were being saved or having salvation means "leaving earth and going to heaven" are relatively few.

so we can play with words and get off track of the thread or we can focus on the thread. either way you have mentioned God was still needed to save these people. But this is not salvation in the contents of the thread . But of course you know this. so peter needed Jesus to save him from drowning so Jesus baptized him, I am sure this is what you meant seeing you are responding to a thread about salvation and baptism!