The Reason for Baptism

[Sola1517]

Why does Jesus command people to be baptized in Matthew 28:19-20?

 

[twin1954]

Why does Jesus command people to be baptized in Matthew 28:19-20?

Because it is our public profession of faith. When we are baptized we are identifying with the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Read Romans 6.

 

[Sola1517]

Because it is our public profession of faith. When we are baptized we are identifying with the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Read Romans 6.

So baptism is only symbolic and not spiritual?

 

[twin1954]

So baptism is only symbolic and not spiritual?

While it is strictly symbolic there is certainly a spiritual aspect to it. It isn't a "sacrament" as many would tell you where grace is imparted in the rite. But it certainly has a spiritual meaning in that by faith we identify with Christ. Baptism doesn't save us it is simply the answer of a good conscience toward God. We rise from the watery grave to walk in the newness of life. We are dead to the law and no longer under the bondage of sin.

 

[Call me Nic]

It's a shame that many denominations believe that baptism is an essential part of salvation, as if we're supposed to do it to be saved - they miss the whole point of the believer doing it because he wants to proclaim publically that he is putting on the new man. The only thing required for salvation is belief in the heart and confession of the mouth, but baptism is a powerful message sent to everyone that your heart and treasure is stored up in heaven. God gave us the spiritual symbol of baptism so that we can profess our love and devotion to Him on our own accord, as an obedient believer.

Many bible versions leave out Acts 8:37 which explains the prerequisites for baptism, the part where it says you have to believe in Christ (that is, you have to be saved) in order to be baptized.

 

[Dave-W]

Why does Jesus command people to be baptized in Matthew 28:19-20?

Read the text carefully. The command is not to BE baptized, but to baptize. I.e. It is not addressed to the new believer but to the evangelist.

 

[Sola1517]

Baptism doesn't save us it is simply the answer of a good conscience toward God.

1 Peter 3:21 in the English Standard Version says it's "an appeal to God for a good conscience". What translation do you use?

Read the text carefully. The command is not to BE baptized, but to baptize. I.e. It is not addressed to the new believer but to the evangelist.

To that effect, if the evangelist isn't baptized what does that mean about the evangelist? Why isn't the evangelist baptized?

It's a shame that many denominations believe that baptism is an essential part of salvation, as if we're supposed to do it to be saved - they miss the whole point of the believer doing it because he wants to proclaim publically that he is putting on the new man. The only thing required for salvation is belief in the heart and confession of the mouth, but baptism is a powerful message sent to everyone that your heart and treasure is stored up in heaven. God gave us the spiritual symbol of baptism so that we can profess our love and devotion to Him on our own accord, as an obedient believer.

Many bible versions leave out Acts 8:37 which explains the prerequisites for baptism, the part where it says you have to believe in Christ (that is, you have to be saved) in order to be baptized.

That may be true.

 

[Dave-W]

To that effect, if the evangelist isn't baptized what does that mean about the evangelist? Why isn't the evangelist baptized?

It would mean that whomever led him/her (the evangelist) to the Lord did not do their job by baptizing them. And beyond that,they did not properly study scripture themselves to understand the importance of being baptized.

The command is TO baptize, not to BE baptized.

 

[twin1954]

1 Peter 3:21 in the English Standard Version says it's "an appeal to God for a good conscience". What translation do you use?

To that effect, if the evangelist isn't baptized what does that mean about the evangelist? Why isn't the evangelist baptized?

That may be true.

I use several versions but prefer the KJV.

 

[Sola1517]

It would mean that whomever led him/her (the evangelist) to the Lord did not do their job by baptizing them. And beyond that,they did not properly study scripture themselves to understand the importance of being baptized.

Exactly.

The command is TO baptize, not to BE baptized.

Umm, it's actually both. Mark 16:16 is another verse that simply reaffirms in my mind that it's both.

 

[faroukfarouk]

So baptism is only symbolic and not spiritual?

Being born again (John 3) is nothing to do with water baptism.

 

[Dave-W]

Umm, it's actually both. Mark 16:16 is another verse that simply reaffirms in my mind that it's both.

16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.​

There is no command there at all. It just tells us of the effect of baptism. (along with faith, part of the overall salvic process)

The closest to being a command is 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.​

While this IS a command, it is said by Peter to whom 10 days earlier our Lord spoke the words of Matt 28. This is Peter properly discharging his obligation to baptize.

 

[Sola1517]

16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
There is no command there at all. It just tells us of the effect of baptism. (part of the overall salvic process)

I'm pretty sure there's an implicit "do this".

 

[Dave-W]

I'm pretty sure there's an implicit "do this".

No there isn't. And the last part of Mark 16 (verse 9 to the end) is not in the oldest and best translations so it may have been added at some later date. (but not to worry, it accurately reflects the beliefs and practices of the early church) I still take it as authoritative. But in the Greek, there is no command at all. Just passive descriptors.


Many times we have our traditions that we understand, and see texts that we think support them, but upon careful investigation, actually do not. This is one of those cases.

 

[Call me Nic]

16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.​

There is no command there at all. It just tells us of the effect of baptism. (along with faith, part of the overall salvic process)

The closest to being a command is 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.​

While this IS a command, it is said by Peter to whom 10 days earlier our Lord spoke the words of Matt 28. This is Peter properly discharging his obligation to baptize.

You make a good point, and I would like to take it one step further with the Acts 2:38, since that verse is commonly mistaken as a "repent of your sins and be baptized to be saved" verse. That verse was a response to a question asked by the jews asking what they should do, but if you notice in Acts 2:21, Peter already told them how to be saved, which is to call upon the name of the Lord, with no mention of baptism. After they agreed to that he was right, they asked what to do AFTER knowing how to be saved.. which was to repent (of disbelief) and then to be baptized.

 

[Sola1517]

No there isn't. And the last part of Mark 16 (verse 9 to the end) is not in the oldest and best translations so it may have been added at some later date. (but not to worry, it accurately reflects the beliefs and practices of the early church) I still take it as authoritative. But in the Greek, there is no command at all. Just passive descriptors.


Many times we have our traditions that we understand, and see texts that we think support them, but upon careful investigation, actually do not. This is one of those cases.

Oh see, but verse 17 is the verse that starts describing things.

I don't know why it's that big a deal to you. It's kind of like splitting hairs to say the command is to baptize and not be baptized.

Verse 15 is obviously a command and verse 16 says that you have to believe and be baptized to be saved. Therefore the imperative carries over from verse 15 to verse 16. It has to.

 

[Dave-W]

I don't know why it's that big a deal to you. It's kind of like splitting hairs to say the command is to baptize and not be baptized

Because if the command is incumbent on the evangelist instead of the convert, baptism cannot be required for salvation.

 

[Sola1517]

Because if the command is incumbent on the evangelist instead of the convert, baptism cannot be required for salvation.

You might be right. How does one know on the physical plane they have been saved?

 

[twin1954]

You might be right. How does one know on the physical plane they have been saved?

They believe in Jesus Christ alone as their whole and complete salvation.

Baptism isn't required for salvation faith is.

 

[DeaconDean]

They believe in Jesus Christ alone as their whole and complete salvation.

Baptism isn't required for salvation faith is.

Amen!

How many time in the Gospels did Jesus say:

"Thy faith has saved thee"?

If baptism was a requirement, how come one of the hardest working evangelists since Jesus, only baptized two people?

God Bless

Till all are one.