- Nov 3, 2004
- 31,716
- 1,425
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Assuming he was baptized by John, John's baptism was not in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.People tell me the thief on the cross wasn't baptized and yet reached heaven so that proves that we don't need baptism really ever to be saved.
Let me point a couple things that I think are wrong with that view.
1) The Bible says that all Jerusalem, Judea, and the surrounding areas were going to John to be baptized (Matthew 3:5-6). This thief could well have been among the multitudes that were baptized by John and then for whatever reason fell away for a time. We know the purpose of the baptism of John was to prepare people to receive the Messiah who was coming. So while this is an assumption, it really is an assumption either way. Yes the Bible doesn't mention his baptism, but it also doesn't say he wasn't baptism either. Kinda like saying, "Well the Bible doesn't mention dinosaurs so the dinosaurs never existed." Its a fallacy argument.
It was a sign of repentance.
He was never baptized into Christ.
Some were baptized into Moses ...
1Cor 10:2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
Many in the OT were baptized into demons and other gods. Jews were baptized into their teachers.
Baptism IN CHRIST is the only baptism that matters.
All the rest have another purpose.
Of course he believed, because he asked to be with Jesus in His Kingdom.2) What is the gospel message? Jesus died, was buried, and crucified (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). So how could this thief have believed according to the gospel if Jesus hadn't even died yet when he asked for "remembrance"? He couldn't. We know from several accounts in the gospels that Jesus had authority to forgive sins while on Earth. That is merely what Jesus was doing on the cross, as he had done several times before. This thief on the cross was redeemed under the Old Covenant as were those who came before. Actually, in all likelihood, this thief on the cross was the last person to ever receive redemption in such a way. Sure Jesus died before this thief did in all likelihood, but no way was Jesus buried before or resurrected before. So the thief could not be a "born again" believer in that sense of the word, like you and me.
So using the thief on the cross as proof that baptism isn't necessary ever is really a misplaced position.
What do you think belief is?
Upvote
0