The question I had was
Does baptism confer
1) Justifying grace?
2) Non justifying Grace?
3) Or is baptism merely symbolic but necessary?
4) Or symbolic and not necessary?
If baptism is necessary for salvation, then faith and baptism are necessary rather than faith alone.
What are the theological arguments involved in the questions outlined above?
This question is relevant to Calvinism?
I would choose number 2 but not certain.
Neither 4 options are fully correct as 1) and 2) work together dynamically, contingent upon one's faith.
Baptism is
promissory as a covenant/contract conditional on "belief". The formula is belief + baptism, or baptism + belief: “He that
believeth (pisteusas
, πιστεύσας, aorist active) and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mk 16:16) i.e. faith is active belief.
There are 2 parts joined in baptism (and or circumcision): a person's belief/faith joins
into God's promise/covenant.
Yet it's God the covenanter who
continuously seeks his covenantee out. Seen also in Christ's marriage to his Church. "If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself." (2 Tim 2:13)
Deu 7:9, "Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God,
the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations"
In Acts 2 the formula is repentance + baptism: "Repent, and be baptized for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38)
About the justification etc, "Paul traces the wider import of circumcision
beyond justification so as
to include regeneration and sanctification. ... The theology of circumcision can be summarized in the ideas of malediction, consecration, identification, justification, and spiritual qualification. The ancient rituals of covenant ratification, both biblical and their international parallels, provide the original historical orientation for the interpretation of this ordinance. In this light circumcision is found to be an oath rite and, as such, a pledge of consecration and a symbol of malediction. That is its primary, symbolic significance." (John Murray, pp 123-124)
Hence, the WCF view:
"BAPTISM is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,[a] not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible church, but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace,[c] of his ingrafting into Christ,[d] of regeneration,[e] of remission of sins,[f] and of his giving up unto God through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life:[g] which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in his church until the end of the world.[h]" (WCF 28.1)
"Although it be a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[n] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated or saved without it,[o] or that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[p]" (WCF 28.5)
Hence, "For Paul, baptism itself does not "inaugurate" the body of Christ, nor is the body of Christ the sum total of all baptized Christians. On the contrary, in some ways the body of Christ existed prior to, and even apart from, baptism." (Richard P. Carlson, The Role of Baptism in Paul's Thought)
So that, "The efficacy of baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered;[q] yet notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited and conferred by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God’s own will, in his appointed time.[r]" (WCF 28.6)
Does that help? lol