The Most Important Ingredient [Archive]

Swordslinger

10-31-2005, 14:58

This is chapter one of a book that I am in the process of writing. Please excuse any typos. I believe the topic is of paramout importance to Christians. In fact, I believe it is a life or death teaching. Your coments are welcome. :)

http://truerepublic.org/pics/Baptism%20Harison%20Ind%20(Small)%20(2).jpg

The Most Important Ingredient in discovering New Truth.It was not hard choosing a title for this chapter. The importance to the subject at hand is paramount to ALL other subjects.

As I first became a True Christian, I had listened to a cassette tape message, entitled, “How do we know the Bible is the inspired word of God”. This message brought about truths concerning how the enemies of Christ had worked so diligently in keeping the Word of God, out of the hands of the people. Their efforts failed, demonstrating the indestructibility of the Holy Word of God, and re-enforcing its infallibility.

As I began researching, and preparing to write this chapter, I began to see that “they” have been very successful in the last several decades in removing God’s people from the Bible in two ways.

1. By cheating the posterity of the God's people out of their inheritance. (We will go into more detail on that in coming chapters.)
2. And by removing the understanding of the Scriptures, and the desire to study them.

“How do you do that?” you might ask. One way is to teach that the Bible is a book of “fairy tales”, have the ministers tell the people that the Christian Bible maintains that the earth is only 6000 years old, and that all races come from Adam. Even more damage is done when they condemn the THEORY of evolution, and then turn around and say that the Bible teaches that all races on the face of the earth are the descendents of Noah, and his three sons. (Who, by the way were all of the same racial stock.) Of course they don’t say they “evolved”, they just say they moved to different parts of the world where the climates were different and they “adapted” each to their own environment. Nonsense!!

What is described above is not Christianity; it is “Judeo-Christianity”. What I commonly call “churchianity” for lack of a better word.

The most damaging blow dealt to God’s people by the anti-Christ forces, came around 1068A.D. when Pope Anacletus the 2nd, of the Pierleoni family, introduced changing Baptism from immersion, to sprinkling. This is admitted a Catholic Document entitled; The Church- Prepared for in the Old Covenant. By Cardinal Christophe Schonborn, O.P.

According to the World Book Encyclopedia,
"At first all baptism was by complete immersion" (vol. 1, p. 651). And the Catholic Encyclopedia states, "In the early centuries, all were baptized by immersion in streams, pools and baptisteries" (vol. 2, p. 263). Immersion was not convenient after the Catholic Church instituted infant baptism; thus the mode was changed to sprinkling. (See Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed, vol. 3, pp. 365-66)

The goal was reached in 1311 A.D. when Pope Clement V at the Council of Vienne, when it was finally officially changed, robbing Millions of Christians of the Gospel Plan Of Salvation. “An enemy hath done this.”

They had rediscovered the ancient art of their forefathers of how wield the most powerful weapon in the world against God’s people. What weapon is that? God’s hand itself.
Who are they? Let's just say they are of their father the devil, and the will of their father they will do. That's what Christ said.

For a full understanding, one must read the entire chapter of Deuteronomy 28. Contained therein are the blessings if we observed God’s commandments and the curses if we do not. For instant, if “they” can get us involved with sin, and God said He would punish us for sin, then they have harnessed the power of God as a weapon. Another example: If God instructed the Israelites to put the blood of the slain lamb on the door post, and the lintel, and “they” (the enemies of the Israelites) made them believe that it wasn’t necessary, then God’s Hand would fall upon the firstborn of those houses because they didn’t apply the blood as directed.

The same happens when we are misled as to the means of how to absolve, or to receive forgiveness for our sins. According to the Bible, sin is a transgression of God’s law (commandments). 1st John 3:4.

As a result, we now have a teaching that has done more damage to God’s people than all of the worlds wars put together, the 20,000,000 plus Christians murdered by the Bolshevik anti-Christ in the former USSR, and all of Nero’s lions combined. What teaching is that? It goes something like this:

“Accept Jesus Christ as your savior, and let Him come into your heart.”

The problem with this is, it is not found in scripture! Nowhere! Maybe, just maybe we should be concerned about Christ accepting us as His personal servant and letting us come into His kingdom. The salvation issue is of paramount importance! So important, that without proper teaching, many truths will remain concealed to us because in our learning of Holy things, we must rely on God’s Holy Spirit as our guide. Without proper teaching on the Biblical plan of salvation, we will not receive “the gift of the Holy Spirit”.

We, as carnal men have made difficult the issue of salvation with volume, upon volumes written to explain away the simple Biblical teaching on God’s gospel (good news) plan of salvation. According to the Word of God, it is His will for us to:

“…be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” 1st Timothy 2:4

The “and” in the above scripture is what is called a “coordinative conjunction” which means He wants us to do both. It is my belief that the Holy Bible is the inspired Word of God, No not the commentary in the back, of the notes at the bottom of the page! Although we have many translations about us today, (many of which we should be very cautious of) God has seen to it that His Covenant people have at their very finger tips, the means to; “be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth”.

Yes, many things in Scripture are concealed and need to be studied out, but the salvation of ones soul through the Blood of Jesus Christ is not one of them. It is the traditions of men that have confused the matter with their volumes written to explain their false doctrine. In this writing we will look at many of those objections, and will show the reader how simple, important, and necessary it is to understand God’ s recipe for salvation.

First, let’s look at; “what saves you?” This is a question that many new converts have. To be saved, we must first have forgiveness of our sins. But, what is sin? It is surprising that many in the Judeo-Christian churches will get this answer wrong. The Bible gives us a crystal clear answer to the question.

“…Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” 1st John 3:4

Many in today’s churches use distortions of Paul’s words to claim that the whole Law is done away with, just as Peter said they would in 2nd Peter 3: 15-16.

“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”

If there is no law, then there is no sin, and if there is no sin, then why do we need Christ? They teach this to there own destruction. That is not the intention of this writing, but one needs simply to look to the words of Christ to see if the Law is done away with.

“Think not that I come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Matthew 5:17

If sin is a transgression of the law, and we need forgiveness from our sins to be saved, then how are we forgiven according to God’s Word, not the doctrine and traditions of men? God’s Word has this to say about the matter.

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

Pretty clear, is it not? Christ also stated that is was His Blood that is shed for forgiveness.

“For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” Matthew 26:28

If Christ’s blood is for the forgiveness of sins, then our next logical question would be; “How do we contact, or apply that blood to our sinful life?” Is that not a valid question? Well, if our hands our dirty, and the soap remains in the dish, will our hands be made clean? What if we believe on the soap, will they then be made clean? No! Another good example is found in the book of Exodus, when God was preparing to free His children.
“And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it.” Exodus 12:7

What if they put the blood on the doorpost of their garage? Would the Destroyer have passed over? What if they left the bucket outside the door, like a child who leaves cookies and milk for Santa? What if you were the firstborn, and you had seen with your own eyes the plagues on Egypt, and you saw your father sprinkling the blood on the door mat for easy clean up? Would you not beg your father to do as The Lord commanded? Of course you would, and so would I!!

Make no mistake about it. There were probably some that said; “Don’t you think that is a little Pharisaical---- brother?” or “A God of love only cares about what is in your heart, not what is on your doorposts and lintel”. And what was the result? They Died!

We apply the blood ONLY by following God’s Biblical plan of Salvation. It is a simple recipe found in scripture. As with any recipe, there are ingredients. Here are the ingredients.

Ingredient number 1 is;
Belief in Christ.
“I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.” John 8:24

2. Confession of Christ as Lord. (when this was penned, it could mean your life to confess him as your Lord and Master)
“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.” Romans 10:9

3. Repentance. (a change of mind, a turning)
“…except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.” Luke13:3

All of the above you will hear in modern churchianity if you attend long enough, but rarely all at the same time. But only a few will tell you of the final ingredient that opens the flood gates that we may apply the Blood of Christ to our filthy, sin stained life.

4. “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:38

That is the exact same Greek phrase found in Matthew 26:28, (“..for the forgiveness of sins”) that the Master used when He instituted the Holy Communion. It is in the waters of Baptism, after all of the other ingredients have been added, (and not until) that we contact the Blood of Christ. Ananias instructed Paul:
“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” Acts 22:16

Paul writes to the Romans:
“…..being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.” Romans 5:9

Christ the Master said Himself:
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Mark 16:16

Peter, the one whom Christ handed the “keys to the Kingdom” said:
“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” 1st Peter 3:21

If the Blood of Christ cleanses us from sin, and Baptism is “FOR the forgiveness of sins”, and Baptism “washes away sins”, then is it safe to say that in the waters of Baptism (having been obedient to all the other commands) we contact that Blood? The answer is clear.

An ingredient has been left out for a long time. And if you leave out of a cake one ingredient, let’s say eggs, what you have is not a cake, but a Frisbee. And that is what we have among our people today, a bunch of Frisbees being tossed about by every wind of doctrine. (Ephesians 4:14)

Notice that 2nd Timothy 2:4 says “be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.” Notice that “saved” is mentioned first, because we need the Gift of the Holy Spirit to guide us to truth. We receive that when we do as those on the Day of Pentecost, when three thousand souls were added by following Peter’s command of; Repent, and let each of you be Baptized for the remission (forgiveness) of your sin and you shall receive the GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT!

Without the Spirit of Christ, we are not His:
“But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Romans 8:9

We just read earlier the “how” we get the Holy Spirit. When we follow God’s simple little plan, He gives it to us freely. And we must have it to be counted as one of His.

The Objections commonly heard when teaching the Bible Plan:1. “What about the thief on the cross?”

Was the thief on the cross under the New Covenant, or the Old? Let us go to the Word.
“And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.” (Hebrews 9:15-17)

From Scripture, we can determine that the new covenant was not brought in until after the death of The Christ on the cross. I would also like to add this point; While Christ was here He could grant salvation to whom ever He pleased. Let us not forget, He is God. (John 1:1-14) Just as I can give my knife to who ever I please. But when I’m dead, and gone to be with the Lord, you will have to follow my last will and Testament.

Objection: “baptism is an outward sign of an inward grace”

Did Peter say that in Acts 2:38? No, you will not find that anywhere in Scripture. But you will find where Christ our Master said;
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Mark 16:16

Objection- “What about Ephesians 2:8-9?” “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

Usually this statement is made saying that Baptism is a “work” and as a result, we should take no part in it. First of all, if that is the case, what about the Scriptures we read? Do we tear them out of our Bibles? No! There is no contradiction in the Scriptures on this matter. We as finite simple minded men sometimes think so. But that is not the case, quite contrary actually.
The word used for “work” is #2041 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. And the definition reads as follows:
“2041 ergon er'-gon from a primary (but obsolete) ergo (to work); toil (as an effort or occupation); by implication, an act:--deed, doing, labour, work.”
The word work that is used in Ephesians 2 is the same word, #2041 that is used in the following Scripture.

“…..This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.” John 6:29
If you must call Baptism a “work”, you must also call belief a “work” also. The Word of God tells us that what we do in obedience shows of our faith. An “outward sign of an inward faith” if you will?

“Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” James 2:24

You may be asking yourself, “What’s the difference?” The difference is this, the works mentioned in Ephesians 2:9 are works of SELF righteousness, and the works mentioned in James 2:24 are works of righteousness. Do not the Scriptures themselves teach us to, “Worketh Righteousness”?
“But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.” Acts 10:35

This Scripture shows us that works of righteousness makes us acceptable to Him.
“My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness” Psalms 119:172

When we obey a commandment of God, it is a work of righteousness. We are commanded in Scripture to; believe in Christ, to confess Him as Lord with our mouth, to repent of our sins, and to be baptized FOR the forgiveness of sins. His commandments are righteousness, and Christ, The Lord God and Master said, “If you love me, keep my commandments” John 14:15

Objection- “Mark 16:16 says “….He who has believed and been baptized shall be saved, but he who disbelieves will be damned”

The argument is this: “Why does He not say he that has disbelieved and has not been baptized will be dammed”?
Because it goes without saying! That’s why! It is like saying that, “He who soweth and cultivateth shall reap; but he who soweth not , reapeth not.” If you do not sow, you will not reap, know matter how much work you do. Just as if you are baptized, but do not believe, it is just another dip in the pond! The same can be said, and is by Christ, if you believe only and are not Baptized.

The Mode-Over the years our language has been perverted beyond belief. Thirty years ago to call someone “Gay” meant you were giving them a compliment. Today, you would be calling them a sexual pervert. Quite a change from its original meaning, wouldn’t you say? As we go though this writing, we will address many names that have different meaning than they originally did.

Today when someone asks the question; “Have you been baptized?” When answering, they may be referring to one of these three modes:
-Sprinkling -Pouring -Immersion/Submersion
But only one of the above modes is the “Baptism” prescribed in the Holy Scriptures. Baptism is a word that was not translated, but transliterated. They translators used the “B” for the Greek letter “beta”, and “A” for “alpha” and so on. They did this because the church at the time was sprinkling, as we mentioned before as had been suggested by Pope Anacletus the 2nd.

The word, “baptism” is what is called an “onomatopoeia”, which means the word itself describes a sound. For instant, when a dog barks, it makes the sound; “Bark!” When we describe to someone what the dog was doing, we say, “It was barking”. The word “baptize” is the same type of word. It was derived from the sound that the dipper made when being submerged into the water. It makes the sound, “Bap”.

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance gives use this definition from the original Greek that it was transliterated from:
907 “baptizo bap-tid'-zo from a derivative of 911; to immerse, submerge; to make whelmed (i.e. fully wet); used only (in the New Testament) of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism:--Baptist, baptize, wash.”
It also directs us to #911 (interesting considering the importance of understanding this.)
911 “bapto bap'-to a primary verb; to whelm, i.e. cover wholly with a fluid; in the New Testament only in a qualified or special sense, i.e. (literally) to moisten (a part of one's person), or (by implication) to stain (as with dye):--dip.”

Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament say this”
907 “1. To dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge.
2. To cleanse by dipping, or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water.”
911 To dip, dip in, immerse”

How do we get “sprinkling” from that word? I’ll tell you how, “an enemy hath done this!” Here is the Greek work for sprinkling from Strong’s.
4472” rhantizo hran-tid'-zo from a derivative of rhaino (to sprinkle);…”
Here is the Thayer’s definition:
1) “to sprinkle
2) to cleanse by sprinkling, hence to purify, cleanse”*

Sprinkle is not the word that was used! It is and always has been, “baptize”. Period!! And you know what? It still is, and it can not be changed no matter how many Popes change it!

It is very simple to understand from the definition given above. But let’s see if the Holy Scriptures gives a definition as clear as the ones above.

“And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.” John 3:23
Sprinkling or pouring does NOT require “much water”. Let us look at another:
“And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.” Acts 8:38-39

They went “into” the water, and when they were finished they came “up” out of the water. Let us look at another:

“And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him” Matthew 3:16

Here we see the same thing. But everywhere you look you see images of Jesus having water poured over His head by John the Baptist with a sea shell. Again I say, “An enemy hath done this!”

Many have said that the baptism that we are speaking of here is the “baptism of the Holy Spirit”. And clearly there is a baptism of the Holy Spirit, but this is totally different. Please note that Phillip said to the Ethiopian eunuch, “Behold, here is water”, not “Word”, or “Spirit” but “WATER”!

Example, if I say, “it is going to flurry today” it goes with out saying that I mean a “snow flurry”. Not a flurry of dandruff, or sawdust, but SNOW! The same principle goes for the word “baptism”. You know it means “water” unless otherwise specified. The Master, Jesus Christ said:

“Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” John 3:5
Why be immersed in water?

It does seem sort of silly to our finite little minds. Many commandments in Scripture seem to be absurd at the time they are given. Later in out history we discover why. An excellent example that comes to mind is the food laws. When they were originally given, there were no microscopes to see the trichinosis (worms) crawling around in swine’s flesh. They didn’t realize that it had microscopic cysts that contain those worms that are protected from the heat, no matter how much you cook it. They could see that every cell in the swine has a layer of fat around it, making it impossible to trim from the meat. They just obeyed because the Heavenly Father said to do it. Why immersion in water? Other than being symbolic of the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord, and Christ, maybe because it is the first physical act of obedience. Maybe, we being “finite” should be more concerned about being obedient, rather than trying to understand the “infinite”.

I believe it to be because it is the point when we become totally submissive to His will. It is when we realize that we are no longer in charge, but under His law. I also believe it to be a way back into the marriage, that we were divorced from God and thrown into captivity for our disobedience. (Jeremiah 3:8)
Baptism is also the death of ones old sinful self. What do you do with a dead person? Do you throw dirt in their face, or sprinkle a little dirt on their forehead? No! You bury them! As Christ was buried, and resurrected, baptism is a likeness of His resurrection.

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:” Romans 6:3-5

Before you leave on your journey to find new truths, I ask you; Have you received His guiding light Spirit? Are you “one of His”? (Romans 8:9) Have you been totally obedient to The Word of God, not the traditions of men? Have you humbled yourself before His throne? Are there any ingredients missing from your recipe?

The choice is clear. Do you want truth? God has ordained it for one man to tell another. I have just told you. The ball is in your court, and you will no longer be able to use the excuse, “I didn’t know Lord”. And now I say to you the same thing that Ananias said to Paul:
“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” Acts 22:16

:)

Swordslinger

01-07-2006, 16:49

Since this is regarding the Biblical Plan of Salvation, I thought I would add this here too. I sometimes get PM's asking me "why", and "what do you think about", so this should help with the objections that I have recieved concerning Baptism for Forgivness of sins.

Fifty Objections to What the Scriptures Say About Baptism Answered.
This pretty much coveres everything that I can think of. If you have any more, please post them, and I will be happy to research them. :)
Baptism is one of the most controversial doctrines in Christendom today. In light of the clear statements found in the Bible, one should wonder why there is so much debate over this elementary issue.
Man is always prone to his own thoughts and conclusions and, sometimes, to protecting them at all costs. This being man’s proclivity, it is worth repeating that "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." (Proverbs 14:12)

The Scriptures Themselves
In order to lay the proper foundation necessary for responding to objections, I would first point you to the Scriptures themselves. Lay aside previously held beliefs. Forget about what this man, or any other man, teaches. Simply read the Scriptures for what they say, and come to your own conclusions.
At this point, I am not asking you to accept what these passages say, but simply to admit what they say.

Mark 16:15-16
And he [Jesus] said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.Acts 2:36-47
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same, Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls…. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.3
Acts 22:16
And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Romans 6:3-4
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Galatians 3:26-27
For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Colossians 2:11-13
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses.
1 Peter 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

These scriptures are so clearly stated that anyone should be able to read them and discern what they say. The issue becomes unclear only when people declare that these passages do not really mean what they say.

Objections Answered
Please keep in mind that how well an objection is framed or how poorly it is answered does not change or negate what is found in Scripture. God’s Word remains the standard by which we must judge all objections. I pray that you will find the following answers helpful in your search for truth about this very important issue.

Objection 1: There are many scriptures such as John 3:16 and Acts 16:31 that only require faith in Jesus to obtain salvation. They do not mention baptism.

Answer: Scripture must never be pitted against scripture. Instead, scripture must be harmonized:
The sum of Thy word is truth…. (Psalm 119:160 NASV)If we want to know God’s Will on anything found in His Word, we must do an exhaustive search of the Bible pertaining to the subject in question. The Lord denounces "smorgasbord-style" Bible study:
…the word of The Lord was unto them … here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. (Isaiah 28:13)
We are not at liberty to go through the Bible randomly collecting scriptures that, by themselves, appear to authenticate a particular doctrine or belief. Everything that the Bible states on any subject must be considered and harmonized in order to determine the truth about that doctrine. Additionally, one scripture can never be used to trump or negate another scripture.
People who argue against baptism as a part of the biblical plan of salvation for the reason stated in Objection 1 seldom apply the same standard to other doctrines in the Bible. For example, it is generally accepted that in order to have our prayers answered we must ask (James 4:2), in the name of the Savior (John 14:13-14), believing (Matthew 21:22), without doubting (James 1:6), according to God’s will (1 John 5:14), with pure motives, and not for our own pleasures (James 4:3). There is not one verse or passage that contains all that is required to have our prayers answered. A person must search for the sum of God’s will in many passages in order to correctly ascertain the truth regarding prayer.
The same is true concerning salvation. John 3:16 says nothing about repentance. However, from Luke 13:3, 2 Corinthians 7:9-10 and 2 Peter 3:9-10, we understand that a person must also repent of his sins. Neither does John 3:16 say anything about confession. However, from Matthew 10:32-33, Romans 10:9-10 and 1 John 4:15, we understand that a person must also confess Jesus as the Son of God and as Lord. And John 3:16 does not say anything about baptism. However, from Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38 and 1 Peter 3:21, we understand that a person must also be baptized for the forgiveness of his sins.

Objection 2: Sound hermeneutics demands that our conclusion on any doctrinal matter must side with the weight of Scripture. Therefore, faith alone is all that is necessary for salvation.

Answer: By this criterion, repentance and a confession of faith must also be discounted, denied and rejected. Sound hermeneutics relies upon the sum, not the weight, of God’s Word to determine truth.

Objection 3: In his second sermon in Acts 3:19, Peter said, "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out…." Peter made no mention of baptism in this sermon.

Answer: Peter’s sermon is probably not recorded in its entirety. Therefore, it cannot be said with certainty that he did not mention baptism in Acts 3. Furthermore, if someone has the right to pit Acts 3:19 against Acts 2:38 then someone else would have just as much right to pit Acts 2:38 against Acts 3:19. But who gets to decide which is correct? Acts 3:19 no more nullifies Acts 2:38 than Acts 2:38 nullifies Acts 3:19 – the sum of God’s Word is truth.

Objection 4: The thief on the cross was not baptized.

Answer: The command to be baptized for salvation came forty days after the thief, and more importantly after Jesus had died. Consequently, the thief was still under the Old Covenant when he was granted salvation and was not required to keep the New Covenant commission first given in Matthew 28 and Mark 16.
The New Covenant did not take effect until Jesus died:
…where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: Otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. (Hebrews 9:16-17)
A testament or covenant is essentially the same as a will. Because Jesus had not yet died when He granted salvation to the thief on the cross, He could provide salvation to him under whatever terms He chose. However, since Jesus’ death there is only one way by which a person can obtain salvation, and that is by the conditions of Jesus ’s last will and testament – faith (Hebrews 11:6), repentance (2 Corinthians 7:9-10), confession of Jesus (Romans 10:9-10) and baptism (Mark 16:15-16).

Objection 5: Other than the Apostle Paul, there is no biblical record of the apostles ever being baptized.

Answer: Doctrine cannot be established by silence. The fact that the Bible does not record the apostles’ baptisms does not prove they were not baptized. I know of one man that is of the opinion that the twelve apostles were not baptized because they did not need to be born of the water (Romans 6:3-4) anymore than Adam needed to be born of the womb of a woman. Spiritual life began for the apostles in a similar fashion to how Adam’s physical life began – Adam received physical life by God breathing upon him (Genesis 2:7), and the apostles received spiritual life by the God breathing upon them (John 20:22). Although Adam was provided physical life in a special way, everyone else from that point forward had to be born by the physical laws of reproduction. In like fashion, although it appears the apostles were provided spiritual life in a special way, everyone else from that point forward had to be born by the spiritual laws of reproduction (Mark 16:15-16, etc.). This is his opinion only, as I believe they were baptized. Remember, Christ told the Apostles to teach as He had taught them. And they taught baptism for remmision of sins. (Acts 2:38) Again, doctrine can not be established by silence.

Objection 6: Revelation 3:20 teaches that Jesus is knocking on the door of our heart and that if we ask Him to come into our heart, He promises to fellowship with us. There is nothing in this verse that indicates that baptism is necessary for this saved relationship with God.

Answer: Neither is there anything in Revelation 3:20 to indicate that someone is supposed to ask Jesus into their heart in order to come into fellowship or a saved relationship with God. This verse has been robbed of its context, and it is repeatedly used to teach something it does not teach. It has nothing to do with someone’s initial salvation or relationship with Jesus.
The context of Revelation 3:20 begins with verse 14, which was written to the church of the Laodiceans. The Greek word "ekklesia" translated church means those called out and denotes people who had already been saved. These were the same Christians to whom it was written in verses 15 and 16, "I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth." Verse 20 is not an explanation concerning how to be saved, but rather how backslidden Christians can come back into a pleasing relationship with God.
The doctrine of asking Jesus into your heart is completely foreign to the Bible and is nothing but a tradition of man. There are no passages that teach this doctrine nor are there any examples of anyone doing this. Additionally, those who teach this false doctrine usually teach one or any combination of the following things about baptism – it is a symbolic outward sign of inward grace, a witness to others, just an act of obedience, a work of man, it has nothing to do with salvation – none of which can be found anywhere in the Bible. In other words, one man-made doctrine begat other man-made doctrines.

Objection 7: "Baptism is a work of man, and the Apostle Paul informed us in Ephesians 2:8-9 that we are saved by the grace of God through faith, not by works."

Answer: The works addressed by Paul in Ephesians 2 are works of the law, not the works of "righteousness" that I mentioned in the above post.
But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ…. Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments…. (Ephesians 2:13-15)

Nowhere is baptism identified as a work of man. Instead baptism is equated with salvation in Mark 16:16 and 1 Peter 3:21, forgiveness of sins in Acts 2:38, 22:16 and Colossians 2:11-13, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38, circumcision of the heart in Colossians 2:11-13, a new life in Romans 6:3-4, becoming children of God in Galatians 3:26-27, putting on Christ in Galatians 3:27, and being added to the body of Christ in Acts 2:41, 47 and 1 Corinthians 12:13. The teaching that baptism is a work of man is a man-made doctrine that circumvents what is clearly taught in the Bible.

The same people who identify baptism as a work often employ Romans 10:9-10, which requires confession with the mouth that Jesus is Lord, as the formula for salvation. However, confession is something we do with our tongue whereas baptism is something we allow done to us. If baptism can be identified as a work of man, then confession can also be identified as a work of man, negating scriptures such as Matthew 10:32-33, Romans 10:9-10 and 1 John 4:15.

Objection 8: The Apostle Paul declared in 1 Corinthians 1:17 that he had not been sent to baptize but to preach the gospel. Consequently, baptism cannot be necessary for salvation.

Answer: The same commission given to the other apostles in Mark 16:15-16 was also, by extension, given to Paul. In other words, Paul actually was sent to baptize, and 1 Corinthians 1:14 records that he indeed did baptize. So was Paul lying? Not at all, he was making a point that it did not matter who does the baptizing.
1 Corinthians 1:17 does not conflict with Mark 16:16 or Acts 2:38, or Paul’s own statements in Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27 and Colossians 2:11-13 regarding the relationship of baptism to salvation, the forgiveness of sins, walking a new life, becoming children of God and putting on Christ. Paul’s statement can only be understood in the context in which it was given. The context reveals that he was addressing a pride problem in the Corinthian church wherein certain people were promoting themselves based upon who baptized them.
Paul understood that it does not matter who does the baptizing any more than it matters who delivers a baby at its natural birth. If a Caucasian man plants his seed in a Caucasian woman, it will not make any difference if a non-Caucasian man is involved in the delivery – the baby will still be Caucasian. Likewise, if the word of God, the seed – 1 Peter 1:23, is planted in a human heart and it is not aborted along the way, it will not matter who does the baptizing – a Christian will be the result.
Paul was not negating baptism, but simply putting the emphasis back upon the preaching of the gospel, which will lead a person to belief and baptism into Jesus the Christ. Those who accepted the gospel Paul preached would be baptized for the forgiveness of their sins whether he did the baptizing or not.

Objection 9: Nowhere does the Bible provide instructions concerning who is qualified to do the baptizing, therefore baptism must not be all that important.

Answer: The only thing that can be deduced from this is that it does not matter who performs the baptism.
Many people believe baptism is important, they just do not believe it is as important as Jesus and the inspired authors of the New Testament considered it – for salvation, forgiveness of sins, indwelling of the Holy Spirit, circumcision of the heart, a new life, becoming children of God, putting on Christ, and being added to the body of Christ.

Objection 10: If we are to accept Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 at face value, baptism would replace Jesus and His blood-atoning sacrifice.

Answer: Because nothing in the context of Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 would indicate that it should be otherwise, they must be accepted at face value and, therefore, must be harmonized rather than pitting other scriptures against them.
Baptism no more replaces Jesus and His blood-atoning sacrifice than does faith or repentance. Only the blood of Jesus can provide regeneration, remission of sins, spiritual birth and salvation. The blood is what accomplishes these things, but The Lord YHVH has a Scriptural means as found in the sum of His Word on this doctrine for contacting the blood.

Objection 11: The Greek word "eis" in Acts 2:38, in the phrase "be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for [eis] the remission of sins," should have been rendered "because of" not "for."

Answer: "Because of" is only one of two possible choices. Therefore, the context of Acts 2:38 must be consulted to determine whether eis in this instance should have been rendered "because of" or "for." Note particularly verses 40 and 41:
And with many other words did he [Peter] testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves [those he was preaching to in Acts 2:38] from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them [the apostles who made up the church at that time] about three thousand souls.
Peter did not recognize those Judahites as saved and added to the body of Christ until after they were baptized. The context, therefore, proves that "for," not "because of," is the correct translation of eis in this instance.
The Greek phrase translated for the remission of sins is identical to the same phrase found in Matthew 26:27-28 when Jesus "…took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." If eis in Acts 2:38 should be rendered "because of" then it would also have to be rendered "because of" in Matthew 26:28. This would mean that Jesus shed His blood because our sins had already been forgiven, thereby nullifying His death, burial and resurrection.
It is the blood of Jesus that ultimately remits or washes away our sins, and if we accept the clear teaching of Acts 2:38, we must conclude that His blood washes away our sins when we are baptized. Of course, in order for any baptism to be legitimate, it must be preceded by faith and repentance.

Objection 12: Faith alone is sufficient for salvation in Christ.

Answer: Pistis and pisteuo, the Greek words most often translated faith or believe, mean to believe in, adhere to, trust in, rely on and obey. Therefore, when biblical faith is understood for all that it is, faith alone is sufficient for salvation because this word automatically includes a total adherence and obedience to the one in whom you believe. Everything included in that allegiance to Jesus is not going to be found in any one verse or passage. All of the scriptures that pertain to following Jesus, including Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, etc., must be consulted to understand what He expects from us when we believe in Him.
In Acts 19, Paul went so far as to even use "believed" and "baptized" interchangeably:
He [Jesus] 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. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. (Acts 19:2-3)

Objection 13: In Acts 10:47, Cornelius received the Holy Spirit before he was baptized, demonstrating that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit does not occur during baptism, and therefore baptism cannot be for salvation.

Answer: Acts 10:44 and 11:15 reveal that Cornelius did not receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but a falling upon of the Holy Spirit, which is identified in Acts 11:16 as the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Every time that the baptism of the Holy Spirit and/or the miraculous gifts are addressed, the gift of the Holy Spirit is identified as a pouring, sitting, falling or coming upon, not an indwelling. If these former descriptions are indicative of the indwelling, then the Samaritans in Acts 8 neither received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit when they believed, nor as they were baptized. Instead, one would be forced to conclude that they received the indwelling only after the Apostles came down from Jerusalem and laid hands upon them, which would set a precedent that the same is required for all of us to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as well. If this were true, then no one has been granted salvation since the death of the Apostles. Obviously, pouring, sitting, falling or coming upon is not equivalent with the indwelling.
This falling upon or baptism of the Holy Spirit was God’s final proof to Peter and his fellow Judahites that Cornelius and his household could be saved. Therefore, in perfect harmony with what he had been commissioned in Mark 16 and what he preached in Acts 2, Peter commanded Cornelius to be baptized in water in the name of the Lord. And it would have therefore been for the same reason he commanded baptism in the name of the Lord in Acts 2:38 – for the remission of sins and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Objection 14: Mark 16:16 simply says that faith plus baptism results in salvation. It does not say anything about one who places his faith in Christ but has not been baptized. Therefore, the claim that baptism is mandatory for salvation cannot be supported by this passage.

Answer: Using the same reasoning, a person who places his faith in Christ but who never repents of raping or murdering people can also be saved because John 3:16 and a score of other passages do not say anything about the necessity of repentance.

Objection 15: A verse like Mark 16:16b – "but he that believeth not shall be damned," stating that without water baptism one cannot be saved – must be provided to prove that water baptism is required for salvation.

Answer: By whose rules? Nevertheless, consider carefully the following three passages, all of them written by the Apostle Paul:
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power. (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9)
Because those who do not obey the gospel of Jesus the Christ will be punished with everlasting destruction we must know what the gospel is that Paul declared we must obey. In 1 Corinthians 15, he informs us what the gospel of Christ is:
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen [in His new body] of Cephas, then of the twelve. (1 Corinthians 15:1-5)
The gospel that Paul tells us we must obey is the death, burial, resurrection and the new body of Jesus that was seen or evidenced by others. So how do we obey Jesus’ death, burial, resurrection and His being seen? There is only one passage in the Bible that provides us with the answer:
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3-4)
Therefore, unless a person is baptized for the forgiveness of his sins, he will suffer everlasting destruction away from the presence of the Lord.
Romans 8:1 informs us that "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus." Being in Christ keeps us from being condemned. There are only two passages that describe how we get into Christ:
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ … buried with him by baptism … that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3-4)
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. (Galatians 3:27)
Therefore, the Bible does teach that anyone who is not baptized into Christ will be damned.

Objection 16: Mark 16:16 concludes by saying, "but he that believieth not shall be damned." Because it does not say that he who is not baptized shall be damned, baptism is not required for salvation.

Answer: The latter half of this verse does not negate the first half, which still says what it says. This is the worse case of pitting scripture against scripture I have ever witnessed. In this instance, it is a case of pitting a single scripture against itself.
To have included baptism in the second half of the verse would have been redundant because no one would be baptized who did not first believe. It would be analogous to someone first saying, "I’m going to the park today, and I’m going to swing on the swing set, teeter on the teeter totter and slide on the slide," and then say, "No, I’m not going to go to the park today, and I’m not going to swing on the swing set or teeter on the teeter totter or slide on the slide." If he is not going to go to the park, it is a foregone conclusion that he is not going to swing, teeter or slide – just as it is a foregone conclusion that anyone who does not believe is not going to be baptized.

Objection 17: Some ancient manuscripts do not include Mark 16:15-16 in their text.

Answer: This is true. But the majority of the textual evidence weighs in on the side of Mark 16:15-16 being authentic. Furthermore, there is nothing therein that is not stated somewhere else in Scripture. The fact that Mark 16:16 is precisely what the apostles and disciples taught and wrote is the strongest evidence on behalf of its veracity.

Objection 18: Water is not mentioned in either Mark 16:16 or Acts 2:38, therefore the baptism required in those passages was a spiritual baptism, not a water baptism.

Answer: Had baptism in Mark 16:16 been a spiritual baptism, Jesus would not have commissioned His disciples to do the baptizing; instead He would have told them that He or the Holy Spirit would do the baptizing.
In Acts 2:38 we are informed that baptism in the name of Jesus the Christ is for the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. This was in obedience to Jesus’ commission fifty days earlier found in Mark 16:15-16. Jesus’ commission and what Peter preached harmonize perfectly and both were a water baptism. This is proven in Acts 10:47-48 where Peter commanded Cornelius and his household to be baptized in water in the name of the Lord:
Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord…. (Acts 10:47-48)
Baptism in the name of Jesus the Christ and baptism in the name of the Lord are obviously the same baptism, and if one was in water then the other was also in water. Therefore, water baptism – not a spiritual, figurative or metaphorical baptism – was for salvation, the forgiveness of sins and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
Salvation, forgiveness of sins and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit occur at the same time as when a person is circumcised in heart (Colossians 2:11-13), begins to walk a new life (Romans 6:3-4), becomes a child of God (Galatians 3:26), puts on Christ (Galatians 3:27), and is added to the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). Therefore, these passages are all referring to water baptism as well.
Water baptism is also indicated in Acts 8:36 when the eunuch said, "See here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized," and in 1 Peter 3:20-21 that declares "wherein … eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us…."

Objection 19: In Matthew 3:11, John the Baptist did not declare that Jesus had come to baptize with water but with the Holy Spirit. Therefore Mark 16 must have been a spiritual rather than a water baptism.

Answer: The baptism with the Holy Spirit is a different baptism altogether from the baptism Jesus commanded in Mark 16. This is proven in both Acts 2 and Acts 10, the only two instances in the Bible where baptism with the Holy Spirit is recorded. We know these are the only recorded instances because these are the only two locations that the Bible identifies baptism with the Holy Spirit, and because they are different from anything else recorded in the New Testament.
Acts 1:4-5 identifies what happened to the Apostles in Acts 2:1-4 as baptism with the Holy Spirit, and Acts 11:15-17 identifies what happened to Cornelius and his household in Acts 10:44-45 as the baptism with the Holy Spirit. The baptism of the Holy Spirit was something altogether different from the baptism preached by Peter. In Acts 2:1-4, when the apostles were baptized by the Holy Spirit, it came directly from God and was somewhat of a surprise to everyone there, just as it was when Cornelius and his household were baptized with the Holy Spirit in Acts 10:44-45.
In both instances, Peter commanded his listeners to be baptized (Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:47-48) in obedience to the Great Commission given him in Mark 16:15-16. In other words, it was to be a decision that the hearers had to make for themselves rather than one made solely by The Lord as in Acts 2:1-4 and 10:44-45. Therefore, the baptism with the Holy Spirit and the baptism that Peter preached are not one and the same baptism.
Even more convincing is the fact that after God baptized Cornelius and his household with the Holy Spirit in Acts 10 (which was the final proof to Peter that these Italians could receive salvation), Peter preached the same baptism that he preached in Acts 2. In Acts 2:38 Peter declared "repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus the Christ for the remission of sins…." and in Acts 10:48 "he commanded them to baptized in the name of the Lord." Clearly baptism in the name of the Lord is the same baptism performed in the name of Jesus the Christ. In verse 47, just prior to commanding Cornelius and his household to be "baptized in the name of the Lord," Peter declared "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized…?" Acts 10 identifies the baptism Peter preached in Acts 2 as a water baptism, performed for the remission of sins. It was the same baptism for salvation that in Mark 16:16 he was commissioned by Jesus to preach.
If the water baptism preached by Peter in Acts 2 and 10 is not the baptism commissioned by Jesus in Mark 16, then who commissioned him to preach this baptism? Moreover, someone needs to identify the baptism that was commissioned by Jesus in Mark 16 and later preached by Peter.

Objection 20: Because Ephesians 4:5 declares there is only one baptism, water baptism must give way to baptism with the Holy Spirit.

Answer: Ephesians 4:5 is talking about the one Lord, one faith, and one baptism that include and unify us in the body of Christ. This one baptism is not the baptism with the Holy Spirit that only the apostles and Cornelius and his household experienced, but instead the baptism preached by Peter in Acts 2:36-41, 47. Note especially verses 41 and 47:
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls…. Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
The baptism of the Holy Spirit is what the apostles experienced in Acts 2:1-4. But it was water baptism that added the 3,000 Judahites to the body of Christ. Therefore, the one baptism of Ephesians 4:5 is not the baptism with the Holy Spirit, but baptism in the name of Jesus the Christ for the forgiveness of sins, performed in water.

Objection 21: Nowhere is it recorded that the apostles baptized with water. Therefore baptism must be spiritual.

Answer: The Ethiopian Eunuch said to Philip, “Behold here is water” Not “Behold, here is Spirit.” The following scriptures show baptism in the Name of Jesus, and in water. Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5 and 22:16 and is identified as a water baptism in Acts 10:47.

Objection 22: Water is not mentioned in either of the two accounts recording Paul’s baptism, therefore it must have been a spiritual baptism.

Answer: In Acts 22:16, Saul, who later became the Apostle Paul, was commanded to "arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling upon the name of the Lord." The command to "arise" would not have been necessary if it were simply a spiritual baptism.
The Apostle Peter, who was given the keys to the kingdom of heaven, first preached baptism in the name of Jesus (in the name of the Lord) for the remission of sins in Acts 2:38. This was the same thing that Ananias preached to Paul – to be baptized, calling upon or in the name of the Lord, that his sins might be washed away. In Acts 10, Peter, who still had the same keys, preached baptism in the name of the Lord and clearly demonstrated that such was a water baptism − Acts 10:47-48. No matter how some people try to avoid it, the baptism recorded in Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27, Colossians 2:11-13 and 1 Peter 3:21 were all performed in water.
Ultimately it is Jesus who, as the baptizer, washes away our sins. But the vehicle through which He has chosen to do so is water baptism, preceded by faith and repentance.

Objection 23: Taken in isolation, Acts 22:16 appears to teach that baptism has something to do with the forgiveness of sins, but there are many more scriptures pertaining to forgiveness of sins that say nothing about baptism. Therefore, Acts 22:16 must mean something else.

Answer: Isolation? Those who take the position that baptism has nothing to do with salvation, isolate every passage that teaches baptism for salvation and deny it, tear it apart, explain it away, and then declare, "See, this passage agrees with all the rest!" Acts 22:16 means exactly what it says and harmonizes perfectly with all the rest of the scriptures on this issue, provided they are all taken for exactly what they say.

Objection 24: In Acts 22:13, before Saul was baptized, Ananias addressed him as "Brother Saul." Therefore, Saul’s baptism could not have been for the purpose of washing Saul’s sins away.

Answer: Ananias seemed to think Saul’s baptism was for washing his sins away. Moreover, Acts 22:13 does not say that Ananias addressed Saul as a brother in Christ. His salutation could have pertained to Saul as a fellow Judahite. Verse 13 alone does not provide us with enough information to decide either away. However, to conclude that Ananias was greeting Saul as a brother in Christ is to pit verse 13 against verse 22, whereas to conclude that Ananias was greeting Saul as fellow Judahite is to harmonize verses 13 and 22 and the remainder of the passages on baptism.

Objection 25: When the twelve were commissioned by Christ in Matthew 10:1-15 and Mark 3:13-19, and when the seventy were sent out in Luke 10:1-20, they were not commissioned to baptize.

Answer: It is speculation that Jesus’ orders to preach were not understood to include baptizing, especially in light of John 4:1-2 that informs us "…that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John (though Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples)." More importantly, these Old Covenant commissions prove nothing concerning Jesus’ New Covenant commission recorded in Mark 16:15-16.

Objection 26: When Christ sends out the two witnesses during the Great Tribulation, Revelation 11:3-6 does not say that they will be sent to baptize with water.

Answer: Doctrine cannot be established by silence. The same argument could be employed to say that the two witnesses were not sent to pray because praying was not specifically mentioned in this passage either. Even if they were not sent to baptize, it still proves nothing as it concerns what Jesus commanded in the Great Commission in Mark 16:15-16.

Objection 27: To require baptism as a part of salvation is essentially the same mistake made by the first-century Judaizers who demanded that a person must be circumcised to be right with God.

Answer: Then Jesus (Mark 16:15-16), Peter (Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:21), Ananias (Acts 22:16) and Paul (Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27 and Colossians 2:11-13) all made the same mistake.
The Judaizers were those who added or replaced their own requirements to those already given by Jesus. To preach the necessity of water baptism because Jesus and His disciples did so is not to judaize, or Jesus and his disciples were all Judaizers. To not preach the necessity of baptism is to judaize, because Jesus’ instructions have been rejected and replaced with surrogate teachings.

Objection 28: To teach the necessity of baptism for salvation implies that Jesus’ death on the cross was insufficient to save us, and therefore adds to the finished work of Christ.

Answer: To teach the necessity of baptism no more adds to the finished work of Jesus on the cross than to teach the necessity of faith or repentance, all of which are required by Jesus and his disciples as clearly stated in the Bible. To not teach the necessity of baptism is to take away from the finished work of Jesus on the cross because He died to establish his New Covenant, a part of which He commissioned in Mark 16:16.

Objection 29: Romans 10:9-10 states that it is by believing with your heart that one is justified and by confessing with your mouth that one is saved. Because Paul does not mention baptism so many times when talking about salvation, it must not be required for salvation.

Answer: Paul and others did not mention baptism every time simply because it was unnecessary, just as it was unnecessary to mention repentance every time, and just as it was unnecessary to mention confession of Christ every time – the sum of God’s Word is truth.
Baptism is required for salvation if you believe what Jesus declared in Mark 16:15-16. A person can choose to accept either Mark 16:15-16 or Romans 10:9-10 and thereby pit one against the other, or he can choose to accept and harmonize both.
Furthermore, Romans 10:13 tells us that "For whoever calls on the name of Yahweh shall be saved." There is only one place in the Bible where we are given an example of someone doing this − "And now why tarriest thou [Saul]? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." (Acts 22:16)

Objection 30: In 1 Peter 3:20-21, we are told that the flood in Noah’s day is a figure of New Covenant baptism. Noah and his family were not saved by the water; they were saved from the water.

Answer: This is a clear case of scripture denial. 1 Peter 3:20-21 does not say that Noah and his family were saved by the ark, but instead by water and that in like manner we are saved by the waters of baptism through the resurrection of Jesus the Christ:
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us … by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 3:20-21)
By The Lord’s (YHVH’s) grace, Noah and his family were saved from the corruption of that day by the water. This is a perfect figure of what happens when a person is baptized for the forgiveness of his sins. By God’s grace and Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection a repentant believer’s sins are destroyed and left behind as he is raised from his watery grave to walk a new life in Jesus the Christ.
Objection 31: 1 Peter 3:21 describes the baptism that saves us as figurative.

Answer: In this passage baptism is not a figure of something else. Instead, the waters of Noah’s flood are a figure or a type of the waters of baptism. In other words, the waters of baptism are an antitype of the waters of Noah’s flood. The Greek word translated figure is "antitupon," meaning antitype, referring to the waters of baptism.

Objection 32: 1 Peter 3:21 declares that baptism is not for the "putting away of the filth of the flesh."

Answer: "The filth of flesh" is referring to what is washed off in bath water. It is contrasted with a good conscience, which can only come when someone’s sins have been washed away. In other words, Peter was declaring that the baptism waters are not for washing the outward man, but the inward man, whereby he can gain a good conscience.

Objection 33: The last phrase in 1 Peter 3:21 declares that we are saved by Jesus’ resurrection, not by baptism.

Answer: This is another example of pitting a scripture against itself. The last phrase does not negate the first phrase of the same verse, which still says what it says. Take out the middle explanation that water baptism does not clean the physical body and the verse reads as follows: "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also save us … by the resurrection of Jesus the Christ." It is the resurrection of Jesus that saves us when we are water baptized.
In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter is perfectly consistent with what he preached in Acts 2:38, what Christ commissioned in Mark 16:15-16, what Ananias commanded Paul in Acts 22:16, and what Paul wrote in Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27 and Colossians 2:11-13 – unless, of course, what those passages so plainly teach has already been twisted and denied. Deny one of these passages and you must deny them all.

Objection 34: One must will to be baptized. Water baptism, therefore, cannot be necessary for salvation because salvation is not according to our will. "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: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12-13)
Answer: John 1:12-13 does not contradict Jesus’ command in Mark 16:16 to be baptized for salvation, anymore than it contradicts Jesus’ commands in John 8:24 to believe and in Luke 13:3 to repent. Just as a man cannot believe and repent unless the Father draws him (John 6:44), he also will not be baptized for the remission of sins unless he is called of the Father. If someone is not baptized for the remission of his sins, it only proves that he has not been drawn by God. This would be in fulfillment of 1 Thessalonians 2:11-13 that declares, "...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth…."

Objection 35: Acts 2:39 reveals that salvation comes through the work of God’s elective choice, not the actions or plans of man such as is required with baptism.

Answer: This is another case of pitting scripture against scripture. Acts 2:39 does not negate verse 38; it is a commentary on verse 38. It testifies to the fact that God’s call includes baptism for the remission of sins.

Objection 36: John 6:29, Ephesians 2:8, Philippians 1:29 and Hebrews 12:2 describe faith in Christ as not initiated by man but as a gift from God. Acts 5:31, 11:18 and 2 Timothy 2:25 also describe repentance as gift of God. Baptism, however, is something we must do on our own, and therefore cannot be for salvation.

Answer: In Acts 2:38, the Apostle Peter declared that "the gift of the Holy Spirit" is the result of being baptized. Therefore a person’s decision to be baptized has to be a gift as well, otherwise the Holy Spirit that comes with being baptized cannot be a gift, but instead what is due.

Objection 37: Ephesians 1:4 teaches that we are in Christ because The Lord chose us to be so. Baptism for salvation takes away from God receiving all the glory because in the mind of someone baptized for that purpose he was saved because he got baptized.

Answer: Ephesians 1:4 does teach that a person is in Christ because Yahweh chose him to be so. Romans 6:3-4 and Colossians 2:12 teach that a person enters Christ when he is baptized. Which is true? Both, of course – the sum of God’s Word is truth – a person is baptized into Christ because God chose him to do so.
Furthermore, if baptism takes away from God receiving all the glory then so does belief, repentance and confession of Christ for the same reason.

Objection 38: What about the poor soul who has repented, believed and even scheduled baptism, but is killed in an accident prior to being baptized?

Answer: This is a hypothetical situation, and the scriptures should never be judged by hypothetical situations. However, if a person has been called of God and truly has a heart to follow Him, it is unlikely that God will keep that person from what is required to reach the blood of Christ. The Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 is a biblical example of God’s faithfulness in this regard. In such situations I suspect that God will either spare the life or provide the water.

Objection 39: In Romans 6:3-4, baptism is symbolic of Jesus’ death and new life, and our own as well.

Answer: There is more than symbolism being described in this passage because Romans 6:4 describes new life beginning after, not before, a person has in faith and repentance been baptized into Christ.

Objection 40: Church history does not support the position that baptism in water is required for salvation.

Answer: Yes, it does, beginning with Mark 16:15-16 and throughout the remainder of the New Testament, and continuing with the remnant of true believers who have obeyed this commission and who have made up the church/ecclesia since. The book entitled; A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs
supports this as well as many 1st century baptisteries that have been unearthed.

Objection 41: It is true that many modern churches do not have the urgency that the first-century churches had about baptism. Nevertheless, the mere fact that many people in the book of Acts were immediately baptized after placing their faith in Christ does not mean water baptism is a necessary condition for salvation.

Answer: This would be true if it were the only fact by which we had to determine the purpose of baptism. But even this fact alone should tell us that something is wrong with the way most churches approach baptism. This is because the first-century church, unlike many churches today, accepted Mark 16:15-16, 22:1-16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27, Colossians 2:11-13 and 1 Peter 3:21 for what they literally say, instead of attempting to force them to say anything but what they actually say.

Objection 42: We are redeemed, made alive and cleansed by the blood of Jesus the Christ. People who believe in baptismal regeneration teach that we are redeemed, made alive and cleansed by water baptism, thereby replacing Christ’s blood with baptistery water.

Answer: I have been a Christian nearly for my entire adult life, and I have yet to come across anyone who teaches that it is the water in baptism and not the blood of Christ that regenerates, makes alive and cleanses us from our sins.
If people who accept the plain teaching of Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, etc. can be accused of believing in "baptismal regeneration" then people who believe the plain teaching of 2 Corinthians 7:9-10, 2 Peter 3:9-10, etc. can be accused of believing in "repentance regeneration."
"Baptismal Regeneration" is a catch-phrase and a straw man employed to pigeon-hole people. In all my years as a Christian, I have never come across anyone who believes that baptism can regenerate someone. Baptism cannot regenerate or save anyone, but it is true, according to the Scriptures, that it is in baptism, when preceded by faith and repentance, that Jesus regenerates or saves someone lost and condemned in their sins.

Objection 43: In Romans 6:3-4, baptism is only used to signify our death to our old way of life and our resurrection to new life in Christ.

Answer: Paul does not say that baptism signifies anything; this is simply a tradition of man. What Paul does say is "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
Because a new life begins when a person is born, we are born from above (John 3:3-5) or become a new creation in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17) when, in faith and repentance, we are raised from the watery grave of baptism.

Objection 44: It is a common mistake for some to confuse the importance of baptism with the necessity of baptism.

Answer: Jesus and His apostles did not seem confused. They understood that baptism’s importance was its necessity. The only people confused are those who do not accept the scriptures for what they plainly teach.

Objection 45: Just as the holy law of God was misused by the Pharisees in Jerusalem and the Judaizers in Galatia, so baptism has been misused by people who claim that it is for salvation.

Answer: Who is misusing scripture − those who take Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27 and 1 Peter 3:21 for what they literally say – or those who tell you that none of those scriptures really mean what they plainly teach?

Objection 46: Baptism is only a symbol and an outward manifestation before men.

Answer: There are no scriptures that declare this. This is a tradition of men who have rejected the plain teaching of the Bible.

Objection 47: Unless we have been saved first by faith, the symbol of baptism is meaningless.

Answer: The Bible never identifies baptism as a symbol, and it is man’s order that says, "He that believes is saved and then gets baptized." Jesus’ order is "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved…." (Mark 16:16).

Objection 48: The Holy Spirit has not moved me to be baptized for the forgiveness of my sins. He has never let me down. I choose to listen to Him instead of my own limited understanding.

Answer: The Holy Spirit is often used as an excuse to ignore or reject what the Scriptures literally say. The Holy Spirit is never in conflict with the written Word. However, the so-called Holy Spirit is often used to justify the personal or denominational biases of some people.
A person must be careful about interpreting what they are "hearing." It may not be from the Holy Spirit at all. Or it just may be that God is speaking to them – but not with a voice that they should be excited about hearing. In 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 we are warned: "…they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion that they should believe the lie that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth...."
Paul did not write that what we think the Holy Spirit has told us is "given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." Only the Holy Scriptures accomplishes all of those things. If it contradicts what God has inspired in His Word, it is not from His Spirit.
A person must guard against judging the Scriptures by his experiences and feelings rather than judging his feelings and experiences by the Scriptures. If people would do the latter, many will discover that what they thought was a salvation experience was merely their conversion. A person cannot be saved without being converted. But he can be converted without yet being saved, as demonstrated in the conversion of Paul and his salvation three days later (Acts 22:1-16).

Objection 49: If baptism is for salvation, how would you respond to someone who has never been baptized but who has placed their faith in Jesus alone for salvation?

Answer: I would implore him to become saved just like Peter did those on the day of Pentecost who had already believed in Jesus but had not yet repented and been baptized for the forgiveness of their sins:
Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost…. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. (Acts 2:37-41)

Objection 50: Provided someone is baptized in water in the Savior’s name, there’s no problem.

Answer: Ephesians 4:5 declares that just as there is only one Lord and one faith, there is also only one baptism that makes it possible for us to be a part of the body of Christ. For baptism to be valid, it has to be performed for the reasons found in the Bible, not those conjured up in the minds of men who have rejected the plain teaching of the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible teach that baptism is an outward sign of inward grace or that it is to be performed as a witness to others. To be scriptural, it needs to be done for scriptural reasons, for salvation and the forgiveness of sins (Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38), understanding, of course, that it is only the blood of Jesus that saves and forgives sins.
Jesus declared that "…if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." (John 12:47-48). The people who have rejected the teaching of Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27, Colossians 2:11-13 and 1 Peter 3:21 have not only rejected the teaching of those passages, but also those passages’ inspired teachers, and more particularly the Holy Spirit by whom they were inspired.
If a non-scriptural baptism is acceptable, it would mean that salvation could be simply stumbled into. Those baptized in this fashion would also never teach others what Jesus and His inspired disciples taught, but instead continue to teach man-made false doctrines such as praying the sinner’s prayer.
Acts 19:1-5 provides scriptural precedent for re-baptism when any prior baptism was not scriptural:

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, 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. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. 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. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 19:1-5)

If the twelve men in Acts 19:1-5, who had been scripturally baptized in John’s baptism (an Old Covenant, but nonetheless scriptural baptism), had to be re-baptized in Jesus baptism, then why would we think that someone who was baptized for unscriptural reasons – even going so far as to deny what Jesus and His inspired disciples taught about baptism – would not likewise need to be re-baptized?

People are often baptized because the Bible tells them to; but not for the reasons the Bible tells them to. This should bring to mind Nadab and Abihu − "Oh, we’ll offer fire, but not the fire You designated!" (Leviticus 10:1-2). If God would not accept the strange fire of Nadab and Abihu’s in substitution for scriptural fire, He is certainly not going to accept a strange baptism. A person who thinks God will accept a strange baptism is gambling with eternity.

Some people will do everything they can to get around what is said in Mark 16:15-16, Acts 2:38, etc., and will be baptized for any reason except the ones stated therein. Anyone who is baptized for any non-biblical reason is in rebellion to Jesus. Although they might have been baptized, can they truly be described as obedient? As important as the mode is, the purpose of baptism is even more important.

Conclusion
Those who deny that baptism (along with belief, repentance, confession of Christ as Lord) is for salvation (Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21), the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38, 22:16, Colossians 2:11-13), the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38), circumcision of the heart (Colossians 2:11-13), a new life (Romans 6:3-4), becoming children of God (Galatians 3:26-27), putting on Christ (Galatians 3:27), and being added to the body of Christ (Acts 2:41, 47, 1 Corinthians 12:13), are not arguing with those today who teach these same things. Their argument is with God.