Baptism
Have we received the baptism of His death,burial & ressurection?Are we circumcised in our heart? Did God disallow children from getting baptised?
The NT doesn’t explicitly teach about Infant baptism , nor does it explicitly tell us that infant baptism is not permitted. So in the absence of explicit teaching ,we have to use inferences in the scripture. There is tendency for people to deviate from the subject that circumcision in the OT is not proportional with baptism in the NT. People say emphatically, “New Testament baptism is not circumcision. There is no equation between the two or identity between the two.” It is not one of identity issues but one of relationship. There are elements of continuity in Circumsicion in OT & Baptism in NT. Everyone would agree that” Circumcision is a sign of the Old Covenant& Baptism is a sign of the New Covenant. But both of them are signs of some kind of covenant that God makes with people. In the case of circumcision, we say it is a sign of the Covenant that God made with Abraham. This includes temporal, earthly blessings like descendants, like the possession of the land, real estate and so on. But that beyond those external matters of physical inheritance, ethnic and national, is communicated the Old Testament promise of Redemption. Well if you carefully observe circumcision in the Old Testament was a sign of the gospel of Jesus Christ. whatever else circumcision was, circumcision was the sign of the covenant and the heart and soul of the covenant is the promise of God to provide redemption for His people. And that Abraham believed that promise and was counted just by God. Abraham rejoiced to see the fullest manifestation in history of the terms of that covenant in the appearance of the one who embodied Israel, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. We can reduce the circumcision aspect just to the Jewish community or their ethnics or possessions. . The circumcision signified a lot more than faith but by no means less because the doctrine of justification by faith alone was taught throughout the Abrahamic Covenant as Paul labors in Romans 3 and chapter 4 of the New Testament.
Now when does Abraham receive the sign? Before he has faith? Or after he has faith? Before he realizes the content of the promises of the covenant, or after he actually realizes the content of the promises. Manifestly he receives the sign of the promise after he’s received the substance of the promise, after he’s believed, after he’s repented, right? Then he is given the sign of circumcision. But not only is this sign of circumcision which indicates all that’s contained in the promise of redemption is given to Abraham after he has faith and has been repentant and all the rest, and is regenerate and so on, God not only permits but explicitly commands the infant son of Abraham receive the sign of this same covenant. And not only is it commanded to Abraham and to Isaac and to Jacob, but when Moses delays it, God threatens to kill him for withholding the sign of the covenant from his infant son.
That’s very important because here in the Old Testament the sign of God’s covenant of redemption is not only permitted to be given to the children of believers, it is commanded of God so to be done. And if faith has the remotest portion of the content, of the promise of Abraham, and if it does not, then we would have to say that Abraham is justified by some other means, or some other instrument than faith which I don’t know. Sign of faith be administered to a person who does not yet possess that which the sign signifies. In the Old Testament this sign of redemption is commanded of God to be given to infants, not to all infants but only to those who are in the covenant community, to the visible household of faith which I’m going to take the liberty to call the OT church.
Now there were people in the OT who believed that the sign saved. Correct? And they lived on into the NT times when the Pharisees said, “We’re the children of Abraham, we’re circumcised.” And Paul talks about how circumcision doesn’t save anybody, only the person who is circumcised inwardly are saved. Only those who actually have faith are saved. You can have the sign without faith, but you can’t have what the sign signifies without faith. So again, we don’t want to ever get to the conclusion that a person is justified by circumcision in the OT or by baptism in NT.
We do baptise adults ,non believers after they repent and accept the faith in Christ. When children were brought to Jesus by their parents for his blessing, the disciples tried to brush them aside (Mark 10:13–16). But Jesus said, “Permit the children to come to Me ... for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” These children included babies (Luke 18:15); Jesus “took them in His arms and began blessing them” (Mark 10:16). Paul’s promise to the Philippian jailer, that salvation would come to his whole house if he believed in Jesus, was no different from what Peter told three thousand adult converts at Pentecost. The promise of the Holy Spirit, Peter said, was “for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself” (Acts 2:39). Eph. 6:1–4; Col. 3:20–21
In the first century , there were lot of infant baptism, there has been no protests over it. There is also no protest shown in the NT mentioning to stop any infant baptism. Or else it would be explicitly mentioned in the NT. , In the OT economy the only person who received the sign of the Covenant were males, boys, little boys. The women didn’t. And presumably in the NT the sign of the Covenant is administered not only to the males but to the females as well.
Now what does that tell you? One thing it tells you is that as the NT labors over and over and over again, the NT is a better Covenant than the OT. And one of the ways in which it’s better, or at least different is that it is obviously more inclusive rather than less inclusive than the Old Covenant. Now in the Old Covenant you didn’t have to be a child of an Israelite parent to be saved. But one of the great mysteries in the history of redemption is the role that the Gentiles play and that there’s a radical expansion of outreach and evangelism to the Gentile world in the New Covenant that is absent in the Old Covenant. It’s a radical expansion. The NT includes all the people , children, women& a major chunk of the gentiles compared to OT covenant. That is what is mentioned in Jeremiah 31 about how God will be in the hearts of each person.Why will not an an all inclusive NT exclude children from being baptised.
1 Cor. 7:14 4 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.,
The unbelieving wife was sanctified along with the husband , for whom? For the benefit of the children so that they will be not Unclean. Unclean means to be outside the covenent or camp etc. The whole nation of israel was sanctified/ set apart in the OT for God. Why will children will be left alone in the much more inclusive New covenant.
It is the language that is used consistently throughout the Bible to refer to those who are in a covenant relationship with God. Everything is about a relationship with God ,
In the Old Testament, circumcision does not convey redemption, it’s the sign of redemption. In the New Testament, baptism doesn’t convey redemption and it’s a sign of many things. It is the sign of our cleansing. It is a sign of our regeneration. It is the sign of our sanctification. It is a sign of our being baptized with the Holy Spirit. It is a sign of our being buried with Christ and raised with Christ. It is a sign of all of those things that are part of the content of salvation which sign does not automatically communicate the reality by the outward sign. What it does communicate is the reality of the promise of God to all who put their trust in Him that they would receive the fullness of redemption that is promised in the gospel.
In a word, the sacrament of Baptism is a visible sign of the spoken promise. We proclaim the Word of God in the presence of infants. They maybe don’t understand the Word, and they don’t understand the sign either until it’s explained to them, that’s why it’s the responsibility of the parents and the church to say to this child, “You received a sign of the promise of God, you received the sign of the gospel of Jesus Christ. And let me tell you what that sign means.” And you tell them what the sign means and you tell them, “If you trust in this promise of Christ, you will be saved.”
Rom. 6:4, "We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life."
But for now, the reason baptism is not necessary for salvation is that we are justified by faith (Rom. 5:1, Eph. 2:8) and not by faith and a ceremony (Rom. 4:1-11). You see, a religious ceremony is a set of activities or forms peformed by someone.
If we are saved by faith, then we are saved by faith when we believe and not when we get baptized, otherwise, we are not saved by faith. Furthermore, if baptism is necessary for salvation, then anyone who receives Christ on his deathbed in a hospital and who also believes Jesus is God in the flesh, who died and rose from the dead for his sins, etc., would go to Hell if he doesn't get baptized before he died. This would mean that we were not justified by faith because if we were, then the person would be saved. Also, if baptism is necessary for salvation, then all babies who die go to Hell since they weren't baptized. The thief on the cross
God Works Covenantally
Baptism is a covenant sign.
Hebrews 13:20 which says, "Now may the God of peace who brought up our Lord Jesus from the dead, that great Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, . . . " The Eternal Covenant is the covenant between the Father and the Son before the creation of the world whereby the Father would give to the Son those whom the Father had chosen. That is why Jesus says things like, "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away," (John 6:37). If you fail to understand that God works covenantally and that He uses signs as manifestations of His covenants (rainbow, circumcision, communion, etc.,), then you will not be able to understand where baptism fits in God's covenant system.
It is a ceremony that represents an outward representation of an inward reality. For example, it represents the reality of the inward washing of Christ's blood upon the soul. That is why it is used in different ways. It is said to represent the death of the person (Rom. 6:3-5), the union of that person with Christ (Gal. 3:27), the cleansing of that person's sins (Acts 22:16), the identification with the one "baptized into" as when the Israelites were baptized into Moses (1 Cor. 10:2), and being united in one church (1 Cor. 12:13). Also, baptism is one of the signs and seals of the Covenant of Grace that was instituted by Jesus.
As the Communion Supper replaced Passover, baptism, in like manner, replaces circumcision. "They represent the same spiritual blessings that were symbolized by circumcision and Passover in the old dispensation" Circumcision was the initiatory rite into the Abrahamic covenant But at the same time we must understand that circumcision did not guarantee salvation to all who received it. It was a rite meant only for the people of God who were born into the family of God (who were then the Jews).
Col. 2:11-12: "In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead." In these verses, baptism and circumcision are related.
If you understand that baptism is a covenant sign, then you can see that it is a representation of the reality of Christ circumcising our hearts (Rom. 2:29, Col. 2:11-12). It is our outward proclamation of the inward spiritual blessing of regeneration. It comes after faith which is a gift of God (Rom. 12:3) and the work of God (John 6:28).
Third, the Bible says that it is the Gospel that saves. "By this gospel you are saved . . . " (1 Cor. 15:2). Also, Rom. 1:16 says, "I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile." Neither of these verses, which tell us what saves us, includes any mention of baptism.
What is the Gospel?
It is clearly the Gospel that saves us, but what exactly is the Gospel? It is found in 1 Cor. 15:1-4: "Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." The Gospel is defined as the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus for our sins. Baptism is not mentioned here.6
Paul said that he came to preach the Gospel--not to baptize: "I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else). For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel . . . " (1 Cor. 1:14-17). If baptism is necessary for salvation, then why did Paul downplay it and even exclude it from the description of what is required for salvation? It is because baptism is not necessary for salvation.
Let's Suppose . . .
Another way of making this clear is to use an illustration. Let's suppose that a person, under the conviction of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8), believed in Jesus as his Savior (Rom. 10:9-10, Titus 2:13) and has received Christ (John 1:12) as Savior. Is that person saved? Of course he is. Let's further suppose that this person confesses his sinfulness, cries out in repentance to the Lord, and receives Jesus as Savior and then walks across the street to get baptized at a local church. In the middle of the road, he gets hit by a car and is killed. Does he go to Heaven or Hell? If he goes to Heaven, then baptism is not necessary for salvation. If he goes to Hell, then trusting in Jesus by faith is not enough for salvation. Doesn't that go against the Scriptures that say that salvation is a free gift (Rom. 6:23) received by faith (Eph. 2:8-9)?
Saying that baptism is necessary for salvation is dangerous because it is saying that there is something we must do to complete salvation. That is wrong! See Gal. 2:21, 5:4.
All right, so this sounds reasonable. But still, what about those verses that seem to say that baptism is part of salvation? I will address those now, but because this subject can become quite lengthy, in fact sufficient for a book in itself, I will only address a few verses and then only briefly.
Baptism Verses
John 3:5, "Jesus answered, ‘I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.'"
Some say that water here means baptism but that is unlikely since Christian baptism hadn't yet been instituted. If this verse did mean baptism, then the only kind that it could have been at that point was the baptism of repentance administered by John the Baptist (Mark 1:4). If that is so, then baptism is not necessary for salvation because the baptism of repentance is no longer practiced.
It is my opinion that the water spoken of here means the water of the womb referring to the natural birth process. Jesus said in verse three that Nicodemus needed to be born "again." This meant that he had been born once--through his mother's womb. Nicodemus responds with a statement about how he cannot enter again into his mother's womb to be born. Then Jesus says that he must be born of water and the Spirit. Then in verse 6, He says that "flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." There are different interpretations for this passage . Ez 36 : 24 - 27 gives us an opening to understand this statement from Jesus.
I would like to add that there are scholars who agree with the position and some who do not. Some believe that the water refers to the Word of God, the Bible, water in the mother's womb and others claim it means the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:38, "Peter replied, ‘Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.‘"
This verse is often used to say that baptism is part of salvation, but we know from other Scriptures that it is not, lest there be a contradiction. What is going on here is simply that repentance and forgiveness of sins are connected. In the Greek, "repent," is in the plural and so is "your" of "your sins." They are meant to be understood as being related to each other. It is like saying, "All of you repent, each of you get baptized, and all of you will receive forgiveness." Repentance is a mark of salvation because it is granted by God (2 Tim. 2:25) and is given to believers only. In this context, only the regenerated, repentant person is to be baptized. Baptism is the manifestation of the repentance--that gift from God--that is the sign of the circumcised heart. That is why it says, "repent and be baptized."
Also, please notice that there is no mention of faith in Acts 2:38. If this verse is a description of what is necessary for salvation, then why is faith not mentioned? Simply saying it is implied isn't good enough. Peter is not teaching a formula for salvation but for covenant obedience, which is why the next verse says that the promise is for their children as well.
1 Pet. 3:21, "and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
The key word in this section is the Greek antitupon. It means "copy," "type," "corresponding to," "a thing resembling another," "its counterpart," etc. Baptism is a representation, a copy, a type of something else. The question is: "Of what is it a type?" or "Baptism corresponds to what?" The answer is found in the previous verse, verse 20: "who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21And corresponding to that, baptism now saves you."
But, water did not save Noah. This is why Peter excludes the issue of water baptism being the thing that saves us because he says, "not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God." Peter says that it is not the application of water that saves us but a pledge of the good conscience. Therefore, baptism here most probably represents the breaking away of the old sinful life and entrance into the new life with Christ--in the same way that the flood waters in Noah's time was the destruction of the sinful way and once through it, known as entering into the new way. Also, Peter says that the baptism is an appeal of a good conscience before God. Notice that this is dealing with faith. It seems that Peter is defining real baptism as the act of faith.
Acts 22:16, "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name."
Is the washing away of sins done by baptism, the representation of the circumcised heart (Col. 2:11-12) which means you are already saved, or is it by the blood of Christ (Heb. 9:14, Rom. 5:9, Eph. 1:7)? Obviously it is the blood of Jesus, and the washing here refers to the calling on Jesus' name.
Titus 3:5, "he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit."
The washing of rebirth can only be that washing of the blood of Christ that cleanses us. It is not the symbol that saves but the reality. The reality is the blood of Christ.
Gal. 3:27, "for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ."
This is speaking of the believer's union with Christ. It is an identification with, a joining to, a proclamation of loyalty to, etc. In 1 Cor. 10:2, the Israelites were baptized into Moses. That means they were closely identified with him and his purpose. The same thing is meant here.
Conclusion
Baptism is not necessary for salvation. It is the initiatory sign and seal into the covenant of grace. As circumcision referred to the cutting away of sin and to a change of heart (Deut. 10:16, 30:6, Jer. 4:4, 9:25, 26, Ezk.44:7, 9), baptism refers to the washing away of sin (Acts 2:38, 1 Pet. 3:21, Tit. 3:5) and to spiritual renewal (Rom. 6:4, Col. 2:11-12). The circumcision of the heart is signified by the circumcision of the flesh, that is, baptism (Col. 2:11-12).
One last thought: If someone maintains that baptism is necessary for salvation, is he adding a work, his own, to the finished work of Christ? If the answer is yes, then that person would be in terrible risk of not being saved. If the answer is no, then why is baptism maintained as being necessary the same way as the Jews maintained that works were necessary?