Requiring Baptism for Salvation

Definition and Denominations

“Baptismal Regeneration” in its definition at Wikipedia says:

Baptismal regeneration is the name given to doctrines held by the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican churches, and other Protestant denominations which maintain that salvation is intimately linked to the act of baptism, without necessarily holding that salvation is impossible apart from it. Etymologically, the term means “being born again” (regeneration, or rebirth) “through baptism” (baptismal).

It’s more than that.  You will find the Church of Christ, the Christian Church, Disciples of Christ, LDS, and Charismatics such as Apostolics who also require water baptism for salvation.  Where I live, the biggest denomination is the “Christian Church,” which believe this.

Hermeneutic

A certain wrong hermeneutic undergirds or produces baptismal regeneration, using a few proof texts.  Instead of looking at all of the New Testament and understanding each verse within the whole, it conforms the whole to a few select verses.  I will examine those verses.  Those few verses don’t overturn what the New Testament teaches about salvation.  They don’t include baptism as a requirement for justification.  I will analyze what they do say, since men use them to buttress their false doctrine of baptismal regeneration.

Versus Belief Alone by Grace Alone

Many times the Bible says something like John the Baptist said in John 3:36.

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

You don’t read any baptism in there.  Forty times the Bible says, “believeth/believed in/on him/Jesus/the Son/me/thee,” as the sole condition for salvation.

Scripture expresses many other faith alone statements. The Ethiopian in Acts 8:37 said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”  Mark 1:15 says, “believe the gospel.”  John 20:31 says, “Believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and believing ye might have life through His name.”  John 13:19 says, “ye may believe that I am he.”  This is what the Bible teaches for salvation.  Those verses mirror Ephesians 2:8-9:

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

As much as verses teach faith alone for salvation, there are also many many that teach salvation not by works.

Adding a Work or Works

Baptism is not an incidental, non-affecting addition to grace or faith.  It is akin to the addition of the one work or ritual of circumcision, which Paul addresses in Galatians 5.  By adding this single work or ritual, “Christ shall profit you nothing” (v. 2).  You become “a debtor to do the whole law” (v. 3).  And, “Christ is become of no effect unto you” (v. 4).  Those adding baptism almost always add other works and then depend on their works to stay saved.  This is perverting the gospel.

Proof Texts

What I’m saying again here is that baptismal regeneration does not depend on what the New Testament teaches about salvation, but on proof texts that adherents use to force this doctrine on the Bible.  I will deal with five verses, not necessarily in any order:  Acts 22:16, Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38,1 Peter 3:21, and John 3:5.  In the end, I will give more evidence against baptismal regeneration [Read the book by Thomas Ross against baptismal regeneration, see his debate on the subject at these links].  My prime goal here was to examine these proof texts.

Acts 22:16

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Post Conversion Baptism

At face value alone, it seems possible that Acts 22:16 says baptism washes away sins or at least precedes the washing away of sins.  The verse itself rests within the conversion testimony of Paul to a hostile audience in Jerusalem, many years after his salvation.  In the first telling of Paul’s salvation, his conversion and then reception of the Holy Spirit far preceded the command and occurrence of baptism (Acts 9:1-17).  Every time he recounts his conversion, Paul places his baptism as a later result of his conversion, not a cause (Acts 9, 22, 26).

Grammar and Syntax of Acts 22:16

The grammar and syntax of Acts 22:16 does not teach baptism preceding salvation or washing away sins.  Luther B. McIntyre, Jr. explains well in his article, “Baptism and Forgiveness” (Bib Sac, Jan-March, 1996, pp. 61-62):

The Greek sentence has two participles and two imperatives:  “Arising, be baptized and wash away your sins, calling upon his name.”  Many English translations include two conjunctive “ands,” but the Greek text has only one kai (“and”).  The construction is participle-verb-kai-verb-participle.

William MacDonald in his Bible Believer’s Commentary (NT, p. 469) suggests that best approach to this verse is to associate each participle with its nearest verb.  This is entirely consistent with what A. T. Robertson (Greek Grammar, p. 1109) calls the adverbial use of the participle.

Based on the Greek construction, the washing away of sins is connected with ‘calling upon his name,’ not with being baptized.  That agrees with Peter’s own appeal to the prophet Joel in Acts 2:21 that “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”  As Polhill says in his Acts commentary (p. 461), “The overarching term, however, is “calling upon the name of the Lord,” the profession of faith in Christ that is the basis for the act of baptism.

Some might not like the use of grammar and syntax getting in the way of their proof text.  However, the grammar and syntax also agree with the vast and overall scriptural teaching of faith alone for salvation.

Context

In Acts 9:13, Ananias referred to Paul (then Saul) as “this man,” yet later, he calls Paul his “brother.”  Paul was already converted before his baptism in verse 18.  Brother was a term adopted by the early disciples.  They used the term to express their familial love for each other in Christ.  The shift from man to brother in the words of Ananias indicate Paul’s conversion preceded baptism.

[I suggest everyone to read, again, Thomas Ross’s book, Heaven Only For the Baptized?  This book does a far more thorough job than above in debunking Acts 22:16 as a baptismal regeneration proof text.]

More to Come