Baptism Panel Discussion Opening Statement
Below is a transcript of my opening statement in the discussion on baptism occurring on Marlon Wilson's YouTube Channel "The Gospel Truth" on June 24th, 2021. Everything quoted herein is, to the best of my knowledge, an accurate transcription of what was said during the discussion sans some unnecessary interjections like pause fillers, discourse particles, back channeling, and stutters/false starts. For a video of the entire discussion, please click here.
"Good evening! Again, I’m Sawyer Hudson, and I’m going to be laying out the view that I hold, which is that water baptism is normatively necessary for salvation and that it ought to be reserved only for those who first express belief in Jesus as the Christ. I will dedicate the first few minutes to a defense of the former point while turning to the latter point during my final few.
Now, some of my friends on this panel through our own personal discussions have adopted similar “normative” language such as what I have employed here, so I will not take any time describing that aspect of the position unless it is asked of me or it becomes relevant to the discussion. Similarly, I will not be presenting a defense of what I believe to be the appropriate method of baptism, which is full immersion. We’re already covering an extremely broad topic with five unique views represented by gentlemen with five very unique theological presuppositions so I’d like to not further muddy the “water” if I can at all help it.
Regarding the necessity aspect of baptism, however, I will argue for five primary points during this discussion that construct a cumulative case leading to the conclusion that baptism is a normatively essential component of the conversion experience.
It is a commandment from Jesus that we find carried out numerous times in the New Testament by the early Christians.
In Matthew 28:19–20, Jesus is recorded as having commanded the apostles to “make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to follow all that I commanded you”. Such a command, by virtue of the final clause, would certainly have been seen as persisting indefinitely throughout the Christian movement. That they saw this precept as binding is evident, as time and time again Luke depicts baptism as occurring in the conversion process throughout Acts. If requested, I can provide a list of these examples.
2. It is presented as being for the forgiveness of sins.
At the pivotal question in Acts 2:37, “Brothers, what are we to do?” Peter responds in v. 38, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” In this statement, Peter makes the assertion that baptism is for the forgiveness of sins, demonstrating a link between the two concepts that strongly supplements the case for baptism’s important role in salvation. Paul’s retelling of his conversion story also bolsters this point, as in Acts 22:16, he alleges that Ananias told him to “Get up, be baptized, and have your sins washed away, calling on his name.” Moreover, Colossians 2:12–13 could be offered as further support, as faithful baptism is shown to effect death and revivification, which is linked to the forgiveness of sins in v. 13.
3. It is presented as being for death/rebirth.
Paul in the early verses of Romans 6 portrays baptism as being a baptism into the death of Christ and a burial with Him. The implication of this death, he goes on to describe, is that we may live a new life free from the enslavement to sin and that we will eventually be resurrected as Jesus was. Colossians 2:12 seems to echo this sentiment as well, likening baptism to a burial with Christ and a subsequent raising by God through our faith in the power of God. Furthermore, John in John 3:3–5 gives us a narrative of Jesus conversing with Nicodemus about being born “from above,” at which point Jesus goes so far as to state that a person cannot see or enter the kingdom of God unless he or she has been “born of water and spirit”. Similarly, Paul in Titus 3:5 states that God saved us “in accordance with His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,” two terms virtually synonymous with this notion of rebirth. Though somewhat controversial, I take these last two passages to be references to baptism, as that seems the most plausible interpretation given the range of competing hypotheses.
4. It is presented as being for entrance into Christ.
In the middle of Paul’s scathing critique of justification by the works of the Law to the churches at Galatia, at the turning point of the letter, he attests that all who were “baptized into Christ have clothed [themselves] with Christ.” One need look no further than the surrounding passages to see what benefits this entrance might confer: “For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith,” (v. 26), “… all of you are one in Christ Jesus,” (v. 28), “And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise, (v. 29). Paul uses similar phrasing in Romans 6:3, “Or do you not know that as many as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” Regarding this passage, some of the benefits have already been discussed: death to and freedom from sin and a promise of resurrection. As one can see, this entrance into Christ grants significant graces to the individual being transferred, so significant that it cannot to be ignored by a student of this topic.
5. It is presented as being for salvation simpliciter.
For this, the quintessential 1 Peter 3:21 shall be cited, which states, “Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ”. I take this admission by the author to be reflective of the early church’s understanding that baptism was the point at which one was considered saved. Slightly less direct yet still germane to the point are Titus 3:5, 1 Corinthians 6:11, and Acts 2:40–41, which appear to insinuate baptism as one’s transition point to a “saved” status. The Acts passage depicts baptism as a culminating event for those needing to “be saved from this perverse generation” that had “received [Peter’s] word.” In 1 Corinthians 6, Paul alludes to a single event marking the monumental lifestyle change of the audience, one in which they were “washed…sanctified…justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” This seems to me to be a nearly indisputable reference to water baptism. Titus 3:5 elucidates the means by which God saves us: “by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,” an exegetically plausible and oft-interpreted reference to baptism. Finally, the Markan account of the Great Commission in 16:16 seems to present belief and baptism as prerequisites to salvation. However, the authenticity of this passage is disputed, so I will rest the bulk of the weight for this point upon the other passages.
From these five points, along with several others that I haven’t the time to expound on here, the case for water baptism being normatively necessary for the salvation of the baptizand appears quite strong.
So, for what reasons ought one maintain baptism to be only for those who first believe? For this I will argue two primary points.
Belief is presented as a prerequisite to baptism in the New Testament.
Out of the conversion narratives where the baptizand is explicitly mentioned, prior belief is either expressly stated or implied by the discourse, indicating proper cognitive faculties of the recipients, with Lydia’s household being the only unclear example where such an implication is not well-founded. Again, if desired, I can present and explicate those examples. Additionally, in both Colossians 2:12 and 1 Peter 3:21, the mental direction behind the action seems to be highlighted as necessary for the action’s efficacy. In Colossians it is faith in the power of God that allows us to be raised in new life from our baptism. In 1 Peter it is our appeal to God for a good conscience that endows baptism with its salvific significance, not the mere ritualistic act of cleansing with water. Acts 8:37 is another passage that, if authentic, provides compelling evidence that the early church saw belief as a necessary prerequisite to baptism since Philip seems to rest the permissibility of the action upon the eunuch’s whole-hearted belief. However, again, the bulk of my case rests on the prior passages due to its dubious nature.
2. There is no good reason given in the New Testament for infant baptism to
be performed.
Now, regarding this last point, I will not dive into a defense for it due to time and the inherent difficulty of producing evidence for negative propositions. Instead, if any of the paedobaptists on the panel wish to put forward any positive evidence to the contrary either during their opening statements or their discussions with me on my points, then I will be happy to address it.
In summation, I believe the cases for both the normative necessity of baptism for salvation and the necessity of belief as a prerequisite to baptism to be compelling for the reasons I have listed. Thus, my goal this evening will be to further demonstrate the superiority of this view relative to the others represented tonight on this panel. I look forward to not only having my own position scrutinized, but examining the viewpoints of each of my interlocutors, and I pray that we can all approach this in a Christ-like manner and be edified by the discussion. Thank you!"
Comments