top of page
Search
Writer's pictureJonah Mcelhaney

Water Baptism

Baptism is something I’ve gone back and forth on for a while now. Initially I was a part of the United Pentecostal Church which taught that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation and must be administered specifically in the Name of Jesus for salvation.


As I transitioned out of Oneness Pentecostalism, my instinct was to distance myself from the doctrines I was leaving behind. Due to the legalistic nature of most of these teachings I assumed that the only option was to prove that baptism wasn’t necessary, but merely a symbolic gesture to showcase our new found relationship ship with Christ.


This is a normal reaction, it’s known as the pendulum swing, and unless we are mindful of it when relearning theology, we can often swing too far in the opposite direction, leading us to hold opposite but equally flawed ideas.


for a while I was content to prove that baptism played no part in our salvation. Slowly however, in my baptism studies I become dissatisfied with this symbolic view. When I would look into the early church, when I examined Biblical texts on baptism, I found that it wasn’t one extreme or the other. I have tried to not let my own opinions overshadow what most of church history and what many Christians hold to when it comes to water baptism, this is my attempt to explain why my views have shifted.


Romans 6:1-4 “What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 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.”


This seems like an unusual place to start in our discussion on water baptism, but this is the verse, or the explanation of this verse, that sparked my initial desire to even dig into this further.


Lately, I’ve seen a trend amongst Christians that I follow, particularly reformed guys on Tik Tok or YouTube, who say that the baptism referred to here is a spirit baptism. This seems to be a reaction to the idea that baptism being a command or a part of salvation somehow contradicts justification by faith.


There’s a real desire to not compromise justification by faith, and because of that it seems that baptism is in most cases minimized or made to be something we do to show people we are Christian. I’ve even seen in some extreme examples of people trying to reject baptism all together!


Some try to separate baptism from the gospel, this is done by pointing to the Words of Paul,


1 Corinthians 1:17 “For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.”


The argument is that Paul went to Corinth to save the lost, and he says he didn’t go to baptize but to preach the gospel. This insinuates that baptism doesn’t play a role in salvation. But is this true?


I don’t think we can assume this from just this one passage. When we too narrowly focus on one passage in light of other passages, we can run into theological issues. In fact, heresy often begins by this approach,


“Someone becomes so convinced and zealous about a particular truth that other, complementary truths within the Christian tradition get eclipsed. Myopic focus on one truth can set us up for a departure from orthodoxy. One truth disconnected from other truths will lead us to insist again and again on whatever principle or doctrine we favor, and over time that doctrine—now isolated from others and exaggerated by the attention we give it—becomes distorted itself, eventually severing us from the rest of the church.”
— The Thrill of Orthodoxy: Rediscovering the Adventure of Christian Faith by Trevin K. Wax

When we strain too hard in one particular point in a doctrinal discussion, we often find ourselves having to explain why other passages don’t mean what they seem to say. One example is when James says in James 2:24 “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.”


When we focus in too narrowly on this one verse while refusing to harmonize it with the rest of Scripture, we have to explain why Paul doesn’t really mean what he says in Ephesians 2:8-9,


“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”


We have to grasp the full weight of Scripture and consider the context in order to ensure we are not misunderstanding what the text is saying. When viewing the overall theme of James, we find that the justification in view is better understood as vindication. How do we know this?


James uses Abraham offering up Isaac as the work that brought justification, yet this action happens years after God declared Abraham righteous by his faith. James is explaining how one can be justified by faith, and that faith can be vindicated through our works.


When we harmonize the New Testament we find this to be the consistent message. As we turn back to 1 Corinthians 1:17, we see that Paul’s point is not that baptism isn’t important or necessary, it had to do with the way the Corinthians were linking their baptisms to the specific leader who baptized them.


“Paul assumes a saving efficacy in the baptismal act, because he shows that those who were baptized by Paul would look at Paul in the role that Christ himself has in our salvation. As Paul rhetorically asks, "was Paul crucified for you?" I cannot imagine a situation in a church wherein a purely symbolic act would so divide a church that those receiving such an "ordinance" would divide themselves over who performed this ordinance for them.”

Another argument I see from Christians who believe in baptism is this, “Baptism is an outward expression of an inward reality”, or something similar to that. But that’s never how Scripture refers to baptism.


Too often when Christians, particularly Evangelicals, want to talk about baptism, they usually skip past the actual baptism texts and focus on passages like Ephesians 2:8-9 or other passages that talk about salvation being a free gift that we don’t work for. But this seems to be due to a misunderstanding of baptism. Baptism is not our work, but God’s work.


Baptism is included in the Great Commission,


Matthew 28:18-20 “And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”


When Jesus commissioned his disciples to to go into the world to make disciples, this disciple making process included both baptism and teaching. We do a disservice to the text by pitting these two against each other.


1 Peter 3:21-22 “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.”


Some argue that this passage isn’t teaching that baptism saves, but rather what saves is a good conscience towards God. This seems to be an attempt to fit this passage into a particular theology rather than just accepting what it says.


The more biblical position is to just agree with Scripture, Peter says here that baptism saves. It would be disingenuous to try to explain away why baptism DOESN’T save rather than to examine why baptism DOES save.


Peter is comparing how the waters of the flood saved Noah and his family, how? Verse 20, “…in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.” Then verse 21 says, “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now save: you,”


There’s no other way to understand this than Peter comparing how Noah and his family were saved by the waters of the flood and comparing that to water baptism. This doesn’t mean that it is the water that saves us, it is Christ! But the waters of baptism act as a vessel that brings forgiveness of sins just like the ark was the vessel that brought them through the waters of the flood.


Acts 22:16 “And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’”


Baptism in this passage seems to have something to do with washing away of sins. Some would suggest that it’s the calling on his name that washes away sins, but that doesn’t fit the text. The calling on his name and baptism are linked here as the means of washing away sins. There’s no reason to separate these into different things.


Titus 3:4-7 “But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”


Washing of regeneration seems to refer to baptism here, especially when considered with what Paul wrote in Ephesians.


Ephesians 5:25-26 “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,”


Baptism works not because it symbolized something, but because the water is mixed with the Word that brings salvation. The water doesn’t save us, the Word when applied to the water brings forgiveness of sins.


Galatians 3:25-27 “for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”


In baptism we are clothed with Christ, buried with him, and raised to newness of life. Now, unless we become legalistic about baptism, we must understand that baptism is the ORDINARY means of salvation. It should never be understood as absolutely necessary for salvation.


In other words, through baptism is how we ordinarily come to saving faith in God, but it’s not the only way. It also comes through the power of the Holy Spirit and the hearing of the Word. It’s not the absence of baptism that condemns, it’s the despising of baptism.


Mark 16:16 “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”


The thief on the cross was saved by his faith, if we explain away his salvation by saying it was a different dispensation, or before the church age, we are not taking the text seriously enough. If we make him the example of salvation for us today, to explain away baptism we also fail to take the New Testament seriously.


We make room for the thief because we understand the special circumstances involved. He would not have been able to attend church, hear sermon, or be baptized. He needed the grace to God and he was saved by grace through faith.


But, and this is key, none of us are in the same situation as the thief. We all have the ability to attend a service, hear the Word, be baptized and follow the Lord. In our case Baptism is the ordinary way that we come to the Lord. It’s only when we despise baptism or reject it that we should be concerned.


In other words, you will not be lost because you didn’t get baptized. I used to attend a church that taught baptism was absolutely necessary for salvation, this meant if someone came to faith but didn’t have a chance to be baptized, their salvation was in question. This turns baptism from grace to law.


What about Jesus Name Baptism Vs Baptism in The Name of The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?


In my previous church, Jesus Name baptism was the only acceptable form of water baptism. If someone was baptized any other way they were told they needed to be baptized specifically in Jesus Name in order for the baptism to be effective.


This is a complete misunderstanding of Scripture and a result of their Oneness position more than it is Scripturally supported.


Why is this even a discussion? For anyone who has only been in one theological camp or the other, it seems crazy to believe anything else.


The orthodox position of baptism being administered in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, has always been the position of the church. The Didache, which is considered the oldest church document, dated to the first century, has instructions for water baptism.


Didache 7:1-4 “Regarding baptism.  Baptize as follows: after first explaining all these points, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Mt 28:19), in running water. But if you have no running water, baptize in other water; and if you cannot in cold, then in warm. But if you have neither, pour water on the head three times in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Mt 28:19). Before the baptism, let the baptizer and the candidate for baptism fast, as well as any others that are able.  Require the candidate to fast one or two days previously.”


While we understand that this writing isn’t canon to Scripture nor divinely inspired, it does give us a glimpse into what the early church believed concerning baptism.


The church has always following the instructions of Jesus found in Matthew 28:19 “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,”


For those who are in my old theological camp, Jesus name baptism is seen as a correction of what they consider the false doctrine of the Trinity.


For them, Matthew 28:19 is understood in light of Peter’s response in Acts 2:38, and it’s understood in light of their Oneness theology.


In Oneness theology, there is only one singular person (person is not a term they would use but for the sake of clarity it helps) who is God, that is Jesus.

In Oneness theology, the God of the Old Testament, known as Yahweh, is revealed in the New Testament as Jesus.


They believe Jesus is the Father incarnate, and he is the Holy Spirit in operation. This means that Father, Son, Holy Spirit are not names distinguishing the members of the Trinity, rather, these are titles describing the one person of Jesus.


With this understanding it’s easy to see how they can reject Baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Especially considering the emphasis they place on the book of Acts for doctrine.


Acts 2:37-38 “When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” 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.”


From this passage it is argued that the Apostles didn’t just repeat Jesus words in Matthew 28, instead, they understood these words to refer to Jesus.


But is this the best way to understand this? I do not think that it is.


There are a few passages we have to look at in order to make sense of all this, one passage that is used to prove that the Father’s name is Jesus is found in John 5:43,


“I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him.”


This passage is an often used prooftext to show that Jesus is the name of the Father. But what does it mean for Jesus to say, I have come in my Father’s name? In simple terms, to come in the Father’s name means to come in his authority and power.


Jesus says, if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. This implies that the Jews rejected him not simply because he was a teacher, but because he was a teacher who claimed to come in God’s authority and power. To use this to prove the Father’s name is Jesus is to misunderstand what it means to come in someone’s name.


This is seen in many examples, but I’ll just give one.


1st Samuel 17:45 “David said to the Philistine, “You come against me with sword and spear and javelin, but I come against you in the name of the Lord Almighty, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied.”


We see that David is coming in the name of the Lord, and we have no confusion about what that means. It means David is coming in the full power and authority of the Lord Almighty.


John 14:26 “But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.”


Again, sending the Holy Spirit in my name does not mean that the name of the Holy Spirit is Jesus. It simply refers to the authority that He is coming in.

To conclude this discussion on names and titles we should look at Hebrews 1.


Hebrews 1:4-5 “So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father”? Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”?”


While it is argued that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not names but titles, Hebrews 1 shows it is not that simple.


The writer of Hebrews says that Christ is much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. This might be misunderstood as the name Jesus, but when we keep reading we see the name that he was given.


“For to which of the angels did God ever say, You are my Son; today I have become your Father? Or again, I will be his Father, and he will be my Son?”


Notice, the name He was given is Son. And it’s clear within this passage that nobody would be confused about who this Son is. In fact, the name of Jesus is absent from the entire chapter and we still know exactly who the Son is.


When we read all of Hebrews 1 we find that the argument between Titles and Names is not a good argument.


Now, I already know what push back this will get. “In the book of Acts every single person that was baptized was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. This proves that it’s the correct formula.”


Acts 2:38, Acts 8:16, Acts 10:48, Acts 19:5. These are the passages that specifically mention Jesus name in baptism. Seems like a slam dunk right? Except when we look closely we notice, none of these actually record a baptism taking place. No text shows someone in the act of baptizing and proclaiming, “I now baptize you in the name of..”


This means we need to pay close attention to what is being communicated in these passages. When we look closely we find that in all these examples, the converts were already believers in the God of the Old Testament. In other words, they already knew the Father, and the Holy Spirit, they needed their faith placed specifically in Jesus as Messiah.


Here’s a quote from a blog by Dan Lewis with a link to read the whole article,


“This point is extremely pertinent with regard to the 1st century when the earliest Jewish Christians were only preaching the message about Jesus to other Jews (Ac. 11:19). Jews and all those who accepted their religious framework already believed in God, the Father, the Creator of the universe who spoke to Abraham, gave the Torah to Moses and inspired the prophets.
They already believed in the Holy Spirit, that mysterious presence of God who is everywhere present in the Hebrew Scriptures. What they necessarily needed to accept was the messiahship of Jesus. This was the crucial point of faith for them—that Jesus was the Messiah sent from God! Hence, for them to be baptized in connection with the name of Jesus entirely makes sense, since this was the pivotal point of their new faith that made them distinctively Christian.
The use of the name Jesus was not a magic formula. Rather, it was an acknowledgement that they now had a new center of faith, and that center was Jesus the Messiah. For Jews and all those who had accepted the Jewish view of God, this was a HUGE issue, an issue big enough to distinguish them from all other Jews, proselytes and God-fearers.
Interestingly, when conversions of non-Jews are described in the Book of Acts, in NONE of them is used this language of "in the name of Jesus" with respect to baptism. It simply is not there--not for Lydia (Ac. 16:15), not for the Philippian jailor and his family (Ac. 16:33) and not for the Corinthians (Ac. 18:8).“

As we can see, the view that baptism must be administered specifically in the name of Jesus is a result of reading their Oneness position into the text, rather than drawing it out of the text itself. This position also rejects most of church history on baptism as well.


Before we wrap up this discussion, it’s helpful to look at how the earliest Christians viewed baptism and the baptism texts in Scripture. We will only look at a few here.


Acts 2:38 “And Peter said to them, “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.”


Barnabas

“Regarding [baptism], we have the evidence of Scripture that Israel would refuse to accept the washing which confers the remission of sins and would set up a substitution of their own instead [Ps. 1:3–6]. Observe there how he describes both the water and the cross in the same figure. His meaning is, ‘Blessed are those who go down into the water with their hopes set on the cross.’ Here he is saying that after we have stepped down into the water, burdened with sin and defilement, we come up out of it bearing fruit, with reverence in our hearts and the hope of Jesus in our souls”

Letter of Barnabas 11:1–10 Date: 74 A.D


Hermas

“I have heard, sir,’ said I [to the Shepherd], ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is”

The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 Date: 80 A.D.


Irenaeus

“And when we come to refute them [the gnostic], we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith...For the baptism instituted by the visible Jesus was for the remission of sins”

Against Heresies 21:1-2 Date: 189 A.D.


“Now faith occasions this for us even as the Elders, the disciples of the Apostles, have handed it down to us. First of all, it bids us to keep in mind that we have received baptism for the remission of sins in the name of God the Father and in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was incarnate, died and rose again, and in the Holy Spirit of God. This baptism is the seal of eternal life and the new birth unto God that we should no longer be the sons of mortal men but of the eternal and perpetual God.”

The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, Date: 192 A.D.


Titus 3:4-7 “But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”


Theophilus of Antioch

“Moreover, those things which were created from the waters were blessed by God, so that this might also be a sign that men would at a future time receive repentance and remission of sins through water and the bath of regeneration—all who proceed to the truth and are born again and receive a blessing from God”

To Autolycus 12:16 Date: 181 A.D.


Clement of Alexandria

“When we are baptized, we are enlightened. Being enlightened, we are adopted as sons. Adopted as sons, we are made perfect. Made perfect, we become immortal . . . ‘and sons of the Most High’ [Ps. 82:6]. This work is variously called grace, illumination, perfection, and washing. It is a washing by which we are cleansed of sins, a gift of grace by which the punishments due our sins are remitted, an illumination by which we behold that holy light of

salvation”

The Instructor of Children 1:6:26:1 Date: 191 A.D.


Hippolytus

“And the bishop shall lay his hand upon them [the newly baptized], invoking and saying: ‘O Lord God, who did count these worthy of deserving the forgiveness of sins by the laver of regeneration, make them worthy to be filled with your Holy Spirit and send upon them thy grace [in confirmation], that they may serve you according to your will”

The Apostolic Tradition 22:1 Date: 215 A.D.


John 3:5-6 ““Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”


Irenaeus

“And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven”

Fragment 34 Date: 190 A.D.


Justin Martyr

“As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven”

First Apology 61 Date: 151 A.D


Matthew 28:19-20 “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them inthe name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”


The Didache

“After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. If you have no living water, then baptize in other water, and if you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

Didache 7:1 Date: 70 A.D.


Tatian the Syrian

"Then said Jesus unto them, ‘I have been given all authority in heaven and earth; and as my Father has sent me, so I also send you. Go now into all the world, and preach my gospel in all the creation; and teach all the peoples, and baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and teach them to keep all whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you all the days, unto the end of the world”

The Diatesseron 55 Date: 170 A.D

50 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page