Study of Denomintions 05/16/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week
--Baptism--

Argument: 1 Corinthians 1:14-17 shows that baptism is not valid for today: Paul did not baptize, and Paul said to imitate him as he imitated Christ.

Answer: We can see here a classic example of inferring an answer despite the fact that one has been given. Let us consider 1 Corinthians 1:14-17:
I thank God that I baptized none of you, save Crispus and Gaius; lest any man should say that ye were baptized into my name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not in wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made void.

It would be rather odd to try to argue here that Paul does not value baptism, considering that he confesses that he baptized no fewer then three persons in Corinth. The reason for his hesitance in baptizing people is found in verse fifteen:
lest any man should say that ye were baptized into my name.

Paul had a peculiar problem when preaching to the Gentiles; they had a tendency to worship a man with supernatural powers as a god. Consider what occurred in Lystra in Acts 14:11-18:
And when the multitude saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voice, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, "The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men." And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercury, because he was the chief speaker. And the priest of Jupiter whose temple was before the city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the multitudes. But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of it, they rent their garments, and sprang forth among the multitude, crying out and saying,
"Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and bring you good tidings, that ye should turn from these vain things unto a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that in them is: who in the generations gone by suffered all the nations to walk in their own ways. And yet He left not himself without witness, in that he did good and gave you from heaven rains and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness."
And with these sayings scarce restrained they the multitudes from doing sacrifice unto them.

We can see, then, that Paul has previously been elevated beyond his position. Even in Corinth, there was division over to whom people owed their allegiance- to Apollos, Cephas, Paul, and/or Christ (1 Corinthians 1:12). Paul did not wish to baptize the Corinthians so that no one would think that there was any power in Paul, since the power was in Christ. Paul asked the Corinthians in verse 13, just before the discussion of baptism, the following:
Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were ye baptized into the name of Paul?

The difficulty, then, is not that the Corinthians were baptized or not baptized, or that Paul was to baptize or not to baptize, but the attitudes of the Corinthians and their tendency to exalt the men who worked with them. The fact that so many Corinthians were said to be baptized confirms the need for all to be baptized.

Argument: The thief on the cross was saved, and he was not baptized.

Answer: The thief on the cross died with a special promise from Jesus:
But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Dost thou not even fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss."
And he said, "Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom."
And he said unto him, "Verily I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with me in Paradise," (Luke 23:40-43).

Christ had not yet died, nor was raised; the work of salvation had not yet been completed (cf. Psalm 22, Isaiah 53). The thief died under the old covenant with a personal guarantee from Christ, realities that are not present for us today. We could say in response, "If Christ comes down and says to you that He will see you in Paradise today, then good, you do not need to be baptized. Otherwise, the need for baptism still stands."

Retort: The thief died after Christ did.

Answer: While it is probably true that the thief outlasted Jesus, the full redemptive work (let alone the inauguration of the Kingdom) required the resurrection, and it is certain that the thief was dead by then. As it is written:
After two days will he revive us: on the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live before him, (Hosea 6:2 ).

Likewise, Paul establishes that if the resurrection is not true, then our faith in Christ is in vain, and we are still in our sins (1 Corinthians 15:12-18). The resurrection, therefore, is as important as the cross in our salvation, and no change in covenant occurred before that point.

Argument: Romans 10:9-10 says that belief and confession save. Belief and confession, then, and not baptism, save.

Answer: Romans 10:9-10 does indeed say that belief and confession are necessary:
Because if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved: for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

As good students of God's Word (2 Timothy 2:15 ), we must always remember that the sum of God's Word is truth (Psalm 119:160 ), and we ought not introduce contradiction into the text. Note that Paul does not say here that belief and confession "alone" save. Consider Luke 13:5:
I tell you, "Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish."

Would we say that this verse denies the need for belief and confession, because it only mentions repentance? By no means! We learn that belief and confession are necessary for salvation in Romans 10:9-10 and repentance is necessary for salvation in Luke 13:5 and Acts 2:38. If Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-7, and 1 Peter 3:21 affirm the need for baptism to be saved, we recognize that all of these aspects, not just one or two, are necessary. Therefore, the absence of the term "baptism" in Romans 10:9-10 does not negate the need for baptism.

It should be noted that this same type of argument will also use belief from Acts 16:31 or another passage, and one can respond in a similar way as above.

Argument: Jesus did not baptize anyone; therefore, why don't we follow His example?

Answer: As seen from John 4:1-2 above, the disciples did baptize people as disciples of Christ with Christ present. If Christ disapproved of this example, would He not have stopped it then? This is actually a confirmation of the need for baptism: Christ used Himself as an example for baptism and people were baptized in His name with His approval while present on the earth.
++++++