How Important Are Your Intentions?

Whenever a person speaks, there is meaning in what is spoken. The speaker has an intended message he is trying to convey. It is frustrating when the listener misunderstands, misinterprets, ignores, or intentionally twists your intended meaning. Your frustration answers the title question: How important are intentions?

In the Bible there are several instances in which intentions are of great significance.

God’s word: 

God’s message to mankind has meaning that originated in His mind. He expects mankind to understand and respond based on the meaning He intended, not ‘what it means to me.’ 

Consider 2 Peter 1:20-21…

But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

Sacrifice: 

In the Old Testament people would bring an animal to a priest to slay it and offered it as a sacrifice. However, there were different purposes of the sacrifices. A sin offering was for the forgiveness of one’s sin. A peace offering was for maintaining fellowship with God. An offering of thanks was a sacrifice of simple gratitude. The person’s intent in offering the sacrifice was the first element in determining its purpose and benefit.

Carried a step further, consider the hunter who kills an animal for food or the person who takes from his livestock to host a feast for friends. Would the slaying of either of those animals forgive sins, secure fellowship with God, or be considered thanksgiving to God. Intent determines the purpose of the death of the animal and the expected benefit.

Baptism: 

As kids we loved to go to the creek near my grandmother’s house. While playing, someone would always be dunked. Technically speaking, that was a baptism. (The literal meaning of baptism is immersion, presumably in water). However, because the creek dunking was done with only playful intent, it had no religious significance. However, when a person is baptized into Christ according to Scripture intending to receive the promises that God has declared, then baptism is full of meaning. It has a spiritual effect because of what God has declared and promised.

Furthermore, what if your intent at your baptism was not the same as God’s intent? What if you were baptized so you could have your name placed on the membership role at a local church group or to show your parents that you were a responsible kid? Those are not God’s intent in baptism. Baptism has value only if your intent matches God’s intent!

Worship: 

When you sing a hymn do you intend to worship? Or is it merely words dribbling off your lips like dog slobbers? The Apostle Paul, in stressing the importance of accurate communication in our assembly, wrote, “I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also.” (1 Corinthians 14:15) His simple point was that if there was no understanding of the mind, then the singing was of no value. (That’s why it is of no value to sing songs in a foreign language unless the meaning is understood.)

When the bread and cup are taken during the Lord’s Supper, how can it be worship if your mind is wandering aimlessly or thinking about lunch or distracted by the toddler sitting in front of you? What is your intent?

Intent is not important; it is critical! 

If you lack intent when you are following God’s instruction in Scripture, or if your intent is different from God’s intent, then you will cheat yourself out of God’s intended blessings.

Mark Stinnett

August 9, 2026

Christian Baptism in the First Century A.D.

John the Baptist did not explain baptism. Jesus did not explain baptism. The gospel writers did not explain baptism. Yet, the Jews at the time of Jesus clearly understood something about baptism, but what?

All four gospel writers write about John the Baptist preparing the way for the Messiah through his preaching. (That was a fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah.) Those who were baptized by John became his disciples. So, baptism was the beginning point of one’s discipleship.

Some scholars think that John’s baptism developed from the purification washings in the Law of Moses. However, John received his instruction from God.

The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! This is He on behalf of whom I said, ‘After me comes a Man who has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’ I did not recognize Him, but so that He might be manifested to Israel, I came baptizing in water.”
John testified saying, “I have seen the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and He remained upon Him. I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.’”
--John 1:29–33 (NASB95)

While John's baptism was not copied from Jewish purification washings, there was a parallel: John was “preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Mark 1:4). So, baptism also had a connection to purification.

Putting these things together, it appears that the Jews at the time of Jesus already associated baptism with purification and discipleship. For that reason we do not read explanations for baptism. Nor do we read of objections to baptism. In other words, those who wanted to be disciples of John did not argue about baptism or refuse to be baptized. Baptism was naturally understood to be associated with discipleship and purification.

Later, just before the resurrected Jesus ascended to heaven, He sent his apostles out to preach the gospel with instructions to “make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” There was no further explanation of baptism by Jesus, and the apostles did not question Him or protest baptism. (See Matthew 28.)

On the Day of Pentecost when Peter preached the first gospel sermon and instructed believers to “repent and be baptized for forgiveness of sins” there was no further explanation; no questions; no arguments. (See Acts 2.)

It is not until we begin reading the letters to the early church that we find additional information regarding the meaning and relevance of the baptism that Jesus had instructed, i.e. Christian baptism. Paul gave a detailed explanation of baptism in Romans 6. One might wonder if he was clearing up some confusion, or simply explaining things more clearly to those without a Jewish background. Whatever the case, it is illuminating and applicable to all Christians.

So, what is the point?

When you read the New Testament you are sure to see that baptism was taught and instructed by Jesus and His apostles. Yet, you never read about people questioning baptism or arguing about the relevance of baptism.

The questions and arguments about baptism appeared in church history after the first century, after the apostles' writings. New innovations came after the New Testament writings; innovations such as infant baptism; pouring and sprinkling instead of immersion; and specific rules on who, how and when baptism could be performed.

All of this leads to a simple question: “Why can’t we return to the simple instruction of Jesus and the Apostles?”

Folks today might not understand the meaning and relevance of Christian baptism. Yet, the instruction of Jesus, the example of the apostles, and the teaching of the New Testament writers provide clarity. In addition, there is overwhelming testimony for the importance of baptism in the many examples of baptism in the Book of Acts. Baptism was the beginning point of true discipleship and purification and it still is.

Let’s get back to the Bible.

Mark Stinnett

Baptism: Exception and Conclusion

The scolding might sounds something like this: “Are you telling me that just because my papa wasn’t dunked in a pool of water he won’t be with God in heaven!?”

The question trivializes baptism and minimizes its meaning as found in scripture. It virtually turns the question of baptism into a personal attack. Though unintentional, I believe, such a question makes God out to be arbitrary. God’s demand for faith and repentance make sense. It makes sense that a person should be willing to openly confess his faith in Jesus, but baptism? How does a water dunking make sense?

This kind of questioning and reasoning closes the mind to the instruction of Jesus and the meaningful explanations presented by the New Testament writers. Such thinking could even present a loved one as a false standard, because he was such a good man, he surely could not have gotten things wrong.

I want to restate the original question using the explanation for baptism presented by the Apostle Paul in Romans 6:

“Are you telling me that just because my papa was not united with Christ he will not be with God in heaven?” You see, Paul taught that baptism united the believer with Christ. Perhaps that gives a clearer perspective.

From scripture we can read that Jesus directly connected baptism with discipleship in the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20). We can read that the Apostle Peter directly connected baptism to salvation (1 Peter 3:21). To sever baptism from discipleship and salvation would do an injustice to scripture.

Of course, there is the well-known exception. (I sincerely intend no sarcasm.) The thief on the cross was not baptized yet assured Paradise with Jesus. There is no question but that at least one exception exists. So, the question is restated (and toned down a bit): “Do you think God will make an exception for papa?”

I would not dare to sit in God’s seat of judgment. Yet, it is unwise to teach an exception as the normal way of things. Consider…

Enoch did not die physically (Genesis 4:24); nor did Elijah (2 Kings 2:11). Yet, who would teach that a person does not have to face physical death based on these two exceptions?

King David lusted for Bathsheba, committed adultery with her and later ordered the death of her husband to cover up their sin. Yet, David and Bathsheba were not stoned to death as the Law of Moses demanded. In fact, it was God himself who sent the prophet Nathan to confront David with his sin. Who in their right mind would used this exception to teach that God allows adultery and murder?

I know from scripture that God is just. I also see in scripture some instances that appear to be exceptions to strict justice. For the living, I can only teach what the scriptures teach about the importance of baptism and its connection to discipleship, salvation, and unity with Christ. As for the dead, I’ll leave things to God.

A personal note: It has been my hope that this series of essays on baptism would be instructional, not adversarial or divisive. While I have presented some of my own reasoning when dealing with various questions, I have always appealed to scripture. I would urge anyone with questions about baptism to do the same.

Is baptism really that important?

What do the scriptures say?

Why All the Controversy over Baptism (Part 2)

There has developed a rather negative view toward baptism among some. You can hear it in the way some folks talk about baptism: ‘submitting’ to baptism, or ‘allowing’ oneself to be baptized. This hesitant kind of mindset is foreign to the believers of first century Christianity.

Do you remember the man from Ethiopia who was reading from the book of Isaiah as he traveled home from a visit to Jerusalem (Acts 8)? He was an outsider to the Jewish religion according to the Law of Moses because he was a eunuch. He could therefore only participate from a distance. Yet, he was a devout man desiring fellowship with God.

When Philip was sent to him to teach him the gospel, he began teaching him about Jesus based on the reading from Isaiah. Then, with eagerness the man asked, “What prevents me from being baptized?” (v. 36) The outsider from Ethiopia recognized that he was not excluded from discipleship to Jesus. He was eager to be baptized and then “went on his way rejoicing.” (v. 39)

Perhaps this is more of an extreme case of excitement. Yet, none of the examples of baptism in the New Testament even hint that there was any kind of hesitation or controversy about being baptized.

So, what has happened???

After the first century religious and historical writings reveal a number of diversions from the simple teachings of Jesus and the New Testament writers.

A religious writing called the Didache (probably written early in the 2nd century) gives specific instructions (restrictions) regarding baptism.¹

• Baptize in living (running) water;
• If not living water, other water is ok;
• If not cold, then warm.
• If insufficient water for baptism, then pour² water on the head three times; in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
• Before the baptism, both the baptizer and the believer to be baptized must fast.

Whether a person agrees or disagrees with the value of these innovations, they simply are not found in scripture, but developed at a later time, originating with man, not God.

Similar innovations are described in the writings of a 2nd/3rd century Christian writer known as Hippolytus. The baptismal candidate was to undergo three years of instruction and finally, if found worthy of ‘receiving’ baptism, was baptized only after three days of preparation.³

Though some have argued that infant baptism is consistent with the biblical text, examples are lacking. In fact, the best evidence is that the practice emerged near the end of the second century. Even then it was not widespread but found primarily in North Africa.⁴

It is clear that new ideas began to emerge in the second and third centuries and after; ideas that originated with man, not God. When these idea were taught as truth, confusion and controversy were sure to result. Yet, Jesus said...

“If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine.” —John 3:31

The simple way to avoid confusion and controversy is to return to the teachings of the New Testament.

___________________

¹Ferguson, Everett. “Baptism in the Early Church.” Eerdmans, 2009, p. 202.

²"Pour" is a distinctly different Greek term than the Greek term for ‘baptize.’ (Ferguson, 202)

³Ferguson, 329.

⁴Ferguson, 336.

Why All the Controversy over Baptism?

We might use the term ‘Christian’ baptism to distinguish it from the baptism of John the Baptist, the baptism of the Jews, pagan baptism, and even the ‘outpouring’ of the Holy Spirit. It is puzzling why Christian baptism is so puzzling to so many people. You will find no controversy over Christian baptism in Scripture.

Misunderstood Nature of Baptism

Have you ever heard someone say that baptism is a ‘work’? Who came up with that idea? Whenever someone talks about baptism as a work, they are telling you what they have heard or read, but the source is not the Bible.

It is obvious that baptism is an action involving movement and muscles of the human body. However, that does not put baptism in the category of ‘works’ unless you are using your physics textbook as a source. When Abraham left his home and went “to the land which I [God] will show you,” was all that effort to move his family and his herds and his flocks to be understood as a work or an act of faith?

To understand Christian baptism, we must not place it in an arbitrary category based on human reasoning, but keep our focus on the text of the Bible. Christian baptism is not a work.

Misunderstood Nature of Faith

The Bible clearly states that we are “saved by grace through faith.” (Ephesians 2:8) So, what is that faith?

Look up passages in your Bible in which Jesus told someone, “Your faith has saved you,” or something similar. Look carefully. Is faith a verbal affirmation? Words only? Is there anything that you see that accompanies faith?

Faith never stands alone, else it is not faith at all.

“Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” 

—James 2:17 (NIV)

The idea that faith stands alone is foreign to scripture. Yet, many folks strain to dismiss salvation by baptism, but can do so only if faith, by their definition, stands alone on man’s part.

When we read about Christian baptism in the New Testament, we see baptism portrayed as an act of faith.

Incomplete Reasoning

If you were to make a list of scriptures about the salvation of the soul you might be surprised to find that:

• Faith saves;
• Confession saves;
• Baptism saves;
• Grace saves;
• Calling on the name of the Lord saves;
• Jealousy saves (Romans 11:14).

I know, that last one is a puzzler...until you read the context in which the verse is written and bring it into the light of other scriptures that deal with salvation. The point is that a scripture taken in isolation (or especially taken out of context), does not tell the whole story. The Psalmist wisely wrote:

The entirety of Your word is truth…. 

—Psalm 119:160 (NKJV)

A single verse, whether it is about faith or baptism is not sufficient to provide a complete picture when there are other related passages to consider.

If a person misunderstands the nature of baptism or the nature of faith, or applies incomplete reasoning to the question of baptism, he/she will most likely misunderstand the role of faith and baptism in salvation. When it comes to the salvation of the soul, wouldn't it be wise to carefully study and apply all the Scriptures?

Why the First Believers Were Baptized (Part 3)

Jesus instructed His apostles to preach the gospel and baptize those who believed. We can read about the spread of the gospel in the Book of Acts where the apostles were doing exactly what Jesus instructed. You might say that these are two witnesses for the relevance for Christian baptism. There is a third.

When the apostles and other inspired writers sent letters to various churches in the first century they encouraged Christians in their faith, reminded them of earlier instruction, applied the teachings of Jesus and provided additional explanation about earlier teachings. The Apostle Paul explained the relevance of baptism into Christ:

Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection. —Romans 6:3–5

At the core of this passage is a statement that ultimately comes from God through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit: A believer is literally united with the death of Christ and the resurrection of Christ. Of course, this is not literal in a physical sense, but that does not mean that it is not literal. The things that Paul wrote about baptism are literal truths set in a spiritual context.

Paul said that the baptized believer is literally united with the death of Jesus. So, it is as if the believer died and was in the tomb with Jesus. Again, this is not a physical truth, but a spiritual truth, one accomplished by God.

In addition, Paul said that the baptized believer is literally united with the resurrection of Jesus. Yet again, this is not a physical truth in the present, but a promise that God will accomplish upon the return of Christ. It can only be understood in a literal spiritual context.

The ‘new life’ that Paul wrote about (v. 4) is the result of the believer having died and then being made alive again (reborn)...not figuratively, but truly. The baptized believer, by faith in the invisible activity of God, understands that he/she has undergone a literal spiritual change, passing from death into life through Jesus Christ.

Baptism is not a mere illustration; it is not some kind of magic ritual; and, according to Scripture, it is not a ‘work.’ Baptism into Christ is an act of faith in the expressed claims of God. It symbolically parallels the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, but literally unites the believer with Christ in His death and in His resurrection by God's power.

Finally, listen to the words of the Apostle Peter:

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. —1 Peter 3:21

Of the many things written about this verse one fact is undisputed. Peter wrote that “baptism now saves you.” The Greek text of this statement is unquestioned. Its meaning is obvious...and it parallels the instruction given by Jesus in the Great Commission as well as the examples of the apostles and first believers who followed Jesus' instruction. Baptism is intimately connected to the salvation of the soul. The writers of the New Testament letters to the churches help us to understand how.

The explanations of the inspired New Testament writers stands as a third witness to the vital importance and relevance of Christian baptism.

Why the First Believers Were Baptized (Part 2)

Jesus instructed His apostles to make disciples baptizing them in the His name. (See last week's blog.) How well did they do in carrying out His instructions?

On the Day of Pentecost following the crucifixion of Jesus an Old Testament prophecy from the book of Joel (chapter 2) was fulfilled. The prophet had foretold the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and the commotion gathered quite a crowd. Filled with the Holy Spirit Peter preached the gospel of Jesus Christ to the crowd. When the people realized that they had crucified the Son of God, they were cut to the heart and asked Peter and the others what they should do.

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

So, Peter instructed the believers to repent, i.e. change their mind/perception (about Jesus), and to be baptized in the name of Jesus; just as Jesus had instructed in the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16).

And how did the people respond?

So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.     —Acts 2:41

So, the Apostles instructed the people exactly according to the instruction given by Jesus, and the crowd understood and responded accordingly by being baptized; and the stated reason for baptism: Forgiveness of sins and the receipt of the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Just so you know, some folks have discounted this simple and direct instruction by saying that baptism is not ‘for’ forgiveness, but ‘because of’ forgiveness. Their reasoning is based on a possible rendering of a Greek term found in the verse. However, does that make sense in light of the broader context?

The alternate translation idea assumes that the listeners were saved by belief alone. If so, we should be able to discover the point at which the people believed and were presumably saved.

Their response (v. 37) revealed their belief; they were cut to the heart when Peter showed that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God and that they had crucified Him. However, based on Peter's instruction it does not sound like they were saved just because they believed. After all, Peter told them to repent and a person does not repent because they have been saved, but because they have not been saved.

To deal with this inconsistency concerning repentance, some have chopped up the verse to say that they were to repent because they were not saved; but that they were to be baptized because they were already saved. The Greek text simply does not read, nor does the English text. Read it again yourself and see if this explanation makes sense.

When a person reads this section of scripture without bias it is clear that Peter and the apostles followed Jesus' instruction from the Great Commission. Then in response, the first believers were baptized as instructed so that their sins would be forgiven and so that they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

So, the instruction of Jesus in the Great Commission was that believers were to be baptized into Christ. Then, by example, we see that the teaching of the apostles and the practice of the first believers mirrored the instruction of Jesus.

Why the First Believers Were Baptized (Part 1)

My previous seven blogs have focused on reasons that some believers have given for being baptized. In each case the reason was found to lack biblical support. Yet, as noted in the first blog on the subject, the reason a person is baptized is vitally important. That leads to a very important question:

Recognizing that the first believers in Jesus were baptized and that baptism was in some way associated with salvation, why were they baptized?

Let’s begin with the instructions that Jesus gave His apostles after His resurrection and before He ascended to heaven. (It is commonly called the Great Commission.)

And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”      —Matthew 28:18–20

Jesus gave His apostles three basic instructions:

• Make disciples;
• Baptize them; and
• Teach them.

From this passage we can make a simple conclusion about baptism: Jesus expected his apostles to baptize those who were becoming disciples. If this were the only reference to baptism in the New Testament, we might wonder why Jesus instructed baptism. Yet, other passages also make a connection between baptism and discipleship.

Those who were baptized by John the Baptist became disciples of John. Likewise, those baptized by the disciples of Jesus became disciples of Jesus. (John 4:1-2; Acts 19:1-5)

Consider also the instruction Jesus gave in the Gospel of Mark (16:15-16), also set after His crucifixion and before His ascension:

And He said to them [apostles], “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.”

Jesus expected the apostles to baptize believers, and he gave a specific reason: The baptized believer will be saved (from condemnation).

One fellow told me that this passage does not say that a person will be condemned if they are not baptized but only if they do not believe. Technically, yes, but let's test his conclusion. A simple illustration should do:

Some years ago a local burger joint offered a burger for only $1 on Sunday if you brought a current church bulletin. (The regular price was about $2.50.) So, this was the deal: On Sunday, whoever brings in a current church bulletin and a dollar will get a burger.

That seems simple enough to understand, but wait! Using the reasoning of my acquaintance, the ad did not say that you would not get a burger for a dollar if you did not bring in a current church bulletin. On a technical point, that is true. However, would you expect to pay only one dollar for a burger if you did not bring in a church bulletin? To ‘assume’ that you would get a dollar burger without the bulletin would be just that, an assumption.

When my acquaintance made his statement about baptism, he was making a bold assumption that he could simply choose to omit baptism, though it was clearly and directly instructed. I guess he can take a chance on his reasoning, but I cannot teach different from what is written. Belief in Jesus accompanied with baptism will save.

So, it is clear from the instruction given by Jesus in the Great Commission that He expected believers to be baptized.

The purpose, according to Jesus: Discipleship and salvation.

Why Were You Baptized? (Reason #6)

For some believers the question of baptism is troublesome since baptism undeniably appears in the New Testament and it is clearly connected in some way to salvation. For example:

He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. —Mark 16:16

...Baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience…. —1 Peter 3:21

Yet, the Bible also clearly states:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. —Ephesians 2:8-9

Some assume that baptism is a ‘work’ and since a person is not saved by works, then baptism does not save, rather...

Reason #6: Baptism is an outward sign of an inward faith (or grace).
Different words may be used to express the same thought, such as, “baptism is an expression of my love for God for having saved me.” Whatever the expression, the idea is that baptism is merely symbolic. So, once a person has been saved (by grace through faith), they are baptized as a sign of their salvation, that is, to show that they have been saved.

Is that what the Bible teaches about baptism?

First, there truly is rich symbolism associated with baptism. The Apostle Paul wrote that a believer’s baptism is symbolically parallel to the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus (Romans 6:3-4). However, he did not say that the believer’s baptism was merely ‘like’ the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. Rather, in the same passage of scripture, he said that the baptized believer:

• Has died with Christ (vv. 6 & 8);
• Is buried with Christ (v. 4);
• Is united with Christ in His death (v. 5);
• Is united with Christ in His resurrection (v. 5).

The “likeness of His death” (v. 5) is the believer’s baptism. The “uniting” with Christ in his death and resurrection is the work of God. Paul recognized the work of God as he wrote:

Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin. (v. 6)

So, God is doing something very real that we cannot sense with our physical senses. He is literally uniting the baptized believer with Christ in a spiritual death, burial, and resurrection so that the believer “might walk in newness of life” (v. 4). So, Paul did not describe baptism as an outward sign to ‘show’ anything to others, but rather to unite the believer with Christ.

Second, there are signs of one’s existing relationship with God. For example, just as an apple (fruit) is a sign of an apple tree, the fruit of the Spirit is a sign of the Spirit of God dwelling in a Christian (Galatians 5:22-25).

When Jesus told His disciples to “Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works” (Matthew 5:16), the good works were a sign of one’s devotion to Jesus.

Paul encouraged Christians to “conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ.” He indicated that this was a “sign...of salvation for you” (Philippians 1:27-28).

Curiously, baptism is never referred to in scripture as an visible sign of love or faith or even salvation. So, if you were baptized as an 'outward sign’ of anything, I would urge you reconsider your baptism and to turn to scripture for your answer.

Why Were You Baptized? (Reason #5)

So many different ’churches’ claiming Christianity; so many different teachings and practices associated with baptism; it is all very confusing. Today's blog addresses:

Reason #5: The Sacrament of Baptism

The Roman Catholic Church and other similar churches teach a system of sacraments. Baptism is the first of seven sacraments which are, in the broadest sense, “external signs of the action of God’s grace.” ¹ Distinguished from lesser signs called sacramentals, “a sacrament imparts grace in virtue of the rite itself." ²

According to sacramental theology, when baptism is administered in the correct way, with the correct water, with the correct words, by the correct person, the one being baptized receives God’s grace in the forgiveness of sins. Since parents make baptismal vows/promises for infants, the Holy Spirit is not received until the rite of the sacrament of Confirmation is administered by a Bishop when a child is older.

Does all this make sense according to the Bible?

Let’s make a couple of observations from the Catholic Encyclopedia compared to Scripture.

First, “in the early Church, it was difficult to distinguish between the sacraments of Initiation,” including baptism and confirmation. One reason is that in the early church only adults were baptized.³ So, originally the Roman Catholic church taught that forgiveness of sins and the receipt of the Holy Spirit occurred at baptism, just as Peter instructed those who heard the gospel when it was first preached:

Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” Peter said to them, “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. — Acts 2:37-38

So, the separation of forgiveness of sins (at Baptism) and a later receipt of the Holy Spirit (at Confirmation) was an invention of the Roman Catholic Church that did not follow Scripture and the practice of the first century Christians. (The practice of separating the two seems to have coincided with the increased practice of baptizing infants during the 4th and 5th centuries.⁴)

Second, as a sacrament, the ritual of baptism “imparts grace in virtue of the rite itself.” ⁵ This suggests that the baptism ritual itself, if done correctly with all the right ingredients will, in and of itself, bring about an expected effect. This further suggests that the ritual itself is used to invoke the power and/or activity of God.

However…
Reflecting on Peter’s answer in Acts 2 (above), the people were instructed to “repent and be baptized.” Repentance involves an active response of the mind of the one being baptized. Later, Peter wrote that baptism is “an appeal for a good conscience” (1 Peter 3:21). Clearly, ‘ritual’ baptism would be incomplete without a proper response of the mind of the one being baptized. So, ‘ritual baptism’ without repentance and without an appeal of the mind cannot possibly “impart grace in virtue of the rite itself.”

Anyone who has only received baptism as a sacrament is urged to consider the historical development of such a practice in light of Scripture and to follow Scripture instead of traditions originating in the minds of men.


¹ Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Encyclopedia, ‘Sacraments, Seven,’ p. 849.
² Catholic Encyclopedia, ‘Sacramental,’ p. 848.
³ Catholic Encyclopedia, ‘Confirmation,’ p. 246.
⁴ Catholic Encyclopedia, ‘Confirmation,’ p. 246.
⁵ Catholic Encyclopedia, ‘Sacramental,’ p. 848.

Why Were You Baptized? (Reason #4)

The reason for baptism that I wish to address today might be generalized:

Reason #4: External pressure.

A young lady sat across my desk from me and broke into tears when I asked the simple question, “Why were you baptized?”

She regained her composure enough to answer, “All my friends were getting baptized, so I did too. I didn’t know what I was doing.”

I spoke with a wife who wondered about her husband’s motive when he was baptized. One thing was certain, her father would not allow the two to marry unless the young man was baptized. Questions lingered.

I have heard it taught that we just need to be obedient, "Be baptized." As a result some have felt pressured into going through a baptism ritual as an act of obedience. Yet, there is much more to baptism than an arbitrary command: "Be baptized!"

Related to that, “If you aren’t baptized you’ll go to hell.” Or, at church camp, “If you haven’t been baptized yet, you won’t be saved.”

All of these examples have one thing in common: Some degree of external pressure.

Let me quickly add; I am sure that the crowd that heard the first gospel sermon on the Day of Pentecost felt pressure. (Read Acts 2.) Having been cut to the heart, they interrupted Peter’s sermon: “What shall we do?” However, the pressure they felt was related to an inner conviction brought about by the gospel message. That is the right kind of pressure.

I am more concerned about external pressure that is not rooted in the gospel message. The problem is an insufficient understanding of the reason for baptism. Sometimes it is the fault of the preacher/teacher, and sometimes the fault of the listener.

Some preachers have pressured people into baptism by using high-pressure sales techniques or by using guilt to manipulate. Paul was on fire for the gospel, but he did not coerce people; no belt-notching, baptism boasting for Paul.

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.    —1 Corinthians 1:17

In the New Testament baptism was always a faith response, not the mere observance of a ritual act. Anyone can participate in a ritual without understanding (e.g. Latin Mass for English-speaking people). However, a faith response is, by nature, a conviction of the heart based on understanding.

If you were baptized just to follow the crowd or to please someone, your baptism lacks meaning and substance. You should rethink your reason for being baptized in light of biblical teaching.

If you were pressured into baptized as an act of obedience to a legal command, you really missed the point of baptism. You desperately need to turn to the scriptures and reevaluate.

Baptism is not a magic shield against God’s wrath. So, if you were pressured into baptism through fear or through guilt, yet did not understand the biblical teaching on baptism, you also need to turn to the scriptures and reevaluate.

I never want to create doubt in the hearts of people. However, there is but ‘one baptism.’ As believers, we must make sure that we have made a proper faith response to God in baptism. If there is any pressure, it ought to come from God through the gospel message.

Reason #5, next week.

Why Were You Baptized? (Followup to Reason #3)

In my previous blog entitled "Why Were You Baptized? (Reason #3)," I showed that the practice of infant baptism identified more with practices under the obsolete 'old covenant' that God had made with the physical nation of Israel, than with the 'new covenant' that defines New Testament Christianity. Still, some people believe that the New Testament allows for the practice of infant baptism. Let me explain some of their reasoning and share some observations.

Even though there is no direct teaching regarding infant baptism and there are no specific examples, the Bible speaks of whole 'households' being baptized. Considering the definition of household, infants would have been included. For that reason, infant baptism is justified. 

Does that reasoning make sense? 
Let's begin with the meaning of household in the first century:

According to Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary the household  "included the immediate family and all who lived together in the same house. This included slaves, concubines, foreign residents and servants."

Clearly, this definition would include family members of all ages, even infants. In addition, there are examples in the New Testament of households being baptized:

• The household of Cornelius - Acts 10:24 ff.
• The household of Lydia - Acts 16:14-15
• The household of the Philippian jailer - Acts 16:31-33
• The household of Stephanas - 1 Corinthians 1:16

So, the thinking is that an infant in any of these households would have been baptized simply because of they were part of the household. Of course there is no evidence suggesting that any of these households did or did not have infants. For that reason, it is mere speculation to use these households as examples of infant baptism.

That leaves us with the definition only. So, is the definition of household enough to justify the baptism of infants?

Let's look a little further in scripture...
First, there is at least one example in New Testament in which infants and small children were excluded from the household. The text is in John 4 where we read that Jesus was in the town of Cana and was asked by a nobleman to heal his son who was near death. The man pleaded with Jesus to go with him to his home in Capernaum before his son died, but Jesus assured him that his son would live. Arriving home the next day, the father found his son in good health. Now, notice the response to the miraculous healing:

"...and he [the nobleman]  believed and his whole household."     --John 4:23

Common sense tells us that only those of the household who were capable of believing were the ones who actually believed. So, we naturally understand that infants, and even small children, were excluded.

This example shows that while the definition of household was all-inclusive, there were exceptions. Some circumstances might exclude certain members of the household.

Second, neither by instruction nor by example is Christian baptism found in Scripture apart from faith, repentance and discipleship. Let's consider three brief passages.

The Great Commission is found in the gospel accounts of Matthew and Mark and it naturally excludes infants and small children because it calls for a response of faith and discipleship:

And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit."     --Matthew 28:18-19

Can an infant or toddler become a disciple (a learner and follower)? Of course not.

Clearly Jesus was not referring to anyone who could not make a conscious decision to devote his life to Him in discipleship. At the very least infants and toddlers are exceptions to Jesus' instruction.

And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned."     --Mark 16:15-16

Can an infant or toddler believe or disbelieve the message being preached? Of course not.

Clearly Jesus was not instructing His apostles to go out preaching to infants. It simply does not make sense. Infants do not have the mental capacity to believe (or to disbelieve) any more than an animal. (And I do not believe the apostles went out preaching to animals even though they are technically a part of "all creation.") 
(Note: I am not calling anyone's child an animal; nor do I wish to offend your beloved pet.)

Let's make another observation in light of Jesus' instruction:

• If 'I' believe and 'I' am baptized, that would make sense;
• If 'you' believe and 'you' are baptized, that would make sense; however, 
• If 'I' believe and 'you' are baptized, that would not make sense.

So, it is clear that the Apostles were not to preach to parents and then baptize their babies. I think it would be a real stretch of the imagination to come to any other conclusion.

Next, consider the reaction of the crowd of listeners when the gospel message was first preached by the Apostle Peter:

Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?" 
Peter said to them, "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."     --Acts 2:37-38

Some have speculated that infants were surely part of the large crowd that gathered to hear Peter and the Apostles. With that assumption, they then reason that infants were baptized that day. Yet, can infants be "pierced to the heart"? Can infants repent? Of course not.

The gospel message was understood by the people who heard and it brought about a response of deep sorrow in their hearts. They were asked to repent. (Repentance is literally 'a change of heart/mind.') With this kind of response, it does not make sense to include infants.

So, putting it all together...
By strict definition, household would include infants, yet where it makes sense infants could be excluded depending upon the circumstances. Furthermore, when the term household is used in the context of discipleship, faith and repentance, common sense tells us to exclude infants.

So, returning to the original question: Is the 'household' idea sufficient to justify the baptism of infants?
The answer is, "No."

Even if infants were members of the households that were baptized, they would have been excluded because of their inability to believe and make a conscious response to the gospel message.

Perhaps one final question should be considered: Is it wrong to baptize infants?

We must recognize that baptism and its benefits always follow faith, repentance and a call to discipleship. Since infants are incapable of faith, repentance and discipleship, then what would be the meaning and purpose of baptizing infants? 
Will the 'ritual' of baptism do something for the infant? Absolutely not!

God has assigned meaning and purpose to baptism in clear statements found in Scripture. So, to use the same practice yet with a different meaning and/or a different purpose would be to add or substitute man's thinking for God's.

So, while it is not technically wrong to baptize infants, it is, at best, confusing. At worst, it is likely to give people confidence in the present and hope for the future not rooted in God's promises. That is an illusion that simply does not make sense.

Why Were You Baptized? (Reason #3)

There seems to be considerable confusion in our day regarding baptism. Many things have been taught about baptism that are simply not in the Bible. For that reason, it is safe to say that the confusion is the fault of man, not God. Here is another reason that some people have been baptized.

Reason #3:

My parents had me baptized when I was a baby.

On one occasion a young man told me that he had been baptized as a baby. Curious, I ask why. He told me that it was the way the parents’ in his church devoted their children to Christ.

I truly admire parents who wish to devote their children to Christ, and I appreciate that they wish to make their desire known. But why choose baptism to express their desire?

I have read other reasons for baptizing infants. Some of the reasoning sounds noble and some of the reasoning is confusing. I have found no parallel in the Bible. In fact, I have found something in Scripture quite contrary to this practice.

The prophet Jeremiah wrote about a ‘new covenant’ that would replace the existing covenant God had with the nation of Israel. In his words…

“They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the Lord, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”     —Jeremiah 31:34

(You can read the entire text beginning in verse 31.)

The first covenant God made was with the physical nation of Israel. When an Israelite couple had a child, that child was automatically part of a covenant relationship with God. Of course, that child knew nothing of God and had to be taught. So, birth occurred before instruction.

However, Jeremiah’s prophecy was about a new covenant. Under the new covenant a person would already have knowledge of God, at least the basic knowledge of His forgiving character.

Jesus fulfilled Jeremiah's prophecy ushering in the a covenant which assured forgiveness of sins through the blood (sacrifice) of Christ. The entire book of Hebrews examines the new covenant which resulted in Christianity. It is better than the old covenant and it made the old covenant obsolete. (Hebrews 8).

One stark difference between the two covenants is relevant to the question of infant baptism:

• Old Covenant: A child was physically born into a covenant relationship with God, then had to be taught about God. So, teaching about God followed physical birth.
• New Covenant: A person was taught about God and then entered into a covenant relationship through a spiritual birth. So, teaching about God preceded spiritual birth.

Which which covenant practice does infant baptism more closely resemble?
If you wish to be a part of the new covenant, it does not start as an infant, or even as a toddler.

Whatever reasons people offer for baptizing infants, Jeremiah said that in the new covenant, “they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them.” All examples of baptism in the New Testament involved adults who were first taught the gospel, then baptized.

If you were baptized only as an infant, it may have been for noble reasons, but it must not be confused with the ‘one baptism’ that the Apostle Paul wrote about in Ephesians 4. The new covenant is better; the old is obsolete. You must be born again!

(Look for a followup to Reason #3 later in the week.)

(Click here for Reason #2.)

Why Were You Baptized? (Reason #2)

Baptism is clearly taught in the New Testament, but baptismal practices differ among various denominations; so also the reasons for baptism. In this article I want to explore a second reason that some people have been baptized.

Reason #2:

I was baptized to join a local church.

In the Bible we read about churches in different cities. However, they were all a part of a global church community whose membership was comprised of all Christians in all places.

When the missionaries in the 1st Century traveled from city to city, they never talked/wrote about ‘placing membership’ or being baptized to be identified as a member of a church in a specific town/location. Such ideas are foreign to the New Testament.

The Apostle Paul traveled to many cities, but never identified himself only with the church in one city or another. He only identified himself with one body of believers:

For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function, so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.     —Romans 12:4–5

Notice especially that Paul included himself with the body of believers in Rome by saying, “So we, who are many….” Yet, he was writing these words while in a different city. So, he considered all Christians to be a part of the body of Christ regardless of location.

Paul also wrote:

There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.     —Ephesians 4:4–6

So, while the members of the body of Christ may be dotted around the globe in various locations, all of these Christians are members of one body, namely, the body of Christ.

Also, did you notice that there is only “one baptism.” A baptism ritual associated with a local membership is different from the disciple-making baptism Jesus that instructed.

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.     —Matthew 28:19

Now, what about the idea of ‘placing membership’ or ‘identifying with’ a congregation?

Again, the only ’membership’ that we can find in the Bible is membership in the body of Christ. Individual church groups that have membership rules in addition to the Scriptures are just making things up.

Of course, common sense tells us the importance of communication. It might be that phrases like placing membership or identifying with a congregation are simply ways of communicating a person’s intentions of being a regular part of a local church. It makes sense to let folks know that you are more than a visitor, that you are not just passing through town. So, by all means, communicate your intentions, but you do not need to be baptized (again) to become a member of a local church.

So, if you were baptized to ‘join a congregation,’ you should return to the Bible to see why Jesus instructed his apostles to baptize believers. Look at the examples in the Book of Acts.

You’ll find your answer.

(Reason #3, next week)

(Click here for Reason #1)

Why Were You Baptized? (Reason #1)

I was about six years old when I first asked my dad, a preacher, to baptize me. We were ‘down at the creek’ with several other family members and I had found a deep pool suitable for dunking. When I asked, Dad said something like, “You know, this doesn’t count.”

“I just want to see what it’s like,” I quipped.

With that, dad ‘baptized’ me. And he was right; it meant nothing and I went off splashing and playing like any other six-year-old.

Did you know that the reason a person is baptized is important?

Baptism is clearly taught in the New Testament, but baptismal practices differ among various denominations; so also the reasons for baptism.

My creek ‘baptism’ at age six had no purpose, at least no purpose related to Christianity. For that reason, it had no value other than to satisfy my personal curiosity, and that is all it did.

So, let me ask: “Why were you baptized?”

Over the years I have heard different reasons for baptism. I do not wish to offend anyone, but I do want to see how those different reasons hold up to biblical teaching and examples.

Reason #1: 

Jesus was baptized, and he is our example. 

It is true. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist in the Jordan River just before he began preaching. But do you know why?

John had been baptizing, telling people to repent because the kingdom of God was coming. He protested when Jesus requested baptism. So, Jesus told him the purpose of His baptism:

Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.     —Matthew 3:15 

John the Baptist agreed to baptize Jesus and later said something more about his purpose for baptizing:

“I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.’ I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God.”     —John 1:33–34

God had told John the Baptist that he would recognize the Messiah when the Holy Spirit visibly descended on Him. After John had baptized Jesus, he was then able to introduce Him to the world as the Messiah (Christ) and Son of God.

So, the Scriptures reveal two reasons for the baptism of Jesus:

• So that Jesus and John could together fulfill all righteousness.
• So that John would be able to identify the Messiah and introduce Him to the world.

There is no instruction in the New Testament for anyone else to be baptized in order to ‘fulfill all righteous’ or to be identified as the Son of God. Clearly, the baptism of Jesus was unique!

If you were baptized to merely follow the example of Jesus, that was noble, but what was the expected result or benefit? (Why not also fast for forty days, like Jesus did?) If you were baptized for a reason other than what Jesus and the apostles taught, it may have had no more benefit to you than a six-year-old’s playful creek baptism.

Go back to the Bible to find out why the early believers in Jesus were baptized. Your intent in being baptized makes all the difference...

(Reason #2, next week)