3 Proofs Water Baptism Doesn't Save
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
Most of our preaching is, and should be about the careful laying forth of Christian truth, but every now and then we need to discuss why certain beliefs are wrong and detrimental. This is exemplified many times in scripture. In Colossians for example Paul argues against people who were focusing on what to eat and drink, and the observance of special days. In James the writer is trying to bring a balance to those who were advocating a faith but had no practical evidence of it. In Galations, Paul argues against works based salvation, and so on. So today, I want to make 3 brief points on why baptism doesn't save. Many of you have come out of a Catholic background and you were taught that without water baptism you didn't stand a chance of going to heaven. So today rather than giving a long argument on what is the biblical basis and understanding of salvation, I will simply give three proofs water baptism doesn't save. Please understand, I am not saying we don't need to be water baptized. Quite the opposite is true, baptism is not an option, it is a command, and if you haven't been water baptized you need to do so immediately. This study should help you think through a few facets of salvation particularly in the area of water baptism as it relates to salvation.
So here are 3 Proofs Water Baptism Doesn't Save:
1. There is no evidence the first believers received Christian water baptism.
You ask how is that a proof? That doesn't sound like a proof of anything, does it? Just try to follow my thinking here. If water baptism is necessary for salvation, then don't you think God would want to show us this in the example of the first people who were saved? How could God skip over how the first converts got saved as regards water baptism. We know they believed Jesus, and that He rose from the dead, so if something more were required for them to be saved, don't you think God would have told us about it?
The crowd on the day of Pentecost were not the first believers, they were water baptized by the first believers. It appears evident from scripture that believers do the water baptizing. That would require Christ to have water baptized the Apostles, after His resurrection, There are two reasons for that, the first is that because no one could receive New Testament salvation prior to Jesus dying and being raised from the dead. Secondly if only believers can baptize others Jesus had to have baptized the first followers, no one else would have been qualified to do it. If water baptism were essential for salvation it is mind boggling that there is no mention of the water baptism of the first converts. When did Peter, James, John and all the others receive Christian water baptism? How could God leave out the story of their water baptism. The answer is simple, they didn't need to be water baptized to be saved and that is why it is not recorded.
What is recorded, is, that they are praying in an upper room and they are baptized in the Holy Spirit, no connection whatsoever is made between that and water baptism. They had fulfilled what Paul considers requirements for salvation and needed no other.
Ro 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
If God were trying to lay out the theological foundation that water baptism saves, surely the first water baptism service would have been recorded, but it wasn't. The connection to water baptism and the first believers was omitted in scripture, this is no small oversight, it is intentional on God's part, because there is no connection. Which leads us to the 2nd proof:
2. There is no formula for water baptism in the scripture.
If one assumes that the scriptures teach water baptism is essential for salvation, then one should be able to easily point out in scripture how and when such an important act should be done. There is no place like that in all of scripture, water baptism is mentioned. but there are no definitive instructions in scripture. How could this be, if it is essential for salvation? We are told that faith is a requirement for salvation, but we are also left with no doubt on what we are to believe. How is it possible that water baptism could be essential for salvation and no explicit instructions are given? It would be like God saying we had to believe to be saved, but not telling us what to believe.
This leads to only two logical conclusions, the first is that water baptism is not necessary for salvation, and secondly is that how a person is water baptized is not of primary importance. (I once was faced with baptizing a quadriplegic on a ventilator. Immersion was not a possibility.) The means of salvation is of primary importance, 2nd in the theological pyramid only to the nature of God and the person of Christ. What must I do to be saved?, ought to be the easiest question for any believer to answer, there should be absolutely no ambiguity in our reply. To say that water baptism is a requirement, begs the question, "well if it is that important, surely God must have clearly told us, who is to do it? How is it to be done? What do I have to believe? Should I say any words?" One might be able to search the scriptures and deduce some of the answers, but my point is, that if it really were true God would have bent over backwards to make sure we were absolutely clear about something that is a part of the salvations process.
What does a person have to believe before they can be baptized? How many cardinal truths do they have to know? How old do they have to be? Do they have to prove their acceptablity to the baptizer? Does the baptizer have to ask them 10 questions on what they beleive? The fact that the answer to these questions have been argued ad infinitum is proof enough that the scriptures do not provide clear answers. (In Acts 8 Philip said a person could be baptized if they believed with all their heart, but there is no mention what had to be believed nor that baptism was THE means of salvation.)
If God requires water baptism as a precondition to salvation, it is insane to think that He would not have provided crystal clear instructions, on how, by whom, upon what conditions and when is a person to be water baptized. Essential for salvation but no instructions!!! Paul gives better instructions on how to take up an offering than he does on water baptism! He explains at length what the gospel is and in that explanation he includes zero references to water baptism. (1 Cor. 15:1-8)
He says quite emphatically: Ro 1:16 "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." Belief in the gospel produces salvation, Paul had numerous opportunities to add water baptism as something that produces salvation, but never did, and the reason is - because he did not teach in baptism as necessary or producing salvation. In point of fact, he gives zero instructions on how a person should be water baptized. Neither does Jesus, nor Peter, nor anyone else in all of the NT! Oh yes, there are glimpses of how it was done, but not one explicit teaching on a subject of alleged supreme importance. How is it possible that God could tell us it is necessary for salvation and leave us so little instructions on how it was to be done? It only makes sense when one realizes baptism is not involved in the salvation process.
3. Water baptism is not listed in the scriptures as a proof of salvation.
What I want you to see in this section is that if baptism were essential for salvation, then in those passages where the bible speaks of assurance of, or the proof of salvation, someone should have said - "well, you have been water baptized, therefore you have assurance." No such statements can be found in scripture.
Paul in two places gives proofs of, and assurance for salvation, neither of which mention water baptism.
2Co 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?
Ro 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
So Paul speaks of a self-test for salvation in 2 Cor. 13, and it is interesting to note that doesn't bother giving them a list of have you believed?: A; B; C; D; ..., but he cuts to the chase and says, is Christ in you? For Paul the definitive proof of salvation is Christ living inside a person, not were they water baptized. He doesn't say, have you been water baptized, have you obeyed perfectly, no He asks simply asks, is Christ in you? He also argues in Romans 8, that if you have the Spirit in you, you will have a Christian resurrection. No mention of water baptism, nor any mention that you get the Spirit by being water baptized, as some argue, as a back door argument to say that water baptism is essential for salvation. If water baptism were essential for salvation than Paul could have easily said so in a number of passages, he never does. As the great apologist of NT theology his silence on the subject is deafening. That the person who is the primary source of teaching on the basis and nature of salvation says nothing on water baptisms role in that process is very telling indeed.
There are some who want to say that a person receives the Holy Spirit when they are baptized in water. If that were true Paul would have said, examine yourselves, were you baptized in water and then got the Spirit? But that isn't what he said, he makes no connection to the Holy Spirit and water baptism anywhere in scripture. In fact there is not one example in all of scripture where a person is said to have received the Holy Spirit when they were water baptized. In Acts 8 it was days (weeks?) after they were water baptized, and the result of hands being laid on them, not water baptism. In Acts 10 it was before they were water baptized, In Acts 19 it was after they were water baptized and as a result of the laying on of hands and prayer, again not water baptism.
So how does one get the Spirit inside them? In Acts 2, Peter seems to be making the case that water baptism is the prerequisite for the reception of the Spirit. But, in Acts 10, Cornelius and his companions receive the Holy Spirit prior to water baptism. This is a fact Peter takes note of in Acts 11 where he makes the case that God gave them the Spirit the same as He had the original believers, and then he goes on to explain how and on what basis they (the original believers) received the spirit: Ac 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as [he did] unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God? Peter equivocates belief as the basis for the reception of the Holy Spirit and not water baptism. He says the Apostles got the Spirit by believing, and now the gentiles also got it by believing.
This agrees completely with Jesus' teaching, ask and believe: Lu 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall [your] heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him? In this verse Jesus make no mention of a need to be water baptized, nor does He in this one: Joh 7:38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. So Jesus clearly links believing with receiving the Holy Spirit. To doubly make the point, observe what God inspires the Apostle John to write in the very next verse:
Joh 7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet [given]; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
"...which they that believe on him should receive" Can there be any doubt, that the Spirit is received by believing? Why doesn't John argue that it would be baptized believers who would receive the Spirit? Why doesn't he say the Holy Ghost was not yet given because no one had Christian water baptism? The reason is because it is not true! Ga 3:5 "Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?" Paul is very emphatic that nothing they did got them the Holy Spirit other than believing. If Paul believed that water baptism was essential to receiving the Spirit, he never bothered to tell anyone that, but in point of fact teaches otherwise, that it is was faith and nothing else. Eph 1:13 In whom ye also [trusted], after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise..." Note, again, Paul teaches that they received the Holy Spirit as a consequence of believing and not water baptism. To have not mentioned water baptism in this section of scripture, where he is arguing what facilitates the reception of the Spirit, proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not believe water baptism had anything to do with it.
Close: How do you know if you are saved? Do you point to your water baptism? Or can you point to a more reliable marker - the very presence of God in your life. Prayer...
