10250 North Freeway @ West Road
Houston, Texas 77037
Tel: (281) 447-8484

What We Believe and Why
Written by Dr. Lester Hutson

Copyright - Lester Hutson - 1986
This material is copyrighted and may not be copied or reproduced without the express written permission of Dr. Lester Hutson.

CHAPTER TWENTY FOUR

THE BIBLE DOES NOT TEACH BAPTISMAL REGENERATION

I PET. 3:21

We categorically reject the common belief that water baptism is essential to salvation from the penalty of sin. As set forth in one chapter of this book, we believe faith alone to be God's method of appropriating eternal salvation. We believe those who teach baptism to be essential to salvation from sin's penalty have perverted the Scriptures, attempting to make them say what they never did say nor were intended to say.

I. If the Bible teaches salvation from sin's penalty by baptism (which it doesn't), then it contradicts itself:

A. In dozens of places, by type and symbol, by implication, and by direct statement, the Bible teaches man is justified before God by faith alone:

1. Rom. 4:5, "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

2. Rom. 5:1, "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

3. Eph. 2:8-9, "For by grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

4. Acts 16:31, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved".

5. The Apostle Paul advocated that his justification before God was wholly apart from anything he had ever done. Phil. 3:4-9.

6. Consider John 3:15-16, John 3:36, Titus 3:5, I Cor. 1:21.

B. The Bible clearly teaches that there is but one way to be saved from the penalty of sin:

1 . Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me," John 14:6.

2. Acts 4:12, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."

3. I Tim. 2:5 declares, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

4. Rom. 11:6 Makes clear that salvation is by one means or another, but not by two or three different means.

C. But, if the Bible does also teach that water baptism is essential to eternal life, as so many believe; then there are two plans of salvation, and the Bible is in error when it teaches there's only one:

1. There'd be one by faith, as so many scriptures clearly state; then there'd be one by water baptism; and everybody knows that 1+1=2.

2. So,that would place Jesus in error in John 14:6; and if God's Word is in error, then are we all deceived.

3. Furthermore, if one argues that regeneration comes only by water baptism, then that invalidates and contradicts all the Scriptures that plainly state salvation to be by faith.

4. Those, who teach baptism to be essential to salvation, back themselves into the position of making the Bible contradict itself, when they deduct their argument to its logical conclusion:

D. But, we believe that Jesus told the truth and that there is no contradiction in God's Holy Word. When it declares you are "saved through faith", Eph. 2:8, that is exactly how it is.

II. Those who advocate baptismal regeneration are hard pressed to explain the salvation of those who have been justified before God without ever being baptized:

A. There are a number of Bible cases of people who were saved from the penalty of sin apart from water baptism:

1. Abraham's a clear case:

a. The Bible specifically says Abraham was justified by faith "before God", Rom.4:2-3." James 2 speaks of his justification before man. Rom. 4:3 reads, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness."

b. Furthermore, Abraham lived and died centuries before water baptism was ever initiated and practiced.

2. Since John the Baptist was apparently the first to baptize (Mt. 3), and that was probably no sooner than A.D. 25; then all who were saved prior to that were saved without being baptized. That would include a great host of people:

a. David was one. (Rom. 4:6).

b. Heb. 11:1-40 is a whole chapter naming many, and referring to a great company of others who were saved.

c. There were apparently 7,000 in Israel in Elisha's day alone who were saved without being baptized. I Kinqs 19:18.

d. The fact that many "saints" rose from the dead on the day Christ was crucified, testifies to the fact that men were saved before baptism was ever practiced. Mt. 27:50-53.

3. The thief who exercised faith in Christ and then died before ever being baptized, yet to whom Jesus said, "Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with Me in paradise" (Luke 23:43), 'is undeniable proof that a man can go to heaven without ever being baptized.

B. The water baptismalists really have no valid answer for these:

1. Some argue that before Christ's death, people lived in a different dispensation and were saved in a different way than those since:

a. What that says is that there have been two plans of salvation: one before Christ death, and another after; and to say that makes Jesus Christ a liar in John 14:6.

b. If there already was one plan of salvation, apart from the sacrifical work of Christ on the cross; then wasn't the work of Christ, including His death a useless thing?

c. The truth is that the law, by which the water baptismalists say the Old Testament people were saved, never did justify a single person. Gal. 2:16 says, "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."

d. Rom. 4 Makes unquestionably clear that all men, from Adam to the last one why shall ever be justified, are justified in the exact same way; by faith. Especially note verses 16-17, 23-24.

2. The weakness of this argument is indicative of the weakness of the whole position of the water-baptismalists:

a. Someone once pointed out that if water is your saviour, then when the plug in the baptistry is pulled, your saviour goes down the drain.

b. Someone also showed how that if your sins are washed into the water; and after the water is released and reaches a stream, a cow happens to drink some of it and recycle it into milk; then you'd have your (or perhaps someone else's) sins right back again, if you drink some of the milk.

III. The water baptism salvationalists have perverted a series of scriptures and built their false doctrine upon these perversions:

A. The perversion of Acts 2:38:

1. This is probably the most common "proof text" of the water baptism salvationalists.

2. Many who read this verse assume that both "repent" and "be baptized" are equally essential to the remission of sins:"

a. Other Scriptures speaking on this very same subject make clear that such an assumption is absolutely false:

(1) The Bible states, "repentance" is "unto life" (Acts 11:18) and "baptism" is unto "death" Rom. 6:4. In other words, repentance is what produces life, while baptism testifies of our personal participation by faith in Christ's death.
(2) in Mt. 3:7-11 John the Baptist refused to baptize anyone who did not offer substantial evidence that they had already repented. He says in vs. 11 that "baptism" is "unto" (because of) "repentance."

b. The grammatical fact is that in Acts 2:38, "repent" is the primary action and "be baptized" is the secondary action:

(1) Every man should repent. That will result in the remission of sins. Then, he should be baptized without delay as a result of sins remitted.
(2) That is in perfect harmony with Bible teaching elsewhere:

(a) As a preceeding chapter shows, the next thing a person who believes should do is be baptized.
(b) But, as John preached, baptism; not repentance, is the secondary action. Repentance is the primary action. Matt. 3.

c. "Repent" and "be baptized" are not equally joined in Acts. 2:38 or elsewhere. The one "repentance" should stimulate the other "baptism."

3. Furthermore, many who read Acts 2:38 assume the preposition "for" really means "in order to obtain:"

a. Accordinq to Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries the word "for" in Acts 2:38 is translated from the Greek word "eis" which can translate numerous ways including "for", "unto", "indeed", "what."

b. The scholars in no way ever indicate that it could translate "in order to obtain."

C. Though the word eis" is translated at least 1,700 times in the King James Bible, many times in the sense of "because of"; it is never once translated "in order to obtain."

d. What those, who claim Acts 2:38 is teaching baptism to be essential to the remission of sins, are saying, is "repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to obtain the remission of sins." Notice how ridiculous several other passages of the same mood and case would appear if "in order to obtain" were used in the place of "for or unto:

(1) Mt. 6:34, "Take therefore no thought (for) in order to obtain the morrow.
(2) Luke 12:19, "I will say to my Soul, thou hast much goods laid up (for) in order to obtain many years."

e. The Apostle Peter uses the preposition "for in Acts 2:38, as it is nearly always used in the Bible, to mean "because of:"

(1) He tells men to repent. That will remit their sins. Then, he tells them to be baptized because of it (you will notice that the phrase about baptism is set in commas, which shows it to be an action to result from the main action).
(2) When we say a man went to prison "for" stealing; nobody interpets that the man went to prison in order to steal; but rather because of stealing; yet when Peter said be baptized for the remission of sins, a whole bandwagon load assumes he meant be baptized in order to obtain remission of sins.

B. The perversion of Mark 16:16:

1. Many pervert this Scripture to mean "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved from past sins by His death".

a. But, if that is what that Scripture means (and it isn't) then Rom. 5:9 would have to read "being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from past sins by His death;" to be consistent; otherwise we have a contradiction in God's Word."

b. Although, Rom. 5:9 says nothing about past sins or death, it says "being now justified by His blood (not baptism), we shall be saved from wrath (not past sins) through Him"; and this future tense salvation is "by His life" (not His death). vs. 10.

c. And, neither does Mark 16:16 say anything about "past sins" or "His death."

2. The fact is that the future tense is used in Mk. 16:16 with relation to "saved" thus refuting the idea that the salvation referred to is a past salvation from past sins.

3. Mark 16:16 is a passage teaching the threefold aspects of salvation:

a. "He that believeth" speaks of deliverance from the penalty of sin.

b. "And is baptized" puts the believer into the house or church of God where access to the high priest enables him to be delivered from the power of sin in his life as he lives from day to day.

C. "Shall be saved" speaks of the future when Christ returns to receive His children.

C. The perversion of Galatians 3:27:

1. The water baptism salvationalists say this scripture teaches water baptism is literally the way a man gets into Christ; and thus without water baptism, he can't be in Christ.

2. To maintain this position poses a set of problems which the water baptism salvation crowd is neither prepared to answer nor ready to accept:

a. John 15:4 teaches that the saved are "in Him" and He is "in" them. Also Col. 3:3, 1 Cor. 6:19.

b. If baptism in water literally puts the man into Christ, then eating of the Lord's Supper must literally be the way to put Christ into the man. Mt. 26:26-28 says, "this is My body. . . this is My blood."

c. It would be inconsistent to hold to one of the positions and yet reject the other; yet most of the water baptism salvationalists teach the Lord's Supper elements only symbolically show (not literally are) Christ's blood and body as they are eaten.

3. We believe that even as by the Lord's Supper, we symbolize our participation in Christ's body and blood, likewise Galatians 3:27 is a figurative statement showing how that by faith, which is shown by baptism, the believer is submerged in Christ.

4. We believe according to the Scriptures that at faith a man literally is placed in Christ (Rom. 5:1-2) and Christ in the person of the Holy Spirit takes up abode in the man. Rom. 8:9; I Cor. 3:16.

D. The perversion of Acts 22:16:

1. As you must suppose, scores of people assume from this verse that a man can literally wash away his sins by water baptism.

2. Such a view is not logical: let alone scriptural:

a. Ananias told Paul (Saul) to "wash" away his sins.

b. If baptism will do it so thoroughly, as the water baptism salvationalists contend, then why did Ananias tell Paul to "wash"?

c. After all, had Paul obeyed the first part and been "baptized", his sins would have already been gone and there'd have been no need for him to "wash." Washing after he was already cleansed of sin would have been like electrocuting a dead man.

3. The truth is that Acts 22:16 refers to deliverance from the daily dominion (not penalty) of sin which Paul (and we) needed:

a. He had already been saved from sins penalty on the road to Damascus, before he ever arrived in Jerusalem and spoke to Ananias, Acts 22:6-10.

b. So,when he arrived in Jerusalem and God's man Ananias began to instruct him what he should do as a new believer, he told him exactly what Jesus had said ought to be told new believers, (Mt. 28:19). He told him to "be baptized", which is the first act of obedience, and "the answer of a good conscience toward God," I Peter 3:21.

c. Then, as an obedient son, he would be in a position to pray (Ps. 66:18) and by so doing; "calling on the name of the Lord", he could have the cleansing from daily sins (IJohnl:8), which he needed to remain in fellowship with God (IJohn 1:9), and which the Lord promised in Rom. 10:13.

d. By calling on the name of the Lord, not baptism, a man can wash away the sins which would otherwise rob him of spiritual strength and deliverance, and bring the chastening hand of God upon him.

E. The perversion of I Peter 3:21:

1. The water baptismal crowd naturally jump to the conclusion that the word "save" refers to salvation from the penalty of sin.

2. Most seem unaware that the Bible refers to three major aspects of God's salvation. (See the chapter on "God's Threefold Salvation").

3. I Peter 3:21 unquestionably refers to the second aspect of salvation:

a. It does not save us from sin's penalty by the "putting away of the filth of the flesh" as the water baptism salvationalists contend.

b. It does make us obedient sons to the command of our Lord to be baptized (Acts 2:41, Mt. 28:19), thus giving "a good conscience toward God. "

C. That does save us from a great amount of chastening (Heb. 12:5-8), especially when you consider that our Lord views "rebellion" as "the sin of witchcraft." (I Sam. 15:23) and, as other chapters in this book amply show, obedience to our Lord delivers us from many a devastating defeat at the hands of our great adversary, Satan.

"It Does Make a Difference What You Believe"