BaptismAll You Wanted to Know and More

By Ted R. Weiland

The Purpose of Baptism

The doctrine of water baptism is one of the most hotly debated topics in Christendom, despite the fact that it is relatively easy to understand what the Bible has to say about it –if we take the Bible for what it says instead of attempting to force individual or collective opinions and biases upon it.

The following Scriptures are sufficient by themselves:

…he [Yahshua1] said unto them [His apostles], Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Mark 16:15-16)2

…when they [three thousand Judahites] heard this [the gospel and that they were responsible for the death of Yahshua], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Yahshua Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.… Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them [the early church comprised of the apostles] about three thousand souls. (Acts 2:37-41)

…now [Saul of Tarsus] why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. (Acts 22:16)

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Yahshua Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3-4)

…by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body… and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:13)

…ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Yahshua. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. (Galatians 3:26-27)

In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses. (Colossians 2:11-13)

…God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein … eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (…the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Yahshua Christ. (1 Peter 3:20-21)

Regardless of how often these passages are ignored, explained away or pitted against other passages, the Bible unequivocally asserts the following about baptism:

Baptism is when we are saved in Yahshua the Christ. Baptism is when our sins are forgiven. Baptism is when our consciences are cleansed. Baptism is when we receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.3

Baptism is when we begin to drink of the Holy Spirit. Baptism is when our hearts are circumcised. Baptism is when we begin to walk a new life in Christ. Baptism is when we are quickened in Christ. Baptism is when we become children of God. Baptism is when we put on Christ. Baptism is when we are added to the church of Christ.

Those who reject these biblical statements about baptism usually teach one or any combination of the following doctrines about baptism, none of which can be found in the Scriptures:

Baptism has nothing to do with salvation. Baptism is an outward sign of inward grace. Baptism is just an act of obedience. Baptism is a work of man. Baptism is a witness to others.

These doctrines about baptism often include the teaching that a person can be saved by “accepting” or “asking Jesus into his heart” or by “praying the sinner’s prayer.” But these statements cannot be found in the Bible; and no record exists of anyone performing these acts to be saved. In other words, these false teachings are used to replace the clear biblical teaching about baptism and its relationship to salvation. This is essentially the same thing the Pharisees and Sadducees did when they replaced Yahweh’s4 laws with man-made traditions:

This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. (Matthew 15:8-9)

In light of the clear statements found in the Bible, one should wonder why there is so much debate over this fundamental issue. Man is prone to his own thoughts and conclusions, and sometimes to defending them at all costs. This being his proclivity, it is

2

worth repeating, “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” (Proverbs 14:12)

The Necessity of Baptism

Yahshua made it clear that men’s vain doctrines can never bring anyone to salvation:

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? And in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:21-23)

Righteous acts done in the Savior’s name, answered prayers, past experiences, good feelings, or man-made doctrines cannot be used to determine or assure us of salvation. Only the Word of God can resolve whether you are in a saved relationship with Yahshua. Forgiveness takes place in Yahweh’s mind, not ours.

The Word of God reveals that after being convicted by the Holy Spirit, we must surrender our lives to Yahshua in faith, repent of our sins, confess Yahshua as the Son of God and as Lord, and be immersed in His name for the remission of our sins.

Immersion alone cannot save anyone. According to the Scriptures, Yahshua saves us through His blood-atoning sacrifice and resurrection from the grave when all of the foregoing scriptural requirements are satisfied.

If you are not yet in a saved relationship with Yahshua as described in the Bible, do not delay; submit to Him as your Lord and Savior today.

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? (Mark 8:36-37)

Fifty Objections to BaptismAnswered

In order to lay the foundation necessary for responding to objections, I point you to the Scriptures themselves. Please lay aside previously held beliefs. Forget about what any man, church, preacher, or denomination teaches. Simply read the Scriptures for what they say and take Yahweh at His word.

The eight passages listed at the beginning of this book are so clearly stated that anyone can understand their meaning. Only when someone declares that these verses do not really mean what they say, does the issue become unclear.

3

Please keep in mind that how well an objection is framed or how poorly it is answered does not change or negate what is found in Scripture. Yahweh’s Word remains the standard by which we must judge all objections.

Objection 1: There are many Scriptures such as John 3:16 and Acts 16:31 that require only faith in Yahshua to obtain salvation. They do not mention baptism.

Answer: Scripture must be harmonized, not pitted against itself:

The sum of Thy word is truth…. (Psalm 119:160 NASV)

If we desire to know Yahweh’s will on anything found in His Word, we must do an exhaustive search of the Bible pertaining to the subject in question. Yahweh denounces “smorgasbord-style” study:

…the word of Yahweh was unto them … here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. (Isaiah 28:13)5

We are not at liberty to go through the Bible randomly collecting Scriptures that, by themselves, appear to authenticate a particular doctrine or belief. Everything the Bible states on any subject must be considered and harmonized in order to determine the truth about that doctrine. No Scripture can be isolated or ignored, nor can one Scripture be used to trump or invalidate another Scripture.

People who argue against baptism as a part of the biblical plan of salvation for the reason stated in Objection 1 seldom apply the same standard to other doctrines in the Bible. For example, it is generally accepted that in order to have our prayers answered we must ask (James 4:2), in the name of the Savior (John 14:13-14), believing (Matthew 21:22), without doubting (James 1:6), according to God’s will (1 John 5:14), with pure motives, and not for our own pleasures (James 4:3). No one verse or passage by itself contains all the instructions for praying correctly. To correctly ascertain the truth regarding prayer, salvation, or any other doctrine, a person must search in many passages for the sum of Yahweh’s will.

John 3:16 says nothing about repentance, confession, or baptism. But from Luke 13:3, 2 Corinthians 7:9-10 and 2 Peter 3:9-10, we are told that a person must repent of his sins; from Matthew 10:32-33, Romans 10:9-10 and 1 John 4:15, we are told that a person must confess Yahshua as the Son of God and as Lord; and from Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38 and 1 Peter 3:21, we are told that a person must be baptized for the forgiveness of his sins in order to be saved in Yahshua the Christ.

Objection 2: Sound hermeneutics demands that our conclusion on any doctrinal matter must side with the weight of Scripture. Therefore, faith alone is all that is necessary for salvation.

4

Answer: By this criterion, a person must also discount and reject repentance and a confession of faith. To side with the weight of Scripture is to pit Scripture against Scripture. Sound hermeneutics relies upon the sum, not the weight, of Yahweh’s Word to determine truth.

Objection 3: In Acts 3:19, Peter said, “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out….” He made no mention of baptism in this sermon.

Answer: It is unlikely that Peter’s sermon is recorded in its entirety. Therefore, it cannot be said with certainty that he did not mention baptism in this second sermon. Furthermore, if someone has the right to pit Acts 3:19 against Acts 2:38, then someone else would have just as much right to pit Acts 2:38 against Acts 3:19. Who decides which is correct? Acts 3:19 no more nullifies Acts 2:38 than Acts 2:38 nullifies Acts 3:19. The sum of Yahweh’s Word is truth.

Objection 4: The thief on the cross was not baptized.

Answer: The command to be baptized for salvation came forty days after the thief was crucified and, more importantly, after Yahshua died. The New Covenant did not take effect until Yahshua’s death:

…where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: Otherwise it is of no strength [never in force NASV] at all while the testator liveth. (Hebrews 9:16-17)

A testament or covenant is essentially the same as a will. Because Yahshua had not yet died when He granted salvation to the thief on the cross, He could provide salvation to him under whatever terms He chose. Because the thief was still under the Old Covenant when he was granted salvation, he was not required to keep the New Covenant commission first given in Matthew 28 and Mark 16.

Since Yahshua’s death there is only one way by which a person can obtain salvation and that is by the conditions of Yahshua’s last will and testament – faith (Hebrews 11:6), repentance (2 Corinthians 7:9-10), confession of Him (Romans 10:9-10), and baptism (Mark 16:15-16).

Objection 5: Other than the Apostle Paul, no apostle was ever baptized.

Answer: Doctrine cannot be established by silence. Just because the Bible does not record the other eleven apostles’ baptisms, does not prove they were not baptized. It is possible, however, that the twelve apostles were not baptized because they did not need to be born of the water anymore than Adam needed to be born of the womb. Spiritual life may have began for the apostles in a similar fashion to how Adam’s physical life began. Adam received physical life by Yahweh breathing upon him (Genesis 2:7), and the apostles appear to have received spiritual life in same manner (John 20:22).

5

Adam was provided physical life in a special way, but everyone else from that point forward had to be born by the physical laws of reproduction. And although the apostles may have been provided spiritual life in a special way, everyone else from that point forward had to be born by the spiritual laws of reproduction (Mark 16:16, etc.).

Objection 6: Revelation 3:20 teaches that Yahshua is knocking on the door of our heart and that if we ask Him to come into our heart, He promises to fellowship with us. Nothing in this verse indicates that baptism is necessary for this saved relationship with Yahweh.

Answer: Neither is there anything in Revelation 3:20 to indicate that someone is supposed to ask Yahshua into their heart in order to come into a saved relationship with Yahweh. Because it has been robbed of its context, this verse is repeatedly used to teach something it does not say. It has nothing to do with someone’s initial salvation or relationship with Yahweh.

The context of Revelation 3:20 begins with verse 14, which was written to the church of the Laodiceans. The Greek word ekklesia, translated church, means those called out and denotes people who were already in a saved relationship with Yahweh. These were the same Christians to whom it was written in verses 15 and 16, “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” Verse 20 is not an explanation describing how to be saved, but rather a call for backslidden Christians to repent and return to a pleasing relationship with Yahweh.

The doctrine of asking Yahshua into your heart is completely foreign to the Bible. Not one passage teaches this doctrine, and the Bible contains no examples of anyone doing this to be saved.

Those who teach this false doctrine usually teach one or any combination of the following things about baptism: it is a symbolic outward sign of inward grace, it is a witness to others, it is only an act of obedience, it is a work of man, and it is irrelevant to salvation. Just as asking Yahshua into your heart cannot be found in the Bible, neither can any of these doctrines about baptism.

One man-made doctrine begat other man-made doctrines.

Objection 7: Baptism is a work of man, and the Apostle Paul informed us in Ephesians 2:8-9 that we are saved by the grace of God through faith, not by works.

Answer: Nowhere in the Bible is baptism identified as a work of man. Baptism is equated with salvation in Mark 16:16 and 1 Peter 3:21, forgiveness of sins in Acts 2:38, 22:16 and Colossians 2:11-13, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38, circumcision of the heart in Colossians 2:11-13, a new life in Romans 6:3-4, becoming children of God in Galatians 3:26-27, putting on Christ in Galatians 3:27, and being added to the body of Christ in Acts 2:41, 47 and 1 Corinthians 12:13. The teaching that

6

baptism is a work of man is a doctrine that circumvents what is clearly taught in the Bible.

The same people who identify baptism as a work often employ Romans 10:9-10, which requires confession with the mouth that Yahshua is Lord, as the formula for salvation. Confession is something we do, whereas baptism is something done to us. If baptism can be identified as a work of man, then so can confession, nullifying Scriptures such as Matthew 10:32-33, Romans 10:9-10 and 1 John 4:15. Neither confession nor baptism is a work of man.

Objection 8: The Apostle Paul declared in 1 Corinthians 1:17 that he had not been sent to baptize but to preach the gospel. Thus baptism cannot be a requirement for salvation.

Answer: 1 Corinthians 1:14 records that Paul did indeed baptize and, therefore he had been commissioned and sent by Yahshua to do so. His statement in 1 Corinthians 1:17 was never meant to be taken literally. He was simply making the point that it does not matter who does the baptizing.

1 Corinthians 1:17 does not conflict with or invalidate Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, or Paul’s own statements in Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27 and Colossians 2:11-13 regarding the relationship of baptism to salvation, the forgiveness of sins, new life, becoming children of God and putting on Christ. Paul’s statement can only be understood in the context in which it was given. The context reveals that he was addressing a pride problem in the Corinthian church in which certain people were promoting themselves based upon who baptized them.

Paul understood that it does not matter who does the baptizing any more than it matters who delivers a baby at its physical birth. If a baby is conceived by Caucasian parents, it will not make any difference if a non-Caucasian is involved in the delivery – the baby will still be Caucasian. Likewise, if the Word of God is planted in a human heart, it will not make any difference who does the baptizing – a Christian will be the result, provided the baptism is scriptural and has been preceded by faith and repentance.

Paul did not disavow baptism – he simply put the emphasis back upon preaching the gospel. Those who received the gospel preached by Paul would be baptized for the forgiveness of their sins whether or not he did the baptizing.

Objection 9: Nowhere does the Bible provide instructions concerning who is qualified to do the baptizing, therefore baptism must not be all that important.

Answer: Baptism’s importance cannot be determined from what the Bible says or does not say about the people who perform baptisms, but by what it says about baptism itself. The only thing that can be deduced from the Scriptures’ silence concerning qualifications of the baptizer is that it does not matter who performs the baptism.

7

Objection 10: If we are to accept Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 at face value, baptism would replace Yahshua and His blood-atoning sacrifice.

Answer: Because nothing in the context of Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 would indicate that it should be otherwise, these Scriptures must be accepted at face value and, therefore, harmonized rather than pitted against other Scriptures or against the crucifixion of Yahshua.

Baptism no more replaces Yahshua and His blood-atoning sacrifice than does faith or repentance. Only the blood of Yahshua can provide regeneration, remission of sins, spiritual birth, and salvation. The blood is what accomplishes these things, but Yahweh has a scriptural means, found in the sum of His Word, for contacting the blood – faith, repentance, confession of Yahshua, and baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

Objection 11: The Greek word eis in Acts 2:38, in the phrase “be baptized every one of you in the name of Yahshua Christ for [eis] the remission of sins,” should have been rendered “because of” not “for.”

Answer: The translators disagree.

“Because of” is one of two possible choices for Acts 2:38. Therefore, the context must be consulted to determine whether eis in this instance should have been rendered “because of” or “for.” Note particularly verses 40 and 41:

And with many other words did he [Peter] testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them [the apostles who made up the church at that time] about three thousand souls.

Peter did not recognize those Judahites as saved and added to the body of Christ until after they were baptized. The context, therefore, proves that “for,” not “because of,” is the correct translation of eis in this instance, just as the translators rendered it.

The Greek phrase ei)$ a&fesin tw=n a(martiw=n translated for the remission of sins is the identical phrase found in Matthew 26:27-28 when Yahshua “…took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” If eis in Acts 2:38 should be translated “because of” then it would also have to be translated “because of” in Matthew 26:28. This would mean that Yahshua shed His blood because our sins had already been forgiven, thereby rendering His death, burial and resurrection pointless.

It is the blood of Yahshua that ultimately remits or washes away our sins, and if we accept the clear teaching of Acts 2:38, we must conclude that His blood washes away our sins when, in faith and repentance, we are baptized for the remission of our sins.

Objection 12: Faith alone is sufficient for salvation in Christ.

8

Answer: Pistis and pisteuo, the Greek words most often translated faith or believe, mean to believe in, adhere to, trust in, rely on and obey. Therefore, when biblical faith is understood for all that it is, faith alone is sufficient for salvation because this word automatically includes a total adherence and obedience to the one in whom you believe – including being baptized.

In Acts 19, Paul went so far as to use “believed” and “baptized” in a way that indicates the two are inseparable:

He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. (Acts 19:2-3)

Objection 13: In Acts 10:47, Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit before he was baptized, demonstrating that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit does not occur during, but before baptism. Therefore baptism cannot be for salvation.

Answer: It is conjecture to say that Cornelius and his household received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit because Acts 10:47 does not say anything about indwelling. In fact, Acts 10:44 and 11:15 reveal that Cornelius’ household did not receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but a falling upon of the Holy Spirit, which is identified in Acts 11:16 as the baptism with the Holy Spirit. In other words, they received the same gift of the Holy Spirit and the accompanying languages that the apostles received on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2.

Every time that the baptism with the Holy Spirit and/or the miraculous gifts are addressed in Scripture, the gift of the Holy Spirit is identified as a pouring, setting, falling, or coming upon. If these descriptions are indicative of indwelling, then the Samaritans in Acts 8 did not receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit when they were baptized or when they believed. Instead, one would have no choice but to conclude that they received the indwelling only after the Apostles came down from Jerusalem days later and laid hands upon them. This scriptural precedent would mean that all of us would be required to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the same manner. If this were true, then no one has been granted salvation since the death of the Apostle John. Pouring, sitting, falling, or coming upon is obviously not equivalent with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

This falling upon or baptism with the Holy Spirit was Yahweh’s final proof to Peter and his fellow Judahites that Cornelius and his household could be saved. Therefore, in perfect harmony with the commission given him in Mark 16 and what he preached in Acts 2, Peter commanded Cornelius to be baptized in water in the name of the Lord. And it would have been for the same reason he commanded baptism in the name of the Lord in Acts 2:38 – for the remission of sins and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

9

Objection 14: Mark 16:16 simply says that belief plus baptism results in salvation. It does not address the one who places his faith in Christ in obedience to John 3:16 but has not been baptized. Therefore, the claim that baptism is mandatory for salvation is not supported by this passage.

Answer: Using this reasoning, a person who believes in Christ but who never repents of rape, murder, or any other number of sins can be saved because John 3:16 and a score of other passages say nothing about the necessity of repentance.

There are not many paths to Yahweh through Yahshua, only one.

Objection 15: A verse like Mark 16:16b, “but he that believeth not shall be damned,” which states that without water baptism a person cannot be saved, must be provided to prove water baptism is required for salvation.

Answer: By whose rules?

Consider carefully the following three passages, all of them written by the Apostle Paul:

In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Yahshua Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power. (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9)

Those who do not obey the gospel of Yahshua the Christ will be punished with everlasting destruction. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul informs us what the gospel of Christ is:

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen [in His new body] of Cephas, then of the twelve. (1 Corinthians 15:1-5)

The gospel that we must obey is the death, burial, resurrection, and new body of Yahshua that was seen or evidenced by others. So how do we obey Yahshua’s death, burial, resurrection, and His new body? There is only one passage in the Bible that provides us with the answer:

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Yahshua Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3-4)

10

Unless a person obeys the gospel and is baptized for the forgiveness of his sins, he will suffer everlasting destruction away from the presence of the Lord.

Romans 8:1 informs us that “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Yahshua.” Being in Christ keeps us from being condemned. There are only two passages that describe how we get into Christ:

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Yahshua Christ … buried with him by baptism … that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3-4)

For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. (Galatians 3:27)

The Bible does teach that anyone who is not baptized into Christ will be damned.

Objection 16: Mark 16:16 concludes by saying, “he that believieth not shall be damned.” Because it does not say that he who is not baptized shall be damned, baptism is not required for salvation.

Answer: The latter half of this verse does not negate the first half, which still says what it says. This is the worst case of pitting Scripture against Scripture that I have ever witnessed. In this instance, it pits the same verse against itself. Worse, it pits the one who makes this argument against Yahshua who said “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved….”

To have included baptism in the second half of the verse would have been redundant because no one would be baptized who did not first believe. It would be analogous to someone first saying, “I’m going to the park today, and I’m going to swing on the swings, teeter on the teeter totter and slide on the slide,” and then say, “No, I’m not going to go to the park today, and I’m not going to swing on the swings or teeter on the teeter totter or slide on the slide.” If he is not going to go to the park, it is a foregone conclusion that he is not going to swing, teeter, or slide – just as it is a foregone conclusion that anyone who does not believe is not going to be baptized.

Objection 17: Some ancient manuscripts do not include Mark 16:15-16 in their text.

Answer: This is true. But the majority of the textual evidence attests that Mark 16:15-16 is inspired Scripture. Furthermore, there is nothing therein that is not stated somewhere else in Scripture. The fact that the apostles and disciples taught and wrote precisely what Mark 16:16 states is the strongest evidence on behalf of its veracity.

Objection 18: Water is not mentioned in either Mark 16:16 or Acts 2:38. Therefore the baptism required in those passages was not a water baptism, but a spiritual baptism.

11

Answer: Had baptism in Mark 16:16 been a spiritual baptism, Yahshua would not have commissioned His disciples to do the baptizing. Instead, He would have told them that He or the Holy Spirit would do the baptizing.

In Acts 2:38 we are informed that baptism in the name of Yahshua the Christ is for the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. This was in obedience to Yahshua’s commission fifty days earlier, found in Mark 16:15-16. Yahshua’s commission and Peter’s preaching harmonize perfectly –both included water baptism. This is proven in Acts 10:47-48 where Peter commanded Cornelius and his household to be baptized in water in the name of the Lord:

Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized…? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord…. (Acts 10:47-48)

Baptism in the name of Yahshua the Christ and baptism in the name of the Lord are obviously the same baptism, and if one baptism was in water, then it goes without saying that they were both in water. Therefore, it is a water baptism – not a spiritual, figurative, or metaphorical baptism – that is required for salvation, the forgiveness of sins, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Salvation, forgiveness of sins, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit occur simultaneously when a person is circumcised in heart (Colossians 2:11-13), begins to walk a new life (Romans 6:3-4), becomes a child of God (Galatians 3:26), puts on Christ (Galatians 3:27), and is added to the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). Therefore, these passages all refer to water baptism as well.

Water baptism is also indicated in Acts 8:36 when the eunuch said, “See here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized,” and in 1 Peter 3:20-21 that declares “wherein … eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us….”

Objection 19: In Matthew 3:11, John the Baptist declared that Yahshua had come to baptize with water, not with the Holy Spirit. Therefore the baptism commanded in Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 must have been a spiritual rather than a water baptism.

Answer: The baptism with the Holy Spirit is a different baptism altogether from the baptism that Yahshua commanded in Mark 16 and Peter preached in Acts 2. Holy Spirit baptism was performed by Yahshua, but the baptism that Yahshua commissioned in Mark 16 was performed by Yahweh’s apostles and disciples.

There are only two instances in the Bible where baptism with the Holy Spirit is identified, and they are different from anything else recorded in the New Testament.

Acts 1:4-5 identifies the Apostles’ experience in Acts 2:1-4 as baptism with the Holy Spirit, and Acts 11:15-17 identifies what happened to Cornelius and his household in Acts 10:44-45 as the baptism with the Holy Spirit. The baptism with the Holy Spirit was

12

altogether different from the baptism preached by Peter in obedience to Yahshua’s commission in Mark 16:16. In Acts 2:1-4, when the apostles were baptized with the Holy Spirit, it came directly from Yahweh and was somewhat of a surprise to everyone there, just as it was when Cornelius and his household were baptized with the Holy Spirit in Acts 10:44-45.

In both instances, after the baptism of the Holy Spirit had already occurred, Peter commanded his listeners to be baptized (Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:47-48) in obedience to the Great Commission given him in Mark 16:15-16. Furthermore, it was to be a decision that the hearers had to make for themselves rather than a decision made solely by Yahweh as in Acts 2:1-4 and 10:44-45. The baptism with the Holy Spirit and the baptism that Peter preached are not the same.6

The baptism with the Holy Spirit was obviously not sufficient for Cornelius and his household. After Yahweh baptized Cornelius and his household with the Holy Spirit (which was the final proof to Peter that these Italians were eligible to receive salvation), Peter preached the same baptism that he preached in Acts 2. In Acts 2:38 Peter declared “repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Yahshua the Christ for the remission of sins….” and in Acts 10:48 “he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” Baptism in the name of the Lord is the same baptism performed in the name of Yahshua the Christ. In verse 47, just prior to commanding Cornelius and his household to be “baptized in the name of the Lord,” Peter declared “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized…?” Acts 10 identifies the baptism Peter preached in Acts 2 as a water baptism, performed for the remission of sins. It was the same baptism for salvation that was commissioned by Yahshua in Mark 16:16.

If the water baptism preached by Peter in Acts 2 and 10 is not the baptism commissioned by Yahshua in Mark 16, who commissioned Peter to preach this baptism? And what was the baptism that Yahshua commissioned in Mark 16 that Peter later preached?

Objection 20: Because Ephesians 4:5 declares there is only one baptism, water baptism must give way to baptism with the Holy Spirit.

Answer: Ephesians 4:5 is referring to the one Lord, one faith, and one baptism that includes and unifies us in the body of Christ. This one baptism is not the baptism with the Holy Spirit that only the apostles and Cornelius and his household experienced, but instead the baptism preached by Peter in Acts 2:36-47. Note especially verses 41 and 47:

Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls…. Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

The baptism with the Holy Spirit is what the apostles experienced in Acts 2:1-4. But it was water baptism that added the 3,000 Judahites to the body of Christ, unifying them with all other genuine believers. Therefore, the one baptism of Ephesians 4 is not baptism

13

with the Holy Spirit, but baptism in the name of Yahshua the Christ for the forgiveness of sins that is performed in water.

Objection 21: 1 Corinthians 12:13, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body….”, proves that the baptism that adds us to the body of Christ is not performed in water, but is instead spiritual.

Answer: 1 Corinthians 12:13 does not say that the baptism under discussion is a spiritual baptism, but that it is the Spirit who ultimately baptizes someone into the body of Christ. It was water baptism that added the 3,000 Judahites to the body of Christ in Acts 2:41-47; therefore, the baptism in 1 Corinthians 12:13 is also a water baptism.

Objection 22: Nowhere is it recorded that the apostles baptized with water in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost as commanded in Matthew 28:19. Therefore, this baptism must have been spiritual.

Answer: The disciples did not baptize using the words “the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.” Instead, they baptized in the Hebrew name that accurately represents all three entities – YAHshua. Baptism in the name of Yahshua occurred in Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5 and 22:16, and it is identified as water baptism in Acts 10:47.

Objection 23: Because water is not mentioned in either of the two accounts recording Paul’s baptism, it must have been a spiritual baptism.

Answer: In Acts 22:16, Saul, who later became the Apostle Paul, was commanded to “arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling upon the name of the Lord.” The command to “arise” would not have been necessary were it a spiritual baptism.

The Apostle Peter preached baptism in the name of the Lord Yahshua for the remission of sins in Acts 2:38 and 10:47-48. This was the same thing that Ananias preached to Paul – to be baptized, calling upon or in the name of the Lord, that his sins might be washed away. No matter how some people try to circumvent it, the baptism recorded in Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27, Colossians 2:11-13 and 1 Peter 3:21 were all performed in water.

It is Yahshua who washes away our sins. But the vehicle through which He has chosen to do so is water baptism, preceded by faith and repentance.

Objection 24: Taken in isolation, Acts 22:16 appears to teach that baptism has something to do with the forgiveness of sins, but there are many more Scriptures pertaining to forgiveness of sins that say nothing about baptism. Therefore, Acts 22:16 must mean something else.

Answer: Isolation? Those who insist that baptism has nothing to do with salvation, isolate every passage that teaches baptism for salvation, deny it, tear it apart, explain it

14

away, and then declare it agrees with every other passage to which they have done the same thing.

Acts 22:16 means exactly what it says and harmonizes perfectly with all the rest of the Scriptures on baptism, provided they are all taken for exactly what they say.

Objection 25: In Acts 22:13, before Saul was baptized, Ananias addressed him as “Brother Saul.” Therefore, he must have been a Christian prior to being baptized and, therefore, his baptism could not have been for the purpose of washing away his sins.

Answer: Ananias certainly seemed to think Saul’s baptism was for washing away his sins. Moreover, Acts 22:13 does not say that Ananias addressed Saul as a brother in Christ. His salutation could have pertained to Saul as a fellow Judahite. Verse 13 alone does not provide us with enough information to decide either away. However, to conclude that Ananias was greeting Saul as a brother in Christ is to pit verse 13 against verse 16, whereas to conclude that Ananias was greeting Saul as a fellow Judahite is to harmonize these verses.

Objection 26: When the twelve apostles were commissioned by Christ in Matthew 10:1-15 and Mark 3:13-19, and when the seventy disciples were sent out in Luke 10:1-20, they were not commissioned to baptize.

Answer: It is speculation that Yahshua’s orders to preach were not understood to include baptizing, especially in light of John 4:1-2 that informs us “…that Yahshua made and baptized more disciples than John (though Yahshua, Himself did not baptize, but His disciples).” More importantly, these Old Covenant commissions prove nothing concerning Yahshua’s New Covenant commission recorded in Mark 16:15-16.

Objection 27: When the two witnesses were sent out during the Great Tribulation, Revelation 11:3-6 does not say that they were sent to baptize with water.

Answer: Doctrine cannot be established by silence. The same argument could be used to say that the two witnesses were not sent to pray because praying was not specifically mentioned in this passage either. Even if they were not sent to baptize, it still proves nothing concerning what Yahshua commanded in the Great Commission in Mark 16:15-16.

Objection 28: To require baptism as a part of salvation is essentially the same mistake made by the first-century Judaizers who demanded that a person must be circumcised to be right with Yahweh.

Answer: If this is true, then Yahshua (Mark 16:15-16), Peter (Acts 2:38 and 1 Peter 3:21), Ananias (Acts 22:16) and Paul (Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27 and Colossians 2:11-13) all made the same mistake.

15

The Judaizers were people who added to the requirements already provided by Yahshua or replaced them with man-made traditions. To exclude the necessity of baptism is to Judiaize because doing so rejects and replaces Yahshua’s instructions in Matthew 28:18-20 and Mark 16:15-16 with man’s surrogate teachings.

Objection 29: Just as the holy law of God was misused by the Pharisees in Jerusalem and the Judaizers in Galatia, so baptism has been misused by people who claim that it is for salvation.

Answer: Who is misusing Scripture − those who take Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27 and 1 Peter 3:21 for what they say – or those who tell you that none of those Scriptures mean what they plainly teach?

Objection 30: To teach the necessity of baptism for salvation implies that Yahshua’s death on the cross was insufficient to save us, thus adding to the finished work of Christ.

Answer: To teach the necessity of baptism no more adds to the finished work of Yahshua on the cross than to teach the necessity of faith or repentance, all of which are required by Yahshua and His disciples as clearly stated in the Bible. To exclude the necessity of baptism is to take away from the finished work of Yahshua because He died to establish His New Covenant, a part of which He commissioned in Mark 16:16.

Objection 31: Romans 10:9-10 states that we are made righteous by believing and saved by confessing that Yahshua is Lord. Because Paul does not mention baptism in this and other salvation-related passages, it must not be required for salvation.

Answer: Paul and others did not mention baptism every time they wrote of salvation simply because it was unnecessary, just as it was unnecessary to mention repentance every time, and just as it was unnecessary to mention confession of Christ every time. The sum of Yahweh’s Word is truth.

Baptism is required for salvation if you believe what Yahshua declared in Mark 16:15-16. A person can choose to pit Romans 10:9-10 against Mark 16:15-16 or he can choose to accept and harmonize both passages.

Furthermore, Romans 10:13 tells us that “For whoever calls on the name of Yahweh shall be saved.” There is only one instance in the Bible where we are given an example of someone doing this, “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” (Acts 22:16)

Objection 32: In 1 Peter 3:20-21, we are told that the flood in Noah’s day was a figure of New Covenant baptism. Noah and his family were not saved by the water – they were saved from the water by the ark.

Answer: This is a clear case of denying Scripture. 1 Peter 3:20-21 does not say that Noah and his family were saved by the ark. Instead, it says they were saved by water, and that

16

in like manner we are saved by the waters of baptism through the resurrection of Yahshua the Christ:

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us … by the resurrection of Yahshua Christ. (1 Peter 3:20-21)

By Yahweh’s grace, Noah and his family were saved from the corruption of that day by the waters of the flood. This is a perfect picture of what happens when a person is baptized for the forgiveness of his sins. By Yahweh’s grace and Yahshua’s death, burial and resurrection, a repentant believer’s sins are destroyed and left behind as he is raised from his watery grave to walk a new life in Yahshua the Christ.

Objection 33: 1 Peter 3:21 describes baptism as figurative.

Answer: In 1 Peter 3:21 baptism is not a figure of something else. Instead, the waters of Noah’s flood are a figure or a type of the waters of baptism. The Greek word translated figure is antitupon, meaning antitype, and refers to the waters of baptism.

Objection 34: 1 Peter 3:21 declares that baptism is not for the “putting away of the filth of the flesh.”

Answer: The filth of flesh refers to what is washed off in bath water. It is contrasted with a good conscience, which can only come when someone’s sins have been washed away. Peter declared that baptismal waters are not for washing the outward man, but the inward man, whereby he can gain a good conscience. This is in perfect harmony with what he was commissioned in Mark 16:16 and what he preached in Acts 2:38.

Objection 35: The last phrase in 1 Peter 3:21 declares that we are saved by Yahshua’s resurrection, not by baptism.

Answer: This is another example of pitting a Scripture against itself. The last phrase does not invalidate the first phrase of the same verse, which still says what it says. Take out the middle explanation that water baptism does not clean the physical body and the verse reads as follows: “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also save us … by the resurrection of Yahshua the Christ.” It is the resurrection of Yahshua that saves us when we are water baptized for scriptural reasons.

In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter is perfectly consistent with what he preached in Acts 2:38, what Christ commissioned in Mark 16:15-16, what Ananias commanded Paul in Acts 22:16, and what Paul wrote in Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27 and Colossians 2:11-13 – unless those passages have already been distorted and denied. Deny one of these passages and you must deny them all. Deny any or all of them and you will be judged by them:

17

He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. (John 12:48)

Objection 36: A person must will to be baptized. Water baptism, therefore, cannot be necessary for salvation because salvation is not according to our will. “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:12-13)

Answer: Yahshua’s command in Mark 16:16 to be baptized for salvation, does not contradict John 1:12-13 anymore than does Yahshua’s commands in John 8:24 to believe and in Luke 13:3 to repent. Just as a man cannot believe and repent unless the Father draws him (John 6:44), he also will not be baptized for the remission of sins unless it is willed by God.

If someone is not baptized for the remission of his sins, it only demonstrates that Yahweh has not drawn him or that he has rejected the Father’s beckoning. 1 Thessalonians 2:11-13 declares that “...because they received not the love of the truth [Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, etc.], that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth….”

Objection 37: Acts 2:39, “For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call,” reveals that salvation comes through the work of God’s elective choice, not through the plans or actions of man, which is required with baptism.

Answer: This is another case of pitting Scripture against Scripture. Acts 2:39 does not nullify verse 38; it is a commentary on verse 38. It testifies to the fact that Yahweh’s call includes baptism for the remission of sins.

Objection 38: John 6:29, Ephesians 2:8, Philippians 1:29, and Hebrews 12:2 describe faith in Christ as a gift from Yahweh rather than something initiated by man. Acts 5:31, 11:18, and 2 Timothy 2:25 also describe repentance as a gift from Yahweh. Baptism, however, is something we must do on our own, and therefore it cannot be for salvation.

Answer: In Acts 2:38, the Apostle Peter declared that “the gift of the Holy Spirit” is the result of being baptized. Therefore, Yahweh’s call for someone to be baptized is also a gift, otherwise the Holy Spirit that comes with being baptized cannot be a gift, but, instead, what is due.

Objection 39: Ephesians 1:4, “According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world….,” teaches that we are in Christ because Yahweh chose us to be so. Baptism for salvation takes away from Yahweh receiving all the glory because in the mind of someone baptized for salvation, he was saved because he got baptized.

18

Answer: Ephesians 1:4 does teach that a person is in Christ because Yahweh chose him to be so. However, Romans 6:3-4 and Galatians 3:27 teach that a person enters Christ when he is baptized. Which is true? Both, of course – the sum of Yahweh’s Word is truth. A person is baptized into Christ because Yahweh chose him to be so.

If baptism takes all the glory away from Yahweh then for the same reason, so does belief, repentance, and confession of Christ.

Objection 40: The poor soul who has repented, believed, and even scheduled baptism, but is killed in an accident prior to being baptized will certainly not be condemned because he was unable to be baptized.

Answer: The Scriptures should never be judged by hypothetical situations.

If a person has been called of Yahweh and truly desires to follow Him, it is unlikely that Yahweh will allow him to be killed in an accident prior to being baptized, preventing that person from what is required to reach the blood of Christ. The Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 is a biblical example of Yahweh’s faithfulness in this regard. In such situations, Yahweh will surely either spare the life or provide the water.

In the early 1980’s, I was involved in a jail ministry in Fort Collins, Colorado. The county jail was without immersion facilities and was run by a Baptist sheriff who did not believe baptism was required for salvation. When a high-security convict was the first prisoner to respond positively to the gospel, no one believed the sheriff would permit him to leave the jail to be baptized. But to everyone’s astonishment, he not only allowed the prisoner, shackled between two deputies, to be transported across town to a suitable church, but he was so impressed with the subsequent transformation in the convict’s life that he deputized two of the men in the jail ministry, allowing them to remove prisoners from the jail to baptize them whenever one of them made a decision to surrender his life to Christ. If Yahweh can provide the water, He can also spare someone’s life until they have opportunity to be baptized.

Objection 41: In Romans 6:3-4, baptism is symbolic of Yahshua’s death and new life, and our own as well.

Answer: There is more than symbolism being described in Romans 6:4. This verse describes new life beginning after, not before, a person has in faith and repentance been baptized into Christ. Because a new life begins when a person is born, we are born from above (John 3:3-5) and we become a new creation in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17) when, in faith and repentance, we are raised from the watery grave of baptism.

Objection 42: Church history does not support the position that baptism is required for salvation.

Answer: Church history does in fact support the position that baptism is required for salvation, beginning with Yahshua Himself, the head of the church (Mark 16:15-16), His

19

inspired disciples (Acts 2:38, 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27, Colossians 2:11-12 and 1 Peter 3:21) and continuing with the remnant of true believers who have obeyed Yahshua’s commission and who have made up the church since.

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it…. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? And in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:13-23)

Objection 43: It is true that many modern churches do not have the urgency that the first-century churches had about baptism. Nevertheless, the mere fact that in the book of Acts people were immediately baptized after placing their faith in Christ does not mean that water baptism is a necessary condition for salvation.

Answer: This would be true if haste were the only factor by which to determine the purpose of baptism. But even this fact alone should tell us that something is wrong with the way most churches approach baptism. This is because the first-century church, unlike many churches today, accepted Mark 16:15-16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27, Colossians 2:11-13, and 1 Peter 3:21 for what they literally say, instead of attempting to force them to say just about anything but what they actually say. Thus the reason for their urgency in baptizing converts.

Objection 44: It is a common mistake to confuse the importance of baptism with the necessity of baptism.

Answer: Yahshua and His apostles and first-century disciples were not confused. They understood that baptism’s importance is its necessity. The only confused people are those who do not accept the Scriptures for what they plainly teach.

Objection 45: We are redeemed, made alive, and cleansed by the blood of Yahshua the Christ. People who believe in baptismal regeneration teach that we are redeemed, made alive, and cleansed by water baptism, thereby replacing Christ’s blood with baptistry water.

Answer: After thirty years of being a Christian and preaching the gospel, I have yet to come across anyone who teaches that it is water and not the blood of Christ that regenerates, makes alive, and cleanses us from our sins.

If people who accept the plain teaching of Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, and other passages can be accused of believing in “baptismal regeneration,” then people who believe the plain

20

teaching of 2 Corinthians 7:9-10 and 2 Peter 3:9-10 can be accused of believing in “repentance regeneration.”

“Baptismal regeneration” is a straw man employed to pigeonhole people. Baptism cannot regenerate or save anyone. But according to the Scriptures, it is in baptism, preceded by faith and repentance, that Yahshua regenerates or saves someone from their sins.

Objection 46: Baptism is merely an outward manifestation before men.

Answer: There are no Scriptures that say baptism is an outward manifestation. This is a tradition of men who have rejected the plain teaching of the Bible.

Objection 47: Unless we have been saved first by faith, the symbol of baptism is meaningless.

Answer: The Bible never identifies baptism as a symbol. This is another tradition of man. It is also man who has transposed Yahshua’s order “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved….” (Mark 16:16) into “He that believes is saved and then gets baptized.” The question is whose order are you going to accept?

Objection 48: The Holy Spirit has not moved me to be baptized for the forgiveness of my sins. He has never let me down. I choose to listen to Him instead of my own limited understanding.

Answer: This objection is better stated: I choose to believe what I think is the Holy Spirit over the plain teaching of the Bible. The Holy Spirit is never in conflict with the written Word. Yet people excuse their rejection of the plain teaching of the Scriptures by claiming that they were led to do so by the Holy Spirit.

A person must be careful about interpreting what he is “hearing.” It may not be from the Holy Spirit at all. Or it may be that Yahweh is speaking to him – but not with a voice that he should be excited about hearing. In 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 we are warned: “…they did not receive the love of the truth [Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, etc.], that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion that they should believe the lie that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth….”

Paul did not write that what we think the Holy Spirit has told us is “given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” Only the Holy Scriptures accomplish all of these things (2 Timothy 3:16-17). If our thinking contradicts Yahweh’s inspired Word, it is not from His Spirit.

A person must guard against judging the Scriptures by his experiences and feelings rather than judging his feelings and experiences by the Scriptures. If people would do the latter, many will discover that what they thought was a salvation experience was merely their conversion. A person cannot be saved without being converted. But he can be converted

21

without being saved, as demonstrated by Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus three days before his salvation in Acts 22:1-16.

Objection 49: If baptism is for salvation, how would you respond to someone who has never been baptized but who has placed his faith in Yahshua alone for salvation?

Answer: I would implore him to become saved just as Peter implored those Judahites who already believed in Yahshua but had not yet repented and been baptized for the forgiveness of their sins:

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Yahshua Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost…. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. (Acts 2:37-41)

Objection 50: Provided someone is baptized in water in the Savior’s name, he has fulfilled the requirements and is saved. It is not important for him to understand the reason for doing so.

Answer: Ephesians 4:5 declares that just as there is only one Lord and one faith, there is also only one baptism that makes it possible for us to be a part of the body of Christ. For baptism to be valid it has to be performed for the reasons found in the Bible, not for reasons conjured up in the minds of men who have rejected the plain teaching of the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible teach that baptism is an outward sign of inward grace or that it is to be performed as a witness to others. To be scriptural, it must be done for scriptural reasons – for salvation and the forgiveness of sins (Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38) – understanding, of course, that it is only the blood of Yahshua that saves and forgives.

Yahshua declared that “…if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” (John 12:47-48). People who reject the teaching of Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:26-27, Colossians 2:11-13, and 1 Peter 3:21 also reject the inspired writers, and worse, the Holy Spirit by whom they were inspired.

It is not as if the passages concerning baptism and the stated purposes found therein are difficult to understand. To be baptized for any reason not stated in those passages, denies what those passages say and substitutes them with the teachings of carnal men. This is precisely what I did many years ago. I read Mark 16:15-16 for what it says and believed I should be baptized for the reason stated therein. I went to the man who had introduced me to the gospel, and I shared with him what I had discovered. He then proceeded to tell

22

me that baptism is important and that I should certainly be baptized, but that it has nothing to do with salvation. In other words, Yahshua did not meant what He said!

Shortly thereafter, I was immersed in water in the Savior’s name – but for the reasons my friend supplied, instead of for Yahshua’s reasons. Was I obeying Yahshua or was I obeying man? Some time later, after reexamining Yahweh’s Word, I realized that I had been baptized for non-scriptural reasons and shortly thereafter I was re-baptized for the forgiveness of my sins.

If a non-scriptural baptism is acceptable, it would mean that salvation can simply be stumbled into. Furthermore, many people baptized in this fashion never teach others what Yahshua and His inspired disciples taught. Instead, they continue to teach man-made false doctrines such as praying the sinner’s prayer and that baptism is an outward symbol of inward grace.

Acts 19:1-5 provides scriptural precedent for re-baptism when any prior baptism was not what it should have been:

And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, he said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Yahshua. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Yahshua. (Acts 19:1-5)

The twelve men in Acts 19:1-5, who had been scripturally baptized in John’s baptism (an Old Covenant but nonetheless scriptural baptism), had to be re-baptized in Yahshua’s baptism. Why would we think that someone who was baptized for unscriptural reasons, having ignored or rejected what Yahshua and His inspired disciples taught about baptism, would not need to be re-baptized?

People are often baptized because the Bible tells them to, but not for the reasons the Bible tells them to. This should bring to mind Nadab and Abihu’s attitude in Leviticus 10:1-2, “Oh, we’ll offer fire, but not the fire You designated.” If Yahweh would not accept the strange fire of Nadab and Abihu in substitution for scriptural fire, He is certainly not going to accept a strange baptism. Anyone who thinks Yahweh will accept a strange baptism is gambling with eternity.

Even when a person’s motives are commendable, Yahweh does not accept substitutes. In 2 Samuel 6, Uzzah was put to death by Yahweh for touching the Ark of the Covenant even though he did so to prevent the ark from falling to the ground. After David had repented of his transgression and was preparing to transport the ark as prescribed in Yahweh’s law, he declared to the priests, “…Yahweh our God made a breach upon us,

23

for that we sought him not after the due order.”(1 Chronicles 15:13) Yahweh is a holy God and as such can only be approached as He has dictated, including being baptized for the reasons so clearly stated in His Word.

Some people do everything they can to get around what is said in Mark 16:15-16, Acts 2:38, and the other Scriptures on baptism, and they are baptized for any reason except the ones stated in these passages. Anyone who is baptized for any non-biblical reason is in rebellion to Yahweh. Although they might have been baptized, can they truly be described as obedient? As important as the mode is, the purpose of baptism is even more important

…Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice…. (1 Samuel 15:22)

Those who refused to be baptized for salvation (Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21), the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38, 22:16, Colossians 2:11-13), the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38), circumcision of the heart (Colossians 2:11-13), a new life (Romans 6:3-4), becoming children of God (Galatians 3:26-27), putting on Christ (Galatians 3:27), and being added to the body of Christ (Acts 2:41, 47, 1 Corinthians 12:13) are refusing and defying Yahweh.

Eternity is at stake. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by doing as He requires:

…behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation. (2 Corinthians 6:2)

BaptismSprinkling, Pouring or Immersion?

The mode of baptism is often as controversial as the purpose. Because baptism is equated with salvation, the forgiveness of sins, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, circumcision of the heart, a new life, becoming children of God, putting on Christ, and being added to the body of Christ, the mode of baptism becomes more important than it would be were baptism not associated with these crucial issues. Because baptism is essential to a person’s salvation, it is imperative that we determine whether Yahshua commanded us to be sprinkled, poured upon, or immersed. This can only be resolved by looking at the original language and the context of the passages discussing baptism.

Baptism in the Greek Language

The English translators created the word “baptism” by transliterating7 the Greek word baptisma, instead of translating it. 8 Had baptisma been translated, there would have been no ambiguity about the mode. Because it was transliterated, certain denominations have taken the liberty of interpreting the English word “baptism” to mean sprinkling or pouring.

24

Yahshua and the inspired authors of the New Testament never commanded anyone to have water sprinkled on or poured over them. Had that been their intent, they would have used the Greek rhantizo, which means to sprinkle, or cheo, which means to pour. Yahshua and the New Testament authors chose the word baptizo, or some form thereof, meaning to immerse:

baptizo (bap-tid'-zo) … to immerse, submerge; to make overwhelmed (i.e. fully wet); used only (in the N. T.) of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism.9

baptisma (bap'-tis-mah); from … [baptizo]; immersion … (technically or figuratively).9

baptizo … primarily a frequentative form of bapto, to dip, was used among the Greeks to signify the dyeing of a garment, or the drawing of water by dipping a vessel into another, etc. Plutarchus uses it of the drawing of wine by dipping the cup into the bowl (Alexis, 67) and Plato, metaphorically, of being overwhelmed with questions (Euthydemus, 277 D).10

baptisma … consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence (from bapto, to dip)….10

baptizo; 1. properly, to dip … to immerge, submerge (of vessels sunk, Polybius 1, 51, 6; 8, 8, 4; of animals, Diodorus 1, 36). 2. to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water … to wash oneself, bathe…. Metaphorically, to overwhelm.... 3. and alone, to inflict great and abounding calamities on one: ebaptisan teen polin, Josephus, b. j. 4, 3, 3; hee anomia me baptizei, Isa 21:4, Sept. hence, baptizesthai baptisma (compare W., 225 (211); (Buttmann, 148 (129)); compare louesthai to loutron, Aelian de nat. an. 3, 42), to be overwhelmed with calamities, of those who must bear them, Matt 20:22 f, R; Mark 10:38 f; Luke 12:50.11

baptisma, baptismatos, … immersion, submersion; 1. used tropically of calamities and afflictions with which one is quite overwhelmed: Matt 20:22 f, R; Mark 10:38 f; Luke 12:50 (see baptizoo, I. 3)…. 3. of Christian baptism; this, according to the view of the apostles, is a rite of sacred immersion, commanded by Christ, by which men confessing their sins and professing their faith in Christ are born again by the Holy Spirit unto a new life, come into the fellowship of Christ and the church (1 Cor 12:13), and are made partakers of eternal salvation….11

Baptism in Context

John the Baptist demonstrated that baptism requires much water:

25

And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized. (John 3:23)

Only immersion would necessitate John traveling somewhere where there was much water. If sprinkling or pouring would have sufficed for baptisms, he could have carried enough water for either of these methods.

Matthew 3:5-6 declares that those who came to John the Baptist were “baptized of him in Jordan.” Replace the word “baptized” with the words “sprinkling” or “pouring” and this statement does not make sense – “sprinkled of him in Jordan” or “poured of him in Jordan.” Replace the word “baptized” with the word “immersed” and it makes perfect sense – “immersed of him in Jordan.” If John had been sprinkling or pouring, he and the person whom he was baptizing would have stood at the edge of the river. Only if John were immersing would they be in the Jordan.

In Mark 1:9-10, Yahshua is described as being in and coming up out of the Jordan after being baptized:

And it came to pass in those days, that Yahshua came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him. (Mark 1:9-10)

John and Yahshua would not have been in the Jordan unless immersion was the mode.

In Acts 8, we are informed that both Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch went down into the water prior to the eunuch being baptized, and both came up out of the water following the eunuch’s baptism:

And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip…. (Acts 8:38-39)

If pouring or sprinkling meets the requirements for baptism, they would have only needed to go to the edge of the water rather than down into the water. In fact, they would not have needed a body of water at all because both Philip and the eunuch certainly would have been carrying sufficient water with him for sprinkling or pouring, which could have been accomplished right in or next to his chariot.

Twice the Bible identifies baptisma as a burial and subsequent resurrection:

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Yahshua [the] Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3-4)

26

In whom [Yahshua] also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him…. (Colossians 2:11-12)

Only immersion meets the criteria for a burial and resurrection. Just as it is intrinsic in the Greek word, immersion is depicted in these biblical accounts.

Baptisma is the same word used for Yahshua’s suffering and for the baptism with the Holy Spirit. If water baptism is to be performed by sprinkling, then Yahshua was only sprinkled with suffering, and those who were baptized with the Holy Spirit were only sprinkled with the Spirit.

Only immersion satisfies both the Greek word and its biblical context in fulfilling the scriptural command to be baptized.

Objections to ImmersionAnswered

Objection 1: In the Greek text, baptism was never described as taking place in or within water, but rather with or by means of water.

Answer: Because the Greek word baptisma means to immerse, it makes no difference if a person was instructed to be immersed in, with, or by means of water.

Objection 2: In Acts 2:41 we are informed that three thousand Judahites were baptized on the day of Pentecost. Logistically, it would have been much quicker and simpler to have sprinkled or poured water over them.

Answer: It was also much simpler to put the ark of the covenant on an ox cart than to transport it as Yahweh prescribed in His law, but when David took the simpler way in 2 Samuel 6, a man paid for David’s digression with his life.

It might have been much quicker and simpler to sprinkle the 3,000 converts, but that was not what they were commanded. The commandment was for them to be immersed.

Objection 3: In 1 Corinthians 10:1-2, the Apostle Paul informed the Corinthians that their Israelite forefathers departing from Egypt were baptized “in the cloud and in the sea” while crossing over on dry ground. The pursuing Egyptians were immersed in the water, but the Israelites would have only been sprinkled as a consequence of the mist produced by the cloud above and the walls of water on each side.

Answer: Analogies, type-antitypes, and other Old to New Testament parallelisms can only be taken as far as the New Testament context allows. Because Paul made no mention of the Egyptians, no application concerning the Egyptians can be made from his

27

analogy. And to say there was a mist or sprinkling during the Red Sea crossing when the Bible mentions neither, is speculation at the best.

Paul used the Greek word baptizo in 1 Corinthians 10:1-2. All Greek lexicographers agree that baptizo means to immerse, and immersion perfectly fits Paul’s description of what occurred. He declared that the Israelites were baptized “in the cloud and in the sea.” They were surrounded above by the cloud and on both sides with water, just as someone is when immersed in water for the remission of his sins. There is no reason, therefore, to force sprinkling into a word that only meant immersion.

The ancient Greek writings of Josephus, Polybius, Epictetus, Plutarch and others reveal that baptizo was used to indicate immersion. Baptizo was the word they employed when writing about a sunken ship, a harpoon sinking in water, a hyssop branch dipped in liquid, a sword plunged into a body, an overwhelming dept, and people drowning. The Greeks clearly understood baptizo to mean immersion.

Because Yahweh inspired the New Testament authors to use the Greek baptizo, He would be the author of confusion if it was His intent for the water to be sprinkled or poured.

If Paul had intended sprinkling or pouring, he would not have used the word “in” when he wrote, “all [were] baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Insert the word “sprinkled” or “poured” in place of the word “baptized” and it does not make sense – “all [were] sprinkled unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea” or “all [were] poured unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Insert the word “immersed” and it makes perfect sense – “and were all immersed unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.”

Objection 4: The baptism with the Holy Spirit is identified with pouring in Acts 2:17-18 and 10:45. Therefore, pouring is the biblical mode of baptism.

Answer: There is no reason to interpret baptizo as anything other than what it means in the Greek language. In Genesis 7:17-24 when Yahweh flooded the earth in the days of Noah, while it occurred by sprinkling or pouring, it also immersed both the dry ground and the wicked thereon. Likewise, when Yahweh poured out His Spirit, the apostles in Acts 2 and Cornelius and his household in Acts 10 were immersed with the same Spirit.

Objection 5: The Old Testament has much to say about sprinkling.

Answer: The Old Testament also refers to dipping or immersion. For example, tabal is the Hebrew word employed in 2 Kings 5:14 in the Masoretic text, when Naaman dipped himself seven times in the Jordan river. In the Septuagint, the Hebrew word tabal is replaced with the Greek word bapto.

Objection 6: The Old Testament type to baptism is found in the Temple’s brazen laver. The laver’s principal use was for washing the priest’s hands and feet. There were special occasions, such as when the priests were ordained, that water was apparently taken from

28

the laver and poured over the priests. The Bible certainly does not indicate that the priests got into the basin.

Answer: Neither does the Bible indicate that water was taken from the laver and poured over the priests. The Bible does not say how they were washed. Therefore, the laver cannot be used to establish the mode of baptism. However, working from the New Covenant back to the Old – or from the antitype to the type – baptizo very possibly can be used to establish the mode of the washing at the laver. In other words, if the antitype – New Covenant baptism – is by immersion, then one would think that the type – the washing at the laver - would also have been immersion.

Objection 7: In Isaiah 52:13-15 we are provided a Messianic prophecy that informs us Yahshua will “sprinkle many nations.” Therefore, sprinkling is the biblical mode of baptism.

Answer: Isaiah 52:15 must be interpreted so that it harmonizes with Yahshua’s clear command to be baptized, in which He employed the Greek word baptizo, which meant immersion to the people of His day. Following are some possible interpretations which provide harmony.

Isaiah 52:15 is not referring to the water of baptism, but to blood as in Leviticus 14:51, 16:14, Hebrews 9:13-14 and 10:22.

Isaiah 52:15 is not referring to the water of baptism, but to the Word of Yahweh sprinkled throughout the nations.

Sprinkle is not a correct translation because nations can be neither literally sprinkled nor immersed. Many Bible versions, including the Concordant Literal translation and the Revised Standard version, employ the word “startle” in place of the word “sprinkle.” The Septuagint renders this phrase “Thus shall many nations wonder at him….”

Whatever the correct interpretation, Isaiah 52:15 cannot be used to prove that baptizo meant something other than what it actually means.

Objection 8: Ezekiel 36:25informs us that Yahweh will “sprinkle clean water upon” Israelites, cleansing them from their sins, and providing them with new hearts and spirits. Therefore, sprinkling is the biblical mode of baptism.

Answer: Ezekiel 36:25must be interpreted so that it harmonizes with Yahshua’s clear command to be baptized, in which He employed the Greek baptizo, which to the people of his day meant immersion. One possible interpretation is that because Yahweh is identified as the baptizer, this is meant to be interpreted from His vantage point. From on high, many immersed people scattered over the face of earth would appear to have been rained or sprinkled upon.

Whatever the correct interpretation, Ezekiel 36:25 cannot be used to prove that baptizo meant something other than what it actually means.

29

Objection 9: Young’s Literal Translation renders the phrase húdata pollá in John 3:23 as many waters rather than much waters:

And John was also baptizing in Aenon, nigh to Salem, because there were many waters there, and they were coming and were being baptized. (John 3:23 Young’s Literal)

Answer: It makes no difference which way the phrase húdata pollá is translated; only immersion would require much or many waters.

Objection 10: John 3:23 declares that John the Baptist was baptizing at Aenon because there was plenty of water. Plenty of water was necessary for pouring water on many people. But there would not have been enough for immersions. Aenon is an Aramaic word that means springs or fountains. Aenon is most likely identified with a place about eight miles south of Scythopolis, west of the Jordan. In this locality there are seven springs within a radius of a quarter of a mile. “…these springs trickling through marshy meadow land on their way to the Jordan, offer little or no facilities for immersion.” (Christy, A Modern Shibbleth, p. 82). Assuming the area has changed little since Yahshua’s day, we are forced to conclude that John’s baptism was in all likelihood performed by pouring, rather than by immersion.

Answer: Do not overlook that the purpose of this argument is to somehow prove that baptizo does not really mean baptizo or, when translated into English, that immersion does not really mean immersion.

Plenty of water is not necessary for pouring even when pouring water over many people. If pouring was the biblical mode of baptism, any amount, even one drop, would suffice because the Bible does not designate the amount of water. Therefore, any location with a bare minimum of water would be adequate for pouring if it were the intended mode for baptisms.

Proponents of pouring or sprinkling do not know whether the location where John was baptizing has changed since his day. They assume that it has not. Even if it is true that it has not changed, it would have been a simple task to dig a cavity big enough to immerse someone.

Objection 11: Because there were no Holiday Inns or Hiltons nearby for lodging, John the Baptist very well could have selected the Jordan as the place for people to come and hear his preaching where they would have had adequate water for drinking, food preparation, and bathing.

Answer: The text does not say that John was preaching in Aenon because there was much water. It says he was baptizing in Aenon because there was much water.

30

Objection 12: Mark 7:4 in the New King James Bible describes the Pharisees as washing (baptismos) couches. They certainly were not immersing their couches.

Answer: Couches in that day were more accurately bedrolls and as such were small and light so they could be carried wherever a person might travel. These bedrolls, along with everything else listed in Mark 7, could have been easily immersed.

Objection 13: The burying in Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12 is not indicative of immersion. It would have been better translated entomb as in a vault or crypt above ground. “Six feet under” did not come along until much later.

Answer: It does not make any difference whether one uses the words “buried” or “entombed” – in either case, only immersion fits the analogy. Sprinkling or pouring cannot fulfill either burying or entombing, unless by pouring one means a waterfall.

Genesis 35:8, 1 Samuel 31:12-13 and Matthew 27:7 reveal that “six feet under” did not come later, but sooner. The terms “burial” or “entomb” were generic terms and could apply to whatever means was used to inter a person, whether in the ground, a cave, or a sepulcher. In all cases, the person was laid down, which was also the only position from which a person could be raised. Therefore, only immersion fulfills Paul’s analogy of entombment or a burial.

Immersion is the only mode that fits Paul’s analogy in Romans 6 wherein baptismal burial is compared with Yahshua’s burial. If baptism could be accomplished by sprinkling or pouring, Yahshua’s body would not have been entombed, but would have merely had dirt sprinkled or poured over parts of it.

Objections to Adult-Only BaptismAnswered

Objection 1: From the beginning of New Testament Christianity to our time, the church has always baptized babies.

Answer: Not if you consider New Testament Christianity commencing in the first century A.D. There is not one example of babies or children being baptized in the New Testament.

What the church after the New Testament should not be the basis for our beliefs. The Bible, and only the Bible, must determine what we practice, even if history demonstrates something different.

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it…. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

31

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? And in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:13-23)

There may be good reason to question whether much of the history that has been preserved is that of the apostate church rather than that of the true church. History is nearly always written by and from the perspective of those in power. Perhaps Yahweh allowed this to happen to test us to see if we would follow His Word rather than the traditions of men.

If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for Yahweh your God proveth you, to know whether ye love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Ye shall walk after Yahweh your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. (Deuteronomy 13:1-4)

Objection 2: In his Dialog with Trypho the Jew, Justin Martyr (110-165 AD) states that baptism is the circumcision of the New Testament. Therefore, because physical circumcision was to be performed at eight days of age, baptism should likewise be performed on an infant.

Answer: What Justin Martyr taught is not how doctrine should be determined.

In Colossians 2:11-13, the Apostle Paul equated New Covenant baptism with Old Covenant circumcision. However analogies, type-antitypes, and other Old to New Testament parallelisms can only be taken as far as the New Testament context allows. Because Paul’s analogy made no mention of age, no application to age can be made from this passage.

If someone can apply the age of eight days old to baptism because that was the age they circumcised under the Old Covenant, then someone else could just as legitimately demand that baptism can only be administered to males.

Objection 3: Irenaeus (130-200 AD) wrote in Against Heresies II 22:4, some thirty-five years after Justin Martyr, that Yahshua “came to save all through means of Himself – all, I say, who through Him are born again to God – infants and children, boys and youth, and old men.”

Answer: Our beliefs and actions should be based upon the Bible not Irenaeus.

Objection 4: Similar expressions are found in succeeding generations by Origen (185-254 AD) and Cyprian (215-258 AD) who reflect the consensus voiced at the Council of

32

Carthage in 254. The sixty-six bishops said, “We ought not hinder any person from baptism and the grace of God … especially infants … those newly born.” …the Sixteenth Council of Carthage in 418 unequivocally stated, “If any man says that newborn children need not be baptized … let him be anathema.”

Answer: Our beliefs and actions should be based upon the Bible not Origen, Cyprian, or the Council of Carthage.

Objection 5: Origen wrote in his Commentary on Romans 5:9, “For this also it was that the church had from the Apostles a tradition to give baptism even to infants. For they to whom the divine mysteries were committed knew that there is in all persons a natural pollution of sin which must be done away by water and the Spirit.” Elsewhere, Origen wrote in his Homily on Luke 14, “Infants are to be baptized for the remission of sins.”

Augustine (354-430 AD) wrote in De Genesi Ad Literam, X:39 that “The custom of our mother church in baptizing infants must not be … accounted needless, nor believed to be other than a tradition of the apostles.”

Answer: Origen’s and Augustine’s statements cannot be found in the Bible. Worse yet, they contradict Yahshua’s and the apostles’ teaching that faith, repentance and confession were prerequisites to baptism. Origen and Augustine’s statements are, therefore, heretical.

Objections 6: Augustine further stated, “If you wish to be a Christian, do not believe, nor say, nor teach that infants who die before baptism can obtain the remission of original sin.”

Answer: Only the adult Israelites were held accountable in the wilderness at Kadesh-Barnea. Infants or children who die before the age of twenty (the age of accountability as provided in Numbers 1412), are covered by the blood of Yahshua.

Objection 7: Entire households, including children, were baptized by Yahshua’s twelve apostles as described in Acts 11:14, 16:15, 33, 18:8 and 1 Corinthians 1:16.

Answer: It is speculation to declare that the term “household” in the previous passages, taken by itself, included infants or children under the age of accountability. It is also speculation for someone else to declare that the term “household” in those instances did not include children. Except for Acts 18:8, which says that Crispus’ household believed before being baptized, those passages simply do not provide us with that information. It is, however, a fact of Scripture that faith, repentance, and a confession of faith were prerequisites to baptism. What we do not know from Scripture must be determined by what we do know. Therefore, the term “household” in the previous passages either did not include children or if there were children in those households, they were covered by their father’s baptism – until they had reached the age of accountability and needed to be baptized themselves.

33

Objection 8: In 2 Thessalonians 3:10 we are told that “if any would not work, neither should he eat.” The clear command was that only those who work should eat. There is no New Covenant command that tells us to feed infants, even though they cannot fulfill the New Covenant’s requirement of work prior to eating. This command only applies to those who can work but refuse to. To apply it to infants would be absurd. Yet this is what those who hold to an adult-only baptism position do – they allow infants (who cannot work) to eat, while refusing baptism to those same infants because they are not yet able to believe or repent.

Answer: Because children under the age of accountability are under the covering of their fathers, they are automatically included in both cases. Children of a working father are fed without having to work themselves. In like manner, children of a father who has been baptized are saved without having to be baptized themselves, until they reach the age of accountability.

The Old Testament provides a biblical precedent. Prior to the Israelites leaving Egypt, the fathers of each household took a hyssop branch soaked in blood and covered their houses with it. Did this act also cover their children therein, or did each first-born child also have to perform the same act? The children were, of course, covered by the obedience of their father, as it is with baptism.

In Numbers 14:27-33, children are identified as anyone under twenty years of age. In Matthew 18:3 we are not told that children need to be converted and baptized to be right with Yahweh, but instead that adults need to become like children, who are obviously already in good standing with Yahweh. In Matthew 19:3-4, Yahshua informed the disciples that the kingdom of heaven consists of children, with no indication that they had to do anything to get into the kingdom.

Objection 9: According to 1 Corinthians 10:1-2, the entire congregation of Israel, including the infants, who came out of Egypt were baptized in the cloud and in the sea.

Answer: If their fathers had not stepped down into the Red Sea, then neither would the children have done so. The children were baptized, not because they individually went through the Red Sea but because they were a part of the household of an obedient father.

Objection 10: Who would dare declare so gracious an invitation to be invalid for infants or children?

Answer: Why would we want to baptize an infant or child under the age of accountability when he is already covered by the grace of God and the blood of Yahshua?

Objection 11: In Matthew 18:6, Yahshua declared that “Whoever offends one of these little ones who believe in Me,” such as those who would deny baptism to infants, “it were better that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”

34

Answer. It is those who teach that infants and children need to be baptized for the forgiveness of sins and, thereby, condemn all children who die before having that opportunity, who offend these little ones.

Objection 12: Yahshua’s command in the Great Commission in Matthew 28:18-20 to baptize all nations was irrespective of age.

Answer: Yahshua’s command in Matthew 28:18-19 was not irrespective of age. Prior to baptism, a candidate had to first be of an age at which he could be taught:

And Yahshua came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. (Matthew 28:18-19)

Objection 13: Acts 2:39 begins with the Apostle Peter declaring that “The promise [of forgiveness of sins obtained in baptism] is unto you and to your children.”

Answer: Acts 2:39 ends with Peter saying, “even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” The word “children” in this passage no more indicates age than does the term “the children of Israel” used repeatedly in the Old Testament. The word “children” in Acts 2:39 is not referring to infants and small children, but to all Israelites in all future successive generations who are called by Yahweh.13

The fact that the Judahites in Acts 2 were told to repent before being baptized (Acts 2:38) proves that only adults need to be baptized.

Objection 14: Because original sin is contracted at conception, infants should be baptized immediately.

Answer: Nowhere does the Bible teach the concept of original sin. The Bible is very clear on this issue:

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. (Ezekiel 18:20)

Therefore, Cain was accountable for his own sin, not Adam’s. Furthermore, sin is not contracted, but committed:

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4)

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. (James 4:17)

35

…he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons. (Colossians 3:25)

…let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil…. (1 John 3:7-8)

King Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes 7:29 that “…God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.” In other words, people are not born in sin, but later commit sin of their own devices. Consequently, it is not necessary to baptize infants because they have not committed sin, or children under the age of twenty because they are not accountable for the sins they have committed.

When the eunuch asked Philip in Acts 8:36, “See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?” Philip answered, “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” This demonstrates that faith must precede baptism, which infants are incapable of.

Mark 16:16 and Galatians 3:26-27 demonstrate that belief is required prior to baptism. Repentance is required before baptism in Acts 2:38. Acts 22:16 demonstrates that one must be able to call upon the name of the Lord while being baptized, and Matthew 28:19 reveals that one must be a disciple, which requires faith and repentance before being baptized, none of which an infant or child can do.

Earlier in Acts 8, we are told that “…when they [the Samaritans] believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Yahshua Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” There must have been some children present in Samaria, but nothing is said about their parents requesting them to be baptized. Instead, only grown men and women were baptized. There is not one example in the New Testament of an infant or child below the age of accountability being baptized.

Objection 15: Nowhere does the Bible say not to baptize infants.

Answer: Neither does the Bible instruct us not to baptize dogs and cats. Doctrine cannot be established by silence.

Conclusion

Your salvation in Yahshua depends upon you correctly responding to Him. If you have reached the age of twenty, and you have not, in faith and repentance, been scripturally immersed in water for the forgiveness of your sins, do not delay in answering your Savior’s call.

And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. (Acts 22:16)

Source Notes

36

1. “Yahshua” is the English transliteration of our Savior’s Hebrew name. A more thorough explanation concerning the use of the sacred names of God may be read at www.missiontoisrael.org/3rdcom-pt1.html or the book Thou shalt not take the name of Yahweh thy God in vain may be ordered from Mission to Israel Ministries, PO Box 248, Scottsbluff, Nebraska 69363 for a suggested $4 donation.*

2. Scripture is quoted from the King James Version unless otherwise noted. Portions of Scripture have been omitted for brevity’s sake. If there are questions regarding a passage, please open your Bible and study the text to ensure that it has been properly used.

3. Although the word “indwelling” is not used in Acts 2:38, it can be ascertained from the sum of Yahweh’s Word that Peter was referring to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. In Romans 8:9, the Apostle Paul informs us that “…ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Salvation, the forgiveness of sins, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit occur at the same time. Because baptism is for salvation and the forgiveness of sins, the gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38, received when a repentant believer is baptized, is the Holy Spirit’s indwelling.

4. “Yahweh” is the personal Hebrew name of the God of the Bible. For a more thorough explanation concerning the use of the sacred names of God, The Third Commandment may be read at www.missiontoisrael.org/3rdcom-pt1.html or the book Thou shalt not take the name of Yahweh thy God in vain by Ted R. Weiland may be ordered from Mission to Israel Ministries, PO Box 248, Scottsbluff, Nebraska 69363 for a suggested $4 donation.*

5. Where the Tetragrammaton hw`hy+ (YHWH) – the four Hebrew characters that represent the personal name of God – has been incorrectly rendered the LORD or GOD in Scripture, the author has taken the liberty to correct this error by inserting Yahweh where appropriate. For a more thorough explanation concerning the use of the sacred names of God, The Third Commandment may be read at www.missiontoisrael.org/3rdcom-pt1.html or the book Thou shalt not take the name of Yahweh thy God in vain by Ted R. Weiland may be ordered from Mission to Israel Ministries, PO Box 248, Scottsbluff, Nebraska 69363 for a suggested $4 donation.*

6. A more exhaustive study concerning the baptism with the Holy Spirit, entitled Testing the Spirits by Ted R. Weiland may be ordered from Mission to Israel Ministries, PO Box 248, Scottsbluff, Nebraska 69363. This six-part cassette tape series may be ordered for a suggested $12 donation.*

7. Transliteration commutes the letters of a word from one language to another and should be used exclusively for the names of people, places, etc.

8. Translation commutes the meaning of a word from one language to another and should be used for words other than the names of people, places, etc.

37

9. James Strong, “Greek Dictionary of the New Testament,” The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990) p. 18.

10. W.E. Vine, Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (McLean, VA: MacDonald Publishing Company, 1900) pp. 98-99.

11. Joseph Henry Thayer, Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, Electronic Database. Copyright © 2000, 2003 by Biblesoft, Inc.

12. For a more exhaustive discussion on the age of accountability, “Who is Accountable?,” a thirty-minute message on cassette tape or CD, is available from Mission to Israel Ministries, PO Box 248, Scottsbluff, Nebraska 69363 for a suggested $4 donation.*

13. God’s Covenant People: Yesterday, Today and Forever, by Ted R. Weiland, provides a documented dissertation identifying Israel with today’s Celtic, Scandinavian, Germanic, Anglo-Saxon and kindred peoples. To obtain a copy, write Mission to Israel Ministries, PO Box 248, Scottsbluff, Nebraska 69363. Suggested donation: hard cover – $23, soft cover – $14.*

*Although there is a suggested price for our books, tapes and CDs, we do not sell them. We are admonished in Matthew 10:8 “freely ye have received, freely give.” In keeping with 2 Corinthians 9:7, this ministry is supported by freewill offerings. If you cannot afford the suggested price, simply inform us of your situation and we will be pleased to provide you with whatever you need for whatever you can send.

Read more on www.missiontoisrael.org/.

38