Subject: Is baptism a work? |
Bible Note: Teacher, I assure you I do not take our Lord's words lightly! But beloved, the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration, is like eating a chittlin’. The more we chew it the bigger it gets! The best way I know to clarify this issue is by simply saying this: BAPTISM WITHOUT FAITH SAVES NO ONE!! I just want to get that said! Baptism does not save the unbeliever. Baptism does not in any way exempt him from Hell. He may be baptized, or he may not be baptized, but if he does not BELIEVE, he will be damned. It doesn’t matter if he is baptized by immersion or sprinkling, in his infancy, or in his adult age, if he is not led to put his trust in Jesus Christ — if he remains an unbeliever, then this terrible doom is pronounced upon him — “He that believeth not shall be damned.” So it is the belief in Christ that saves, period. Furthermore, I respectfully submit to you that people are not saved by baptism, because it would be totally out of character with the spiritual religion which Christ came to teach, if we made salvation depend on mere ceremony! Charles Spurgeon said it best: “The false religions of heathens might require salvation by a physical process, but Jesus Christ claims for his faith that it is purely SPIRITUAL, so how and why would he require regeneration with water? I can’t see how baptism could be a spiritual gospel, but I can see how it would be mechanical. If anyone teaches that regeneration goes with baptism, I say it’s false doctrine, a craftily invented mechanical salvation to deceive ignorant, sensual, and grovelling minds, rather than the teaching of the most profoundly spiritual of all teachers, who rebuked Scribes and Pharisees for regarding outward rites as more important than inward grace.” My brother, if we proclaim that Baptism is a requirement for salvation I fear that we are opening that door to the belief that Baptism saves. Let's not regress to the 15th century and argue that all over again!In Christ's Love,cwade |