Growing up, there were times my parents and I didn’t get along. I’m sure you can relate. In fact, for a large portion of my adolescence, I was pretty convinced that my parents were idiots. I certainly didn’t respect them very much, and at times I thought I didn’t need them. Later in life, I have now come to appreciate and cherish them both, and I recognize their significant contribution to my life. They have shaped and molded me into the man that I am today, even when I resented and even failed to recognize it.

Despite my feelings and lack of recognition towards them, they have always been my parents since birth. They never ceased to be my parents. Our relationship with our heavenly Father is very similar in this regard. In our spiritual (re)birth we become His children, and He becomes our Father. I failed to acknowledge Him as such throughout much of my life, and I certainly didn’t (and often don’t) appreciate Him enough. But all the while, He was still my Father.

The other day someone mentioned to me that she had a hard time believing that human choice and sincerity plays no role in our salvation. She said that despite being baptized at a young age and being raised in the church, she didn’t feel that she was saved until she began taking her faith seriously as a young adult. Today I was thinking about the analogy above, and how God has been my heavenly Father even when I failed to recognize Him as such. I think we run into trouble when we make our sincerity or choice a part of salvation. God saves us, we respond to that, but only after He has saved us.

“To all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.” -John 1:12-13 (NIV)

What role did I play in being born into this world? None. But now that I am born, I have the choice of how I will live. Our spiritual rebirth is no different. I played no role in being “born again” (justification), but now I must choose to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in order to become more like Jesus each day (sanctification). We run into trouble when we use our feelings as a gauge of our salvation. They can be an indication of reality, but they also can mislead us. As children of God, we will continually grow in grace and in appreciation of what God has done for us in and through Jesus Christ. We will continue to understand more and more of the depth of His love and compassion for us. But as we grow in knowledge and grace, we don’t become “more saved” than when we were first baptized into His death and raised to life through faith with Him (Romans 6:4). We are saved by one thing: Jesus Christ took our place on the cross and died for our sins.

My dad has been my dad since I was born. And my heavenly Dad has been my Dad since I was reborn. The same is true for you.

This is part 5 of a series on the paradox of salvation. In part 1, I presented two humorous video clips (one minute each) dealing with Calvinist and Arminian witnessing. In part 2, I broke down Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and how he used the Bible to proclaim Christ to those gathered in Jerusalem that day, using both Law and Gospel. In part 3 I further discussed Peter’s answer to the question, “what must we do to be saved?”, focusing on the importance of baptism and what the Bible says about it. Then in part 4 I discussed the link between the Holy Spirit and baptism by examining Acts chapters 8 and 19.

Here in part 5 we are going to discuss 1 Peter 3:18-22 and the link between baptism and salvation. Let me preface this by pointing out that this is one of the most debated texts in scripture, and exegetical scholars have written extensive essays explaining the text. This is going to be a very brief synopsis, but that inevitably means there will be a lot of holes that will need to be filled in. I encourage you to do the studying yourself, read the text and pray to God that His Holy Spirit will reveal its meaning to you.

First the text itself:

For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit…. In [Noah's ark] only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him. (1 Peter 3:18, 20b-22)

Yes I know I skipped verse 19 and part of verse 20, and yes they are important verses, but not so much for interpreting the teaching on baptism in this text. I omitted them only because of length, I could write an entire post on verses 19-20 which would involve explaining the Nephilim in Genesis 6, what happened to them, and how demonic spirits can be sentenced to imprisonment / bound in chains prior to Christ’s final return. I’ll save that for another day. For now let’s stay on track: baptism and its link to salvation in this text.

Verse 18 begins with the word “for.” One of my teachers told me that any time I see the words “for” or “therefore,” I need to find out what they’re there for! In this case it is referring to the immediate context of vv. 13-17, which deals with suffering for doing good, specifically for professing Christ as Lord. It is thus saying that Christ’s suffering and death in v. 18 is the ultimate suffering for good, since he “died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous.” He had no need to suffer, since He was perfect, but He chose to suffer in order to redeem us, and that is our example for suffering even when innocent of wrongdoing. Verse 18 also makes it clear that “Christ died… to bring [us] to God.” We must keep this in mind as we read this entire text: what brings us to God? Christ’s defeat of sin, death and the devil on the cross.

Enter the controversy. Vv. 20b-21 in the ESV read: “Baptism, which corresponds to this [Noah and his family’s salvation from the flood through the ark], now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” The water itself did not save Noah, but it sustained the ark built in faith, resting on God’s word: thus it was to him the sign and means of the regeneration of the earth. The Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary on the Bible puts it this way:

“The flood was for Noah a baptism, as the passage through the Red Sea was for the Israelites; by baptism in the flood he and his family were transferred from the old world to the new: from immediate destruction to lengthened probation; from the companionship of the wicked to communion with God; from the severing of all bonds between the creature and the Creator to the privileges of the covenant: so we by spiritual baptism…. The antitypical water, namely, baptism, saves you also not of itself, nor the mere material water, but the spiritual thing conjoined with it, repentance and faith, of which it is the sign and seal, as Peter proceeds to explain.”

Let me cut through some of the wordiness: “Baptism… now saves you… through the resurrection of Christ.” It doesn’t get much simpler than that.

Conclusion

To conclude this entire series, we should not look to man-made doctrines to understand the paradox of salvation. It is just that, paradoxical, and human reason often goes beyond scripture in order to “make sense” of justification. Evangelism involves sharing Christ by teaching both His Law and Gospel. This means teaching that we are born spiritually dead and are thus subject to the power of the devil. Apart from Christ, we are morally and spiritually bankrupt. Because of sin, we are destined to death and eternal separation from God in a literal hell. We are completely helpless and hopeless, powerless to change without the divine grace extended in the offer of the Gospel, God’s good news of salvation through Jesus Christ.

This salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone. The Bible clearly teaches that our salvation cannot come about by our own works; it is entirely the work of God. The Holy Spirit draws us to Christ through the Word of God and creates faith in our hearts.

All sinners must die, for the wages of sin is death. They can either die eternally, or they can die baptismally. Baptism should be immediately sought out by and administered to new believers for the forgiveness of sins and the seal of the Holy Spirit. Through baptism we are buried with Christ and integrated into His new covenant, being raised to life by faith, now being counted dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Thanks for reading this series, I hope you found it worth your time and thought.

Denominational Comparison on Baptism

So where do we go from here? I’ve given what the Bible says, yet many Christians still can’t agree on much of the teachings concerning salvation and baptism. That’s because we apply human logic to the Bible and come up with doctrines. Everyone does it, myself included. My only point here is that we should unify on the essentials we all agree in, like those above. But there will inevitably remain differences. I’ll go through the main spectrum of beliefs on how baptism functions, then close with a personal position. The following is from Understanding Four Views on Baptism, p. 125:

I personally vacillate somewhere between the Lutheran and Reformed views. Here is my own personal statement on baptism:

In baptism, God graciously and miraculously washes away our sins by applying the benefits of Christ’s death and resurrection to us, gives us a new birth, clothes us in Christ’s righteousness, seals us with the Holy Spirit, buries us with Christ and through faith raises us up with Him as new creatures, making us holy before God and integrating us into the Body of Christ. None of this comes about due to anything magical in the water, but by the Word of God in and with the water conjoined with our faith in that Word. According to the Bible, all of this happens in baptism and it is entirely the work of God, not our own doing.

Thanks for reading!

For more good reading on baptism, check out the following posts:

• Baptism: Children Running Through God’s Sprinkler of Grace or Just a Symbolic Confession?
• Baptism in the New Testament: The Holy Spirit and Water Baptism in Acts
• Luther… on Baptism
• What We Believe

This is part 4 of a series on the paradox of salvation. In part 1, I presented two humorous video clips (one minute each) dealing with Calvinist and Arminian witnessing. In part 2, I broke down Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and how he used the Bible to proclaim Christ to those gathered in Jerusalem that day, using both Law and Gospel. Then in part 3 I further discussed Peter’s answer to the question, “what must we do to be saved?”, focusing on the importance of baptism and what the Bible says about it.

As promised, here in part 4 we are going to discuss the link between the Holy Spirit and baptism by examining Acts chapters 8 and 19. But before we begin, I need to make a short disclaimer. People have written books explaining these passages (and I’ve read a few of them). This is going to be a rather terse overview, mostly in order to expose you to the passages and to get you thinking. I’m not going to fill in all the blanks, I would have to write another manifesto in order to do that. So bear with me as I go through the text at this brisk pace, it will be helpful for you to have the text handy as you read this.

I’m going to begin with Acts 19, but in order to fully understand it we need to go back to Acts 18:24-28. Here we are introduced to Apollos, who is “a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John” (18:24-25). So let’s get this straight, he taught about Jesus accurately, but his understanding of baptism was wrong. Was this such a big deal? I mean, all we need is to hear about Jesus right? Yeah, it was a big deal. It was big enough that Priscilla and Aquila pulled him aside and set him straight (v. 26). Now we’re at chapter 19. Paul is in Ephesus (where Apollos had been preaching), and he asks the believers if they received the Holy Spirit when they believed. Their answer: no, we don’t know anything about the Spirit. So what does Paul do? Does he immediately begin instructing them properly about the doctrine of the Trinity? Does he begin quoting Christ’s teachings on the Holy Spirit? No. Instead he asks them one question: “Then what baptism did you receive?” (v. 3).

Hmm, apparently there must be a pretty strong link between baptism and the Holy Spirit if this is the first question Paul asks. They reply that they received John’s baptism.

Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve men in all. (Acts 19:4-7)

Baptism is apparently such a big deal that they do it again – the right way. Note the close connection between the Spirit and water baptism in this account. The Ephesian disciples said that they had not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit. Paul does not question their belief or their previous instruction. His diagnostic question on matters of the Holy Spirit focuses on water baptism: “Into what then were you baptized?” (19:3, literally).

Andrew Das, in an article he wrote concerning baptism, says:

What about the order of events in these narratives? Shouldn’t baptism come first and then the Spirit? Luke clearly establishes a connection between water baptism and the Spirit. In Acts 2:38 the Spirit is promised to those who are baptized. But in Acts 10 Cornelius’ household receives the Spirit first and then is baptized. Acts 19 records the “disciples” first being baptized and then receiving the Spirit. Luke does not then seem to be establishing a clear sequence between the events. BUT: note how they are always in the immediate context of the other. The Spirit is simply a promise in connection with baptism in Acts 2:38. It’s a lot like John 3:8: you hear the sound of the wind but don’t know where it’s coming from or where it’s going. The two are simply connected.

But what about Acts 8:1-25. This passage presents a problem. In Acts 8 a group of baptized believers remain without the promised Spirit for a significant period of time (the time it took the apostles to arrive after the evangelization was well on its way). Only after the apostles arrive and pray for the people do they receive the Spirit. Does this passage disrupt the connection between water baptism and the Holy Spirit. Not really. One must not overlook certain grammatical features qualifying Acts 8. In v. 16: For [the Spirit] had NOT YET fallen on any of them, but they had ONLY been baptized. The words “not yet” and then “only” are placed first in their respective clauses for emphasis. First, the Spirit had NOT YET fallen on them. An event that was supposed to happen had not yet happened…. The distinction between “not yet” and a simple “not” is one of an EXPECTED event that had not In other words, the Spirit SHOULD HAVE fallen upon them in baptism. The Spirit, then, SHOULD HAVE come with the Baptism. Now we can understand the emphatic word “ONLY.” They were ONLY baptized. The baptism was “ALONE,” that is, it was UNACCOMPANIED.

Luke is serving the reader notice that the separation of the Spirit from water baptism was UNUSUAL. The Spirit was therefore NORMALLY RECEIVED IN WATER BAPTISM. Something strange had happened in Samaria. This was not how the Spirit was normally received. So why did the Spirit delay His coming to the Samaritans if they had been baptized? To understand why we must take a look at the role that Samaritans play in Luke and Acts.

For the sake of length I’m not going to post Das’ entire response, but you can read the full-length article here. In a nutshell, Das explains how Jews and Samaritans have had a longstanding rivalry, going back into Old Testament times. He shows how Luke establishes this theme throughout his Gospel and in the book of Acts. I really recommend you read the original article to fully grasp the magnitude of this, but I will jump ahead to his conclusion for the sake of length.

When the Spirit does not come in the water baptism as expected, the whole episode forces the Samaritans to submit to the laying on of the Jerusalem Apostles’ hands. The Jerusalem Apostles had to personally preside over the Samaritan reception of the Spirit. The Spirit WAS THEREFORE FORCING TWO SEPARATE BODIES OF ISRAELITES TO BE REUNITED. Heterodox Samaria is once again restored to orthodoxy, an orthodoxy represented in the Jerusalem Apostles. The Samaritans will not receive the Holy Spirit apart from the Jerusalem Apostles. There will be no separate Samaritan, Christian church autonomous of the Jerusalem church. The old walls of division are torn down by the activity of the Holy Spirit. Luke’s motif of ethnic hostility between Jews and Samaritans up to this point is surely the key to the proper interpretation of Acts 8 and the separation of the Spirit from water baptism. We know that we have been on the right track in our interpretation when we get to Acts 10-11. Consider Acts 10-11 from the perspective of ethnic tensions. The Jews with Peter are all surprised that the Gentiles received the Holy Spirit and particularly, “in the same way” as the Jews had at Pentecost. Acts 10:45 speaks of the astonishment of those with Peter that the Gentiles had received the Holy Spirit. Since the Gentiles were given “THE SAME GIFT” (11:17) as the Jews at Pentecost, Peter could not hinder them. The gift of the Spirit came to them “as also to us.” The reception of tongues forced the Jewish apostles to recognize the Gentiles as fellow recipients of the Spirit. God had already gone out of His way with a vision to Peter that the Gentiles are to be considered clean. Then he sent the Holy Spirit upon them in an undeniable way. Thus the Holy Spirit was overcoming human prejudice against the Gentiles in Acts 10-11 by these extraordinary manifestations. Salvation was therefore clearly for all. Acts 15 portrays a Jerusalem council mindful of what God was doing among the Gentiles. Like the gap between Jew and Samaritan, the Spirit was now forcing the bridging of the gap between Jew and Gentile. Acts is a story of the Spirit intervening in the midst of the human condition of weakness and sin. Where the Jerusalem church had been initially slow to take the Gospel to new groups, the Spirit was taking the initiative. People found themselves having to “catch up” with the Spirit’s activity. Nothing, not even ethnic conflict, could stand in the way of the Spirit’s work.

Acts is a story of the Spirit at work in human affairs, the Spirit of Jesus Christ (1:1). We should not be surprised, then, at the unusual delay of the Spirit in Acts 8, since it provided a unique opportunity to bring two groups of Christians once divided together. And once again, as Luke carefully qualifies the events: Acts 8 confirms that the Spirit and water baptism do indeed go together even as Acts 2:38 indicated.

So in conclusion, it is clear from scriptures that there is a close connection between water baptism and the Holy Spirit. Stay tuned for part 5 where we will discuss a passage in 1 Peter 3 which demonstrates a strong link between baptism and salvation.